Hank Scorpio Posted January 20, 2023 Share Posted January 20, 2023 9 minutes ago, The_Steve said: 7-and-a-half year contract for Madueke. Madness. It gets them around ffp and basically allows them to spend whatever they like now. I get the impression they are worried about Newcastle 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Steve Posted January 20, 2023 Share Posted January 20, 2023 46 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said: It gets them around ffp and basically allows them to spend whatever they like now. I get the impression they are worried about Newcastle For sure. They are so average for what they’ve spent and gambling on signing players now but will stuck with them for years if this doesn’t work out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GingerCollins29 Posted January 20, 2023 Share Posted January 20, 2023 Just announced madueke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MachoFantastico Posted January 20, 2023 Share Posted January 20, 2023 (edited) Honestly, it's an interesting approach from Chelsea. They are basically spreading the cost of these players over very long contracts allowing them to work within the rules of FFP I believe, I do wonder if we'll see this repeated by other teams in the future. I guess it all depends on if it works out. That said, they'll most likely still have to sell some players this January given the size of the squad. Apparently there's talk that Sterling's future at the club is far from certain despite only being a recent purchase from City. Basically Chelsea have found a loophole in the FFP rules, one I expect a lot of clubs to copy. Edited January 20, 2023 by MachoFantastico Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 I've seen talk already about changing the rules to make 5 years the maximum contract length offerable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommo_b Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 8 hours ago, HanoiVillan said: I've seen talk already about changing the rules to make 5 years the maximum contract length offerable. This was always going to happen after Chelsea have some extravagantly exploited a loop hole. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutByEaster? Posted January 21, 2023 Moderator Share Posted January 21, 2023 It's a very temporary advantage though, they're emptying the value of this window (and the summer one just gone) into their future, you can only really do that once, those future values are going to affect what they can do in the next few windows as they come with some of this season money already in them. I think they're gambling on the rules changing at some point in the next couple of years, before the adverse effect hits. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ender4 Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 1 hour ago, OutByEaster? said: I think they're gambling on the rules changing at some point in the next couple of years, before the adverse effect hits. It’s already confirmed to be changing in one key aspect and that’s wages as a % of turnover is coming in over the next couple of seasons. Chelsea have exploited that rule as well with these contracts… say you sign a player on £100k a week for 4 years. After 3 years he wants £150k a week to sign another 3 year contract. By giving a player a 7.5 year contract, you’ve fixed his relatively low salary for at least 6 years. It’s actually really clever but you have to be very confident your recruitment team are choosing the right players for the long-term as duds will cost you over the years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 3 hours ago, Tommo_b said: This was always going to happen after Chelsea have some extravagantly exploited a loop hole. City have been giving 6 year deals out before that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fightoffyour Posted January 21, 2023 VT Supporter Share Posted January 21, 2023 The lineup today doesn’t look like that of a team that’s just spent half a billion or whatever on players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bannedfromHandV Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 13 minutes ago, ender4 said: It’s already confirmed to be changing in one key aspect and that’s wages as a % of turnover is coming in over the next couple of seasons. Chelsea have exploited that rule as well with these contracts… say you sign a player on £100k a week for 4 years. After 3 years he wants £150k a week to sign another 3 year contract. By giving a player a 7.5 year contract, you’ve fixed his relatively low salary for at least 6 years. It’s actually really clever but you have to be very confident your recruitment team are choosing the right players for the long-term as duds will cost you over the years. But I assume if one or more of the plethora they’ve signed go on to excel they’ll likely be offered improved contracts periodically to keep them happy, so whatever commitments they may be making now they’re either going to increase due to good performance or become a millstone round the neck if they perform poorly. I don’t really understand FFP, amortisation etc but it doesn’t feel all that smart of an approach to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 (edited) 3 hours ago, OutByEaster? said: It's a very temporary advantage though, they're emptying the value of this window (and the summer one just gone) into their future, you can only really do that once, those future values are going to affect what they can do in the next few windows as they come with some of this season money already in them. I think they're gambling on the rules changing at some point in the next couple of years, before the adverse effect hits. This Think about it if they have spreaded 3 50m players for example over 5 years that means they have spent 30m of their transfer budget for the next 5 years. If these player flop and they are stuck with they could be **** after Its a absolute crazy strategy Edited January 21, 2023 by Demitri_C Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talldarkandransome Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 Mudryk looked good today, big upgrade on Mount Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Villaphan04 Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 14 hours ago, HanoiVillan said: I've seen talk already about changing the rules to make 5 years the maximum contract length offerable. that would be interesting -- can a governing body control that type of contract offer? I also read somewhere that they are using a club option to extend which is then automatically triggered extending the contract. Not sure if that's correct but it's a classic fm trick I've used Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
penguin Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 From a quick search, FIFA regulations already state contracts shouldn’t be longer than 5 years but they’ve left in some wriggle room. I suspect that may be tightened up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 4 hours ago, Talldarkandransome said: Mudryk looked good today, big upgrade on Mount Looked quick but hid decision making at times was quite irratic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tayls Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 (edited) 4 hours ago, Talldarkandransome said: Mudryk looked good today, big upgrade on Mount Yea looked excellent. Are we sure though that Mudryk and Nyland aren’t the same person? Has anyone ever seen them in the same room? I couldn’t help but thinking that it was Orjan Nyland tearing through Liverpool today. Edited January 21, 2023 by Tayls 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 4 hours ago, Villaphan04 said: that would be interesting -- can a governing body control that type of contract offer? 4 hours ago, penguin said: From a quick search, FIFA regulations already state contracts shouldn’t be longer than 5 years but they’ve left in some wriggle room. I suspect that may be tightened up. Penguin is right, FIFA have a rule that contracts be no longer than 5 years but they leave the enforcement up to individual associations, and ours seemingly have never had any interest in enforcing it. Question is whether that will change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Dogg Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 5 hours ago, Talldarkandransome said: Mudryk looked good today, big upgrade on Mount They don't play in the same position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talldarkandransome Posted January 21, 2023 Share Posted January 21, 2023 1 hour ago, Mr_Dogg said: They don't play in the same position. I know, I mean just better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts