City owners want to win trophies, our owners only want to finish in top 4.why dont we just do what city did? you know, cheat.
Not like you hey, you see through the liesFFP is going to be the golden goose of an excuse for the new era.
Glazers did a beautiful job conning gullible fans to accept mediocrity but now all the Ineos lot have to say is "we can only compete within our means"
Heaton and Evans, why would they care about first team football? They are more at the retirement point, they knew the role they were signing up for before they joined. Maybe Evans but I have my doubts. Altay is a normal backup GK, if he's content in the role it doesn't matter they don't play anyway.The bolded could/should go too. Heaton and Evans will want first team football, as may Eriksen/Bayindir.
I’m not convinced what Hannibal offers to be honest, and Antony simply isn’t good enough.
Clearly we aren’t going to let the majority of the squad go in one window. We are stuck with some of these players for the long term.
We need to be the moral victors or somethingwhy dont we just do what city did? you know, cheat.
Yeah whenever they've tried to spin constant failure as a process. When they framed the Ole era as a reboot of club culture. Which they tried the exact same thing again with Ten Hag.Not like you hey, you see through the lies
It's almost like spending £100m well is better than spending £200m badly.Yeah whenever they've tried to spin constant failure as a process. When they framed the Ole era as a reboot of club culture. Which they tried the exact same thing again with Ten Hag.
How we spend £200m a year on transfers (until the credit card ran out) but are supposed to be happy with tinpot cup finals or top four finishes.
Desperately needs a complete overhaul whatever happens. Personally if the money ain't there I'd buy a dozen teenagers who might make it and hope some work out by fast tracking them. If it means treading water for a year or two like we are now then nothing ventured etc.Even without a takeover this should prompt a major revamp of transfers. We have a poor squad and can't spend
I don’t think anyone believes this is a process, that ship has long gone. And nobody is happy, there’s just very little to be done aside from disrupting matches.Yeah whenever they've tried to spin constant failure as a process. When they framed the Ole era as a reboot of club culture. Which they tried the exact same thing again with Ten Hag.
How we spend £200m a year on transfers (until the credit card ran out) but are supposed to be happy with tinpot cup finals or top four finishes.
Heaton was offered a contract by Luton in the summer. He would have been their first choice but we wouldn’t let him leave because the DDG/Onana thing was up in the air. I think he could have a year or two playing somewhere else. Evans has shown he can still kick it too.Heaton and Evans, why would they care about first team football? They are more at the retirement point, they knew the role they were signing up for before they joined. Maybe Evans but I have my doubts. Altay is a normal backup GK, if he's content in the role it doesn't matter they don't play anyway.
Hannibal I agree, but as a backup to Bruno to just get those few minutes that Bruno doesn't play is fine. When Bruno needs replacing then I'd just spend big there anyway on someone like Wirtz.
Agree on Antony but that's the 2nd point, we spent so much on him and recently, he's gonna stay, especially given we don't have other right wingers.
Backup goalkeepers are full aware that they are showing up to never play. It's assumed that they will only play if the main guy gets injured, and that's always needed.Heaton was offered a contract by Luton in the summer. He would have been their first choice but we wouldn’t let him leave because the DDG/Onana thing was up in the air. I think he could have a year or two playing somewhere else. Evans has shown he can still kick it too.
Bayindir was first choice at Fener, I don’t understand why he would come to Utd to NOT play. Also by most accounts he is nowhere near the required standard. It’s pointless paying his wages if he never plays.
No point keeping Hannibal for a backup role. You sign somebody to challenge Bruno and rotate effectively. We need to stop relying on the same guys and having a huge drop off if first choice isn’t available. We can definitely improve on Hannibal.
Tell that to Pep!You don't sign somebody to rotate your best player who is fit every game and plays every game. It's just about prioritizing and not wasting money on a backup 10 who won't play anyway.
So you're suggesting we play with no goalkeeper and have no back-ups given Onana will likely be at AFCON?The bolded could/should go too. Heaton and Evans will want first team football, as may Eriksen/Bayindir.
I’m not convinced what Hannibal offers to be honest, and Antony simply isn’t good enough.
Clearly we aren’t going to let the majority of the squad go in one window. We are stuck with some of these players for the long term.
Like signing Phillips to be cover for Rodri and then just never using him??Tell that to Pep!
Exactly that, but be honest Phillips was a hot property. It’s not the same as using Hannibal from the youth team.Like signing Phillips to be cover for Rodri and then just never using him??
Pep has the backing of an entire financial country so he can waste money on players even if it's to just keep them from going to another clubTell that to Pep!
I feel like I’ve just been offended by a pigeonBe careful. If you get geebs angry then you might end up having to deal with a proper mod.
They absolutely gutted their entire team over the last 3 windows. Almost complete squad turnover from even last year. Most of those guys were on really high salaries. Salaries have a far bigger impact on the bottom line than transfer fees. We still keep on the same underperformers and even extend their contracts and bloat their salaries even more.How does a club like Chelsea not have restrictions? Surely they've spent more than us? Other clubs?
We smarty avoid UEFA rules by deliberately not qualifying for any UEFA competitions. We're trying the same tactic with the Premier League as well it seems.How does a club like Chelsea not have restrictions? Surely they've spent more than us? Other clubs?
Not entirely accurate. Some nuggets of truth in some of the individual assumptions/statements but the bottom line is, Chelsea have basically decided to ignore FFP and suffer the consequences - possibly believing that they wouldn't get a serious punishment.They absolutely gutted their entire team over the last 3 windows. Almost complete squad turnover from even last year. Most of those guys were on really high salaries. Salaries have a far bigger impact on the bottom line than transfer fees. We still keep on the same underperformers and even extend their contracts and bloat their salaries even more.
They sign most of their new players to very long contracts to minimize the annual amortization impact of transfer fees on the bottom line. The impact of Enzo's transfer for example is like €15m because of the long tenor of the contract.
Their new owner pumped money into the team.
Pretty sure it was amortisation that helped Chelsea. Plus they actually sell players - 2023 saw £266.4m received. That's banked in that financial year. The 608.7m was amortised over the length of the contracts given.Not entirely accurate. Some nuggets of truth in some of the individual assumptions/statements but the bottom line is, Chelsea have basically decided to ignore FFP and suffer the consequences - possibly believing that they wouldn't get a serious punishment.
I think this, in part, is why Everton were punished so harshly for one breach. Its essentially a warning shot to Chelsea and other clubs who might be thinking the rules don't apply to them. It also sets a precedent to prevent FFP punishments being challenged effectively in a courtroom.
Mount has no place on this list, be serious.Sales help ffp and that's the idea. Loans won't do much of course. January should be focused on clearing out the squad as we have no fixture congestion left this season, to fix our FFP position for the summer.
- Sancho
- Casemiro
- Varane
- Martial
- Lindelof or Maguire
- Reguilons loan
- Amrabats loan
- Van de Beek
- Mount
- Pellistri
Those are all players who have extremely questionable current or future roles and all either have a good chunk of wages or could get us money. With Casemiro and Varane, you have the injury/age concerns plus what our rebuild target is, and finding that balance.
People remaining would be:
Onana, Altay, Heaton
Dalot, AWB
Shaw, Malacia
Lindelof or Maguire, Martinez, Evans
Mainoo, McTominay, Eriksen, Bruno, Hannibal
Amad, Garnacho, Antony, Rashford
Hojlund
Obviously we have gaps there to fill like CB and DM if we sell some of those guys, but we'd be fine to see out the year and it puts us in a spot to build better in the summer.
That's why I said there was a 'nugget of truth' in what was posted. Its not entirely an incorrect representation as its true that Chelsea have used creative contracts to balance the books - although all transfers are spread over the contract term whether paid upfront or not, so it's nothing new.Pretty sure it was amortisation that helped Chelsea. Plus they actually sell players - 2023 saw £266.4m received. That's banked in that financial year. The 608.7m was amortised over the length of the contracts given.
They've now made that illegal, however it won't be back dated. So I imagine Chelsea won't be continuing to do what they are doing in future windows.
Same with City too, they actually sell players for decent prices. 114.5m Euros according to transfermarkt last summer. Whilst it's a negative netspend, it's nothing on us due to our sheer ineptitude in signing players with no resale value or simply never selling (e.g. Martial would have been shipped by any normal club about four years ago to Spurs or something).
I like Mount. I don't see what role he plays. He can only play Bruno's role IMO, and it makes no sense keeping him as a Bruno backup when Bruno plays pretty much every game.Mount has no place on this list, be serious.
Honestly every time I see our entire squad typed out somewhere it remind me how weak we are considering the amount of money we have spent.Sales help ffp and that's the idea. Loans won't do much of course. January should be focused on clearing out the squad as we have no fixture congestion left this season, to fix our FFP position for the summer.
- Sancho
- Casemiro
- Varane
- Martial
- Lindelof or Maguire
- Reguilons loan
- Amrabats loan
- Van de Beek
- Mount
- Pellistri
Those are all players who have extremely questionable current or future roles and all either have a good chunk of wages or could get us money. With Casemiro and Varane, you have the injury/age concerns plus what our rebuild target is, and finding that balance.
People remaining would be:
Onana, Altay, Heaton
Dalot, AWB
Shaw, Malacia
Lindelof or Maguire, Martinez, Evans
Mainoo, McTominay, Eriksen, Bruno, Hannibal
Amad, Garnacho, Antony, Rashford
Hojlund
Obviously we have gaps there to fill like CB and DM if we sell some of those guys, but we'd be fine to see out the year and it puts us in a spot to build better in the summer.
But I don't think they're actually running foul of FFP, as hard as it is to believe. They haven't chosen to ignore it, in fact the opposite. They've successfully circumvented the rules as far as I can tell.That's why I said there was a 'nugget of truth' in what was posted. Its not entirely an incorrect representation as its true that Chelsea have used creative contracts to balance the books - although all transfers are spread over the contract term whether paid upfront or not, so it's nothing new.
Its also true that they have sold homegrown players which means they get to recognise the full value of the transfer immediately.
None of this, however, changes the fact that senior sports lawyers/advisors believe they will well exceed what is allowed with respect losses and will therefore be in breach.
