The Footie Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 15344
  • Start date Start date
GB72 said:
OK not the usually most reliable of people but i heard Simon Jordan's explanation of how it works and it makes some sense with the maths he used. Whilst not no allowed now, the offset from the long contracts last year coupled with the money brought in from sales basically kicks the FFP can down the road and it remains sustainable so long as there is a future increase in income or continued profits from transfer sales (Mount, for example, counted as 100% profit as he was academy). It is a big loophole but by the definition I heard, one that sounds perfectly legit.
Click to expand...

They are amortising the transfers across the length of the contracts so kicking the payments down the road - UEFA have closed the loophole so it’s now 5 years

But it’s very risky for Chelsea - they could be left with a lot of players on very long contracts and they need to bring in income down the line to balance.

It’s the US way of offering contracts etc
 
Liverpoolphil said:
They are amortising the transfers across the length of the contracts so kicking the payments down the road - UEFA have closed the loophole so it’s now 5 years

But it’s very risky for Chelsea - they could be left with a lot of players on very long contracts and they need to bring in income down the line to balance.

It’s the US way of offering contracts etc
Click to expand...

Risky but not against FFP as many people are claiming at the moment. Currently all perfectly legit.
 
Lord Tyrion said:
January fire sale? Summer fire sale next year? All seems pretty reckless with the future of the club.
Click to expand...
TimShady said:
Let’s see they’ll get a lovely sponsorship out of the blue from a company linked by proxy to their owners a la Man City and all will be well with the world.
Click to expand...
I think it'll be a combination of both of these things as they won't get any UEFA income for sure.

Based on the rates they have been letting senior players go for would indicate that it would need to be some fire sale indeed. More like a Napalm sale.
 
GB72 said:
Risky but not against FFP as many people are claiming at the moment. Currently all perfectly legit.
Click to expand...


At this moment in time no - but FFP is over a certain rolling period hence why they will need to bring in a decent level of income to ensure they stay under it

GreiginFife said:
I think it'll be a combination of both of these things as they won't get any UEFA income for sure.

Based on the rates they have been letting senior players go for would indicate that it would need to be some fire sale indeed. More like a Napalm sale.
Click to expand...

I think they have sold most of their “saleable” assets now - Lukaku will fetch an ok price , Gallagher a bit more

Hudson -Odoi and Ziyech they are looking to offload but not sure how much they will fetch
 
Liverpoolphil said:
At this moment in time no - but FFP is over a certain rolling period hence why they will need to bring in a decent level of income to ensure they stay under it



I think they have sold most of their “saleable” assets now - Lukaku will fetch an ok price , Gallagher a bit more

Hudson -Odoi and Ziyech they are looking to offload but not sure how much they will fetch
Click to expand...
And a lot of those "saleable" assets went for interestingly low prices, given the market, some not even fetching £20m in a market where a 19 year old with one half decent season is going for £60m+.
 
GreiginFife said:
And a lot of those "saleable" assets went for interestingly low prices, given the market, some not even fetching £20m in a market where a 19 year old with one half decent season is going for £60m+.
Click to expand...

Just a case of getting them out , getting some money in and releasing the wages as well

All the players who have left were before Boehly and none on the longer contracts

They may have an issue when they come to selling those players that have arrived since he bought the club
 
Liverpoolphil said:
At this moment in time no - but FFP is over a certain rolling period hence why they will need to bring in a decent level of income to ensure they stay under it



I think they have sold most of their “saleable” assets now - Lukaku will fetch an ok price , Gallagher a bit more

Hudson -Odoi and Ziyech they are looking to offload but not sure how much they will fetch
Click to expand...

But they are legal now and I suppose that is the salient point when it comes to accusations on social media etc of breaches of FFP. The team needed rebuilding and they have found a way to do it, there may be consequences down the line if this does not pay off but at the moment, carry on.
 
GreiginFife said:
Like a football ponzi scheme :D
Click to expand...

That may be true but it is a legal one at the moment and so all those in the media, social and otherwise, questioning FFP are barking up the wrong tree. They have simply gone all in and we will see how that pans out but at the moment, nothing to see here.
 
GB72 said:
But they are legal now and I suppose that is the salient point when it comes to accusations on social media etc of breaches of FFP. The team needed rebuilding and they have found a way to do it, there may be consequences down the line if this does not pay off but at the moment, carry on.
Click to expand...


A lot scream FFP rules when clubs spend a lot of money


But the threshold is also different in UEFA than it is in UEFA

Both are over three year period


Think in the Prem the losses over that period can up to £105mil and if the club does lose £105mil believe the owner must cover £90mil of that

But those losses are obviously not the raw net figures because of amortisation of fees etc

In UEFA I think it’s £30mil


So right now Chelsea won’t be - but they need to do a lot of work to increase income as not to get caught up next year

I think there is also differing rules when paying a certain amount up front for a player and most clubs doing payment schemes- think that was one of the issues with Caicedo for Chelsea - too much up front was going to cause them issue and affect other signings

Either way it seems a club also needs a clever accountant now as well

No idea what’s going to happen when the wage bill can’t be any more than 70% of the income




Just need to add Lavia and Olise to that will make it around £1bn

It just real life football manager
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Re Raya.

I heard he was only on loan, with an agreed optional fee. He also agreed a new contract at Brentford.

So it's win win. If arsenal like him they sign him, so they're happy and Brentford get a fee that they accept so they're happy.

If arsenal don't want him, then he still has years on his contract so is an asset to Brentford still.
 
Well, looks like Maguire thinks he can get his place back, so deal off to West Ham.

From what we know, silly boy. I guess he saw how inept United were last night, and feels it is evidence the problems in defence lie with the careless attackers rather than with him.

Or, maybe he just loves his weekly wage
 
Swango1980 said:
Well, looks like Maguire thinks he can get his place back, so deal off to West Ham.

From what we know, silly boy. I guess he saw how inept United were last night, and feels it is evidence the problems in defence lie with the careless attackers rather than with him.

Or, maybe he just loves his weekly wage
Click to expand...

Not sure if he's thick or arrogant! Or possibly a bit of both...I think West Ham have dodged a bullet and far wiser places to spend £30m.
 
Lord Tyrion said:
That's a classic 'back in the day' comment. Centre halves went through strikers constantly, and then they couldn't 🤷‍♂️.

If an attacker takes out a keeper like that it would be a foul every time. It's a foul, simple.

There are some seriously red glasses being worn here 😳
Click to expand...
Did you see the dissalowed one for Everton.
How is that a foul on the Keeper?
 
Swango1980 said:
Well, looks like Maguire thinks he can get his place back, so deal off to West Ham.

From what we know, silly boy. I guess he saw how inept United were last night, and feels it is evidence the problems in defence lie with the careless attackers rather than with him.

Or, maybe he just loves his weekly wage
Click to expand...

I heard it's to do with money.. he accepted a lower wage with us but because he just got a rise with you he is chasing a 7 million settlement and you offered him 5 million
 
Really disappointed in fabainski gone crying to the press that he's been dropped as number 1 and wasn't expecting it

I'm sorry but areola is 8 years his junior, imo a better keeper.. and has patiently waited for his chance (whilst winning the cup with us)

Fab instantly walked back into the team after injury when areola had done nothing to warrant dropping. He kept his place through some serious errors , he played a couple games at end of season which (because we were safe ) should have been areolas to get him sharp for the European final ..

Turns out he played those games so his contract would be auto renewed .. I mean it's clear you can't expect to be number 1 when your contract was being allowed to run down and a replacement is waiting ..

I'm disappointed at the age of 38 hes spoken out about such an obvious decision that should have been made last season
 
Lord Tyrion said:
I didn't. I was away on holiday at the weekend. Saw the last 20 minutes in a bar but didn't see any highlights. That makes the result even worse 😭
Click to expand...
Tawkoski just standing there ,arms by his side as he knew he wasn’t getting anyway near the ball.
keeper catches the ball and lands on him loses the ball
ref gives a foul.
absolute joke.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Hobbit
Another footie thread
2
Replies
36
Views
1K
WorldHandicapSystem
W
road2ruin
Fantasy Footie 25/26
2 3 4
Replies
79
Views
3K
road2ruin
road2ruin
C
Weather apps
2
Replies
20
Views
426
jim8flog
jim8flog
SwingsitlikeHogan
Rental Rights Act
2
Replies
24
Views
1K
jim8flog
jim8flog
jim8flog
Golf or football
2
Replies
33
Views
6K
Voyager EMH
Voyager EMH
Top