It fluctuates. We all pay obscene wages. Chelsea were first 4-5 years ago but I think we were 4th in the league like 2 years ago. I’d imagine we’re creeping up to first again after the spending spree the last two windows. Not really worth going tit for tat over when both United and Chelsea are in and around each other with the size of our wage bill.
Enzo Fernández | signs for Chelsea
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
- Status
It fluctuates. We all pay obscene wages. Chelsea were first 4-5 years ago but I think we were 4th in the league like 2 years ago. I’d imagine we’re creeping up to first again after the spending spree the last two windows. Not really worth going tit for tat over when both United and Chelsea are in and around each other with the size of our wage bill.
You suggested United signed Lukaku an 8.5 year contract? Or at least that’s what it looked like you were suggesting.
Obviously amortisation isn’t new but are you really saying this approach to using it is common?
Where did I say that? It’s absolutely common but committing to 600m is still completely out of the ordinary.
FFP is completely useless. The rules change so frequently and city swatted their case against them using the best lawyers money can buy. I wish we had done what Chelsea have to sign the best players they can for a serious rebuild - we just used to swallowing the company lines from the glazers.
You said United did it with Lukaku? In response to someone questioning the huge contracts?
Unbelievable.
Read it again. 5 year deal with the fee spread over the course. This is hardly new. You’re being pedantic over 5/8 year contract when I never said it was 8 years.
All you've done is defend Chelsea and provide excuses for their spending. Forest spent less than 200m on their rebuild, excessive but still not unusual. Chelsea spent over half that amount on just one player. You even attempted to use our spending as a defense for Chelsea. You have no idea what they're going to do in the future. City was accused of buying the league, well the most they spent in a 12 month period was just over 300m. Chelsea have doubled that. I would assume no other club in the PL has spent more than 300m over a 12 month period
So once again, it's not normal and it's not right. You clearly think Chelsea should be able to purchase as many players as they like and spend as much money as they like. I think that opinion is in a very small minority both on redcafe and shared with football fans across England (unless they're Chelsea fans of course then I imagine they'd be loving it).
They better hope the majority of them 18 are a success or they'll be stuck with them on massive contracts and have to spend big again to replace them whilst still paying off these transfers
5 year deals are common. These are all over 7 years with many on 8.5.
I mean it’s not pedantic. It’s literally very rarely done by anyone when signed a brand new player.
There's a pretty big difference between a 5 and 8 year contract. 3 whole years in fact. How many 6+ year contracts have ever been issued before?
€34m + €17.5m x 5. Doesn’t even sound like a bad deal.
Once again, I never said Lukaku was signed in an 8 year deal nor that it was normal
Shattering the PL transfer record for some random young player from the Portuguese league. This has to be the dumbest deal in the history of the sport.
Once again, I never said Lukaku was signed in an 8 year deal nor that it was normal
Why mention him then
I was only referring to the fee being spread over the course of a contract. In accounting terms £100m for example is 5 x £20m or 8 x £12.5 yearly - neither is a large annual expense. When FFP is judged on annual spend (I think) it’s easy to see how and why the rules are being bent.
In reference to amortisation.Why mention him then
And yet a large % of the Caf wanted United to sign him
I mean he won the best young player award at the world cup, as well as being one of the eventual winners best players, too, ya know.
Which is the whole reason why people are pissed because it's Chelsea once again dicking around with FFP.
In isolation I wouldn't have a problem with this deal if it was a 5 year contract and they hadn't already spent 480m. It would be excessive but we've paid similar contracts and fees before, but we didn't take the piss.
That's shitload of money but that's Chelsea.
I do wonder all of you who keep saying this.. Are you genuinely stuck in the 90's or have you all missed that when it comes to spending and money this sport died long ago?
Not only spending but also corruption and dodging rules etc.. Why be upset when the entire industry has become so filthy as it is? Only thing Chelsea have done different to others is how much they've spent in a short time frame.
It will only become worse in the future..
You answered your own question.
On a side note;
Kepa £75m
Chilwell £60m
Cucerella £63m
Fofana £73m
Gusto £40m
Koulibaly £35m
Enzo £110m
Mudryk £88m
Sterling £50m
Havertz £75m
Lukaku £100m
I’m sure I’m missing some more
Pulisic £60m
Badashille £38m
Kovacic £40m
Pretty much every fan of any club doing the same would be happy!
It's not normal of course but they aren't breaking any rules, the rules are going to be changed in the summer so it'll likely not happen again
We should probably move some of this talk to a different thread anyway. As it's moving away from the Enzo deal specifically and more to do with Chelsea total spending and new laws (which would be an interesting thread).
This deal is just mental. Chelsea playing with monopoly money.
Ah okay. I think it’s a misunderstanding then. I don’t think anyone is suggesting amortisation itself as a concept is new. What they are saying is using it on so many players over such a long period is.
The prices players like Nunez, Antony, Mudryk and now Fernandez have gone for makes me wince when thinking about the fees clubs will be looking for for any premium targets we want this summer.
If those players are costing that much what will the likes of Levy/Napoli look for for players like Kane and Osimhen? Hell, even a team like Benfica for Goncalo Ramos?
If those players are costing that much what will the likes of Levy/Napoli look for for players like Kane and Osimhen? Hell, even a team like Benfica for Goncalo Ramos?
I might have this wrong but isn't amortisation part of the FFP rules now?
This is part of the problem now. The market is even more inflated off the back of this. The same happened when RA first arrived though, The Chavs have form.
The rules are changing in the summer due to what Chelsea have done. Capping at 5 years I believe.
I didn't realise redcafe had so many accountants!
"The Chavs have form" - I thought the form came from goings on down the King's Rd
Gusto, Enzo, Mudryk look like top players.
He is top of our wish list though, and he just won the world cup too.
Yep which is part of the reason they're doing it now
Chilwell cost £45m up front and even with add ons it only reaches £50m. Cucurella was £55m up front with add ons taking it to £62m, Gusto was £27m up front, with add ons taking it to £30m, Badashille was £33m up front. But you keep inflating Chelsea’s fees though. Enzo’s fee just got released by benfica and it’s going to shock you, it’s not the fee you’ve just made up.
Stop stalking me you weirdo.
Wasn't there literally something a few days ago from the FA putting a stop to artificially-long contracts that are there only to get around FFP restrictions, and that whilst it wouldn't apply retrospectively it was going to be in force going forwards? Ah, it's not til the summer.
Regardless, as much of a damp squib FFP has been, personally I think this deliberate mistreatment of the rules is pretty shitty. Might well be legit, but it's not very ethical.
Regardless, as much of a damp squib FFP has been, personally I think this deliberate mistreatment of the rules is pretty shitty. Might well be legit, but it's not very ethical.
If you want ethics then football's not for you I'm afraid
- Status