Jump to content

The Premier League Thread - 2024/25


CSA96
 Share

Recommended Posts

The Chelsea 'zero strategy' bandwagon carries on. Someone has got to put a stop to them surely?

Now going for Felix, who has already had a stint there which was a bit of a fail. They have no idea what they're doing, and you do have to feel somewhat for their fans as it's a hollow club. It's like a mega version of the WHU Transfer tombola.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, S-Clarke said:

The Chelsea 'zero strategy' bandwagon carries on. Someone has got to put a stop to them surely?

Now going for Felix, who has already had a stint there which was a bit of a fail. They have no idea what they're doing, and you do have to feel somewhat for their fans as it's a hollow club. It's like a mega version of the WHU Transfer tombola.

Just theorising here but are they now taking Joao Felix just because he is a Jorge Mendes client and Mendes got them Neto ahead of the likes of Arsenal and Spurs who were supposedly also interested? Now the Omorodion deal has fallen through they need someone else from the Atletico squad to balance up the fees for the Gallagher deal to do their little FFP fiddle, and Felix wants out of Atletico and supposedly enjoyed his loan spell with Chelsea (even though at the time they didn't keep him on permanently)

Edited by CSA96
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, S-Clarke said:

The Chelsea 'zero strategy' bandwagon carries on. Someone has got to put a stop to them surely?

Now going for Felix, who has already had a stint there which was a bit of a fail. They have no idea what they're doing, and you do have to feel somewhat for their fans as it's a hollow club. It's like a mega version of the WHU Transfer tombola.

In the last couple of decades they've literally won every trophy imaginable, many more than once. So sorry, my sympathy for their fans can be found somewhere between shit and syphilis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 09/08/2024 at 20:36, Saint86 said:

Any recommendations for overseas coverage providers (that may or may not be accessible over a VPN, not in anyway suggesting i would make use of such a thing 😇)

I may or may not also be interested in any reliable, paid for services that people may or may not be considering using for the upcoming season.

Edited by goodymatt
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can be bothered with the rigmarole of changing your app store over, signing up and streaming it from your phone, Peacock is a good option.

You pay $5 a month and can watch every game.

Allegedly.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just seen that Chelsea have given Cole Palmer a contract until 2033. 8/9 year deal?. I think those sorts of contracts are stupid.

Chelsea are breaking football, something needs to be done about how they're doing transfers and contracts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

Just seen that Chelsea have given Cole Palmer a contract until 2033. 8/9 year deal?. I think those sorts of contracts are stupid.

Chelsea are breaking football, something needs to be done about how they're doing transfers and contracts.

Agreed

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, S-Clarke said:

Just seen that Chelsea have given Cole Palmer a contract until 2033. 8/9 year deal?. I think those sorts of contracts are stupid.

Chelsea are breaking football, something needs to be done about how they're doing transfers and contracts.

Why can’t they give as long of a contract as they like?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, HarvSFC said:

No more Garth Crooks team of the weeks. Not that it was actually him picking the team and writing up the articles, just something created to get clicks. It's now being associated with one of the biggest egos in the game - Troy Deeney. https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cn5r72k2z44o

No more Garth Crooks ("The Fish")??? :) He always irritated the majority of Saints fans with his PL team of the week rubbish.
Troy Deeney (currently out of jail) is more likeable - and was a great co-pundit at the championship play off final.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Why can’t they give as long of a contract as they like?

They obviously have. I'll leave it to someone with more patience and energy than me to explain the implications to you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

No, go on. 

I think its to do with the player purchase amortisation model, something to do with financial calculations for PSR based off of the initial sale divided by the contract length for each year the contract is valid. For example say Arsenal buys a player for 40 m on a four year contract, the expenses written in the book for that player purchase is 10 m spread across four financial years, Chelsea also buy a player for 40m but on an 8 year contract, they only have to write down 5 m for that player purchase expense essentially cutting their expenses in half in the accounts despite buying a player for the same price that Arsenal bought their player and that's where I assume the point of contention lies in setting their crazy long contracts.

Its also the reason why Loaning Aaron Ramsdale would be extremely difficult for us financially just by being on a wage around the 100k a week bracket, because it would be the equivalent of us paying for a 20.8m player on a four year contract and that's not taking into account potential loaning fees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, V.Johnathan.Wilson said:

I think its to do with the player purchase amortisation model, something to do with financial calculations for PSR based off of the initial sale divided by the contract length for each year the contract is valid. For example say Arsenal buys a player for 40 m on a four year contract, the expenses written in the book for that player purchase is 10 m spread across four financial years, Chelsea also buy a player for 40m but on an 8 year contract, they only have to write down 5 m for that player purchase expense essentially cutting their expenses in half in the accounts despite buying a player for the same price that Arsenal bought their player and that's where I assume the point of contention lies in setting their crazy long contracts.

Its also the reason why Loaning Aaron Ramsdale would be extremely difficult for us financially just by being on a wage around the 100k a week bracket, because it would be the equivalent of us paying for a 20.8m player on a four year contract and that's not taking into account potential loaning fees.

That is Ramsdale's issue if he does not want to play football, surely?

I am sure that amortisation is now limited to 5 years, regardless if you give a player an 8 year deal?

Edited by AlexLaw76
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well if nobody wants to pay 30m or his wages for those gunning for a loan, then he'll probably be forced to take a salary cut in order to get a move if he desires it. I presume that if we still want to get Ramsdale this window then this is what we are banking on.

Edited by V.Johnathan.Wilson
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, V.Johnathan.Wilson said:

I think its to do with the player purchase amortisation model, something to do with financial calculations for PSR based off of the initial sale divided by the contract length for each year the contract is valid. For example say Arsenal buys a player for 40 m on a four year contract, the expenses written in the book for that player purchase is 10 m spread across four financial years, Chelsea also buy a player for 40m but on an 8 year contract, they only have to write down 5 m for that player purchase expense essentially cutting their expenses in half in the accounts despite buying a player for the same price that Arsenal bought their player and that's where I assume the point of contention lies in setting their crazy long contracts.

Its also the reason why Loaning Aaron Ramsdale would be extremely difficult for us financially just by being on a wage around the 100k a week bracket, because it would be the equivalent of us paying for a 20.8m player on a four year contract and that's not taking into account potential loaning fees.

Surely this is when the player signs for a club? Cole Palmer is signing his second contract with Chelsea after agreeing a 7 year contract last year. This is an additional two years so has nothing to do with the initial phasing of the transfer. So after the first contract this is just tying the player down for longer. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, AlexLaw76 said:

Still doing this nonsense

image.thumb.png.f16b9b5bb9c8f0656a7c37df0574c7e0.png

It was notable when they done this shit last time that Smallbone wouldn't. Good on the lad, I wonder if the pressure of the PL will lead him to do it this time round... 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The wankfest has started already. “Trents” pass, Sakas goal. Saw them both on MOTD this morning having heard the reports about how unbelievable both things were I was very underwhelmed. Good pass yes, good goal but was hearing it was the sort of stuff only they could, unreal etc FFS

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BHA 2-1 Man U. With a last second headed winner.

United had a goal disallowed when Fernandes' open goal bound shot was ajudged to have hit an offside Zirkzee's knee just before the line. Zirkzee was sliding in and unable to get out of the way.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...