Wesley Fofana - He is no more - finished - forgotten.

[Nalis]

To add to the FFP misery, from stalking the Chelsea forum it seems that Chelsea are well within FFP to make this happen despite spending hundreds of millions already.

 

Disillusion with modern football is multiplying by the week...

[foxinsocks]

Just now, Beechey said:

Alternatively, if we sell Fofana for massive money, that greatly increases revenue, which would solve our wage to revenue problem for this season at least.

I am not dure it will count as revenur... but it should be a debit against player cost gor ffp :-)

but this is the wrong season for that to matter

[ronnup]

Trevor Chalobah is the one if we're recruiting from them

[dannythefox]

Do not sell for less than 100M 

Edited 9 August 2022 by dannythefox

[MadsEmil]

Just now, ronnup said:

Trevor Chalobah is the one if we're recruiting from them

How about Loftus Cheek as well while we're at it?

 

Chelsea have/ had just 2 players we were ever gonna be interested in: CHO (if he lowered his wages) and Colwill

[An Sionnach]

What is this strengthening talk. We lose Fofana ,we are weakened and picking up a couple of cast offs with the money won't change that. At the moment there is no upside to losing him at all apart from easing the financial situation.

[Beechey]

3 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

What is this strengthening talk. We lose Fofana ,we are weakened and picking up a couple of cast offs with the money won't change that. At the moment there is no upside to losing him at all apart from easing the financial situation.

That's nonsense, it depends who we sign.

If you assume we will sign dross, then obviously it's a negative, that's not a given, though.

[ARM1968]

There is absolutely NO upside to losing Fofana. Not even for £85 million. After the 15% profit sell on clause we would have enough, if we used it all, to purchase 2 reasonable players at best. On recent form it would be two less than successful fillers. We are bloated with fillers already. 
 

There is absolutely NO circumstance in which this sale benefits us. NONE. 

[Leeds Fox]

1 hour ago, Tielemans63 said:

What is Little Wes on? £80k a week? If he goes then there is the transfer fee but in terms of wages, you'd hope we'd bring in another player capable of playing in the PL so that's surely at least £50k pw - thus from an FFP* point of view we're only saving £30k a week and will have a significantly weaker squad. Is that really worth it? Surely we're not going to rely on an aging Evans, an out-of-favour Cags and Big Dan? That actually could see us fighting to stay up if Evans cops a bad injury.

 

Having to sacrifice (not literally) the best young defender on the planet because we can't shift the likes of Bertrand, Vesty or Hamza is absolutely galling but a problem entirely of the club's making. £200k a week were spunking on those 3 wasters.

 

*Words can't express how much I hate the concept of FFP, to use the word 'fair' in there is an insult. Genuinely believe it's a nail in the coffin for the ambitions of a club like ours and it's wrong. The game is so heavily in favour of the 'big clubs now', let them **** off and start their super league imho.

Good post. Although there’ll be Kaspers wages to take into account too surely? So that’s another £140k/wk to play with. 

[An Sionnach]

8 minutes ago, Beechey said:

That's nonsense, it depends who we sign.

If you assume we will sign dross, then obviously it's a negative, that's not a given, though.

We want a quality replacement , we pay big + a premium because other clubs see us coming. Then we pay a bigger salary than Fofana gets. No benefit whatsoever.

[Beechey]

5 minutes ago, An Sionnach said:

We want a quality replacement , we pay big + a premium because other clubs see us coming. Then we pay a bigger salary than Fofana gets. No benefit whatsoever.

It's entirely dependent on the player and his contract situation though. Not all clubs can reject £30m offers, we got Fofana for not much more.

Again, if you assume we'll sign awful players, why would you ever want us to sell anyone?

 

Player trading is one of the largest parts of modern football, and if the club gets an offer they can't refuse for Fofana (because it meets their internal valuation), then they have to sell and buy again. If the club's position genuinely is that Fofana won't be sold, then there's nothing to be concerned about.

Edited 9 August 2022 by Beechey

[ronnup]

24 minutes ago, MadsEmil said:

How about Loftus Cheek as well while we're at it?

 

Chelsea have/ had just 2 players we were ever gonna be interested in: CHO (if he lowered his wages) and Colwill

He's shit

[An Sionnach]

1 minute ago, Beechey said:

It's entirely dependent on the player and his contract situation though. Not all clubs can reject £30m offers, we got Fofana for not much more.

Again, if you assume we'll sign awful players, why would you ever want us to sell anyone?

 

Player trading is one of the largest parts of modern football, and if the club gets an offer they can't refuse for Fofana (because it meets their internal valuation), then they have to sell and buy again.

Fofana was an expensive buy to give this club a core defender to succeed Jonny Evans and stay with this club for a number of years. His new contract makes him highly paid and will probably be improved if we continue to be successful. It would be the hight of stupidity to let him go now. As I have said it is entirely down to Top , and if it went sour he would carry the responsibility.

[urban.spaceman]

8 minutes ago, Philkeavo said:

Does anyone have any information on how FFP has affected Leicester. BR speaks of financial constraints, others  have said it is mainly due to FFP, but does anyone actually know or have data to prove it?

From SwissRamble:

 

 

Simply put, our wages are too high compared to our turnover. The rules are complex and I don't quite understand it so hopefully someone else can help with them. From my understanding infrastructure isn't included in the rules so we can spend as much as we want of the owner's money on new training grounds and stadium expansions.

 

We're basically at the absolute limit of what we can spend on wages without regular European football; before we sign new players we have to reduce the wage bill by showing the door to certain players on high wages. That's why Kasper has gone, he was our second highest earner and him leaving takes c.£7m off the salary.

 

More importantly for the club is selling off players who aren't bringing any value to the club - these are rumoured wages so take these figures with a pinch of salt - Bertrand (78k - 4m), Soumare (83k - 4.3m), Vestergaard (75k - 3.9m), Hamza (61k - 3.1m), Perez (83k - 4.3m) - that right there is £19m a year that could be spent on other first team players wages that would improve the squad.

 

The problem is actually move them the **** on. Bertrand, Hamza and Perez all have one year left on their contract. Vestergaard 2 years and Soumare has 4. 

 

We've also found it difficult with player whose contracts are running down to either sign new contracts or attract bids. Youri being the most known one - nobody's come in for him and he's being ****ing stubborn. Cags, Mendy, Evans, Amartey and Vardy are all on contracts ending in 2023.

 

With Kasper gone it does make it a bit easier to renew some contracts, with Maddison, Vardy and Ndidi perhaps the most important to stave off interest.

 

So unfortunately I am now going to have to concede to @Finnegan that we are indeed in a bit of a bloody mess.

[Dahnsouff]

23 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

There is absolutely NO upside to losing Fofana. Not even for £85 million. After the 15% profit sell on clause we would have enough, if we used it all, to purchase 2 reasonable players at best. On recent form it would be two less than successful fillers. We are bloated with fillers already. 
 

There is absolutely NO circumstance in which this sale benefits us. NONE. 

Exactly like the sales of Mahrez, Chilwell. Kante different as he had a release clause. Maguire was different because he was secretly shit.

[Beechey]

6 minutes ago, urban.spaceman said:

From SwissRamble:

 

 

Simply put, our wages are too high compared to our turnover. The rules are complex and I don't quite understand it so hopefully someone else can help with them. From my understanding infrastructure isn't included in the rules so we can spend as much as we want of the owner's money on new training grounds and stadium expansions.

 

We're basically at the absolute limit of what we can spend on wages without regular European football; before we sign new players we have to reduce the wage bill by showing the door to certain players on high wages. That's why Kasper has gone, he was our second highest earner and him leaving takes c.£7m off the salary.

 

More importantly for the club is selling off players who aren't bringing any value to the club - these are rumoured wages so take these figures with a pinch of salt - Bertrand (78k - 4m), Soumare (83k - 4.3m), Vestergaard (75k - 3.9m), Hamza (61k - 3.1m), Perez (83k - 4.3m) - that right there is £19m a year that could be spent on other first team players wages that would improve the squad.

 

The problem is actually move them the **** on. Bertrand, Hamza and Perez all have one year left on their contract. Vestergaard 2 years and Soumare has 4. 

 

We've also found it difficult with player whose contracts are running down to either sign new contracts or attract bids. Youri being the most known one - nobody's come in for him and he's being ****ing stubborn. Cags, Mendy, Evans, Amartey and Vardy are all on contracts ending in 2023.

 

With Kasper gone it does make it a bit easier to renew some contracts, with Maddison, Vardy and Ndidi perhaps the most important to stave off interest.

 

So unfortunately I am now going to have to concede to @Finnegan that we are indeed in a bit of a bloody mess.

We are above what we should be spending on wages. New UEFA FFP rules dictate that next year you can spend 90% of revenue on wages, the year after is 80%, every year after is 70%. Given the 2021 accounts were inflated due to some money being included from the previous year, we are almost certainly currently above 100% of revenue to wages. Schmeichel leaving may have brought that down by 5%-10%, but we signed Soumare, Daka, Vestergaard and Bertrand (probably up to £300k/week of wages there) since these accounts were released, so the effect is probably not that pronounced, espeically since we made no sales of note last season.

Edited 9 August 2022 by Beechey

[An Sionnach]

Just now, Dahnsouff said:

Exactly like the sales of Mahrez, Chilwell. Kante different as he had a release clause. Maguire was different because he was secretly shit.

Harry gets a lot of stick on here from the same people who loved him when he played for us. We have been weak in the air since he left and people forget that. He is not a great CB , not many are , but he is a lot better than some think.

[FoxesWalk]

Next summer we will solve some of our issues since so many are out of contract, i suspect Vardy maybe negotiating a new deal on a lower salary anyway as he winds down his career. At least most of our deadwood will be off next summer regardless, it’s the likes of Soumaré and Vestergaard that need to go now arguably. I’d almost prefer we spend nothing now and have more next summer to rebuild the squad after the contract expiries. 

Edited 9 August 2022 by FoxesWalk

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, An Sionnach said:

Harry gets a lot of stick on here from the same people who loved him when he played for us. We have been weak in the air since he left and people forget that. He is not a great CB , not many are , but he is a lot better than some think.

He is, he has become a figure of fun unjustly so (But he sure does not help himself) and he was massively hindered by moving for a preposterous world record fee

 

Everyone outside of Man Utd (And most probably inside) knew it was overblown, but still they paid it  

 

And you are correct about weaker in the air sicne his departure, something we should seek to address with out next CB

[Horibbly Wrong]

1 hour ago, ClaphamFox said:

Our wages-to-revenue are apparently 105%, higher than any other club than Bournemouth - and well above most of the 'big six'.

 

This video explains it quite well:
 

 

I have completely changed my attitude towards player sales after watching this

[City1884]

Some people still seem to not actually be listening to the problems that are causing our stale transfer window…….
 

Let’s say we do sell Fofana for £85m, that means currently we’ve lost 2 players from an already bloated squad. 
 

Realistically that means we have the squad room to sign a maximum of one new player without being right back to where we started. 
 

Our transfer record is currently in the region of £40m for Tielemans. It’s unlikely we would sign any one player for more than £50m, especially not a centre back to replace Fofana.

 

Realistically we would end up probably buying a replacement CB for up to a maximum of around £35m.

 

Where does that leave us? (Up to) £50m in profit, with still no space in the squad for new signings, and a weakened back line. 
The money only becomes useful if we offload deadwood to make space, and guess what? We are struggling to do that.

 

The transfer fee for Fofana is pretty irrelevant. It could be £85m or £200m, we still need space in the squad (and a reduction in the wage bill) by offloading the players we actually don’t want!

 

The sale of Fofana would be a dreadful move, at any price, unless we also get rid of multiple unused, overpaid players. (Choudhury, Vestergaard, Bertrand, Perez, etc etc)

 

The only other thing it would make possible is paying off some of these players contracts, but that’s seen (quite rightly) as just pouring money down the drain…………

[Torten]

46 minutes ago, Dahnsouff said:

This is depite Alfie being a Hull fan

Indeed . Can't complain though, he complements to us often in his videos as an example for fans of lower league clubs of what's possible if a club is well run. 

[turtmcfly]

24 minutes ago, ARM1968 said:

There is absolutely NO upside to losing Fofana. Not even for £85 million. After the 15% profit sell on clause we would have enough, if we used it all, to purchase 2 reasonable players at best. On recent form it would be two less than successful fillers. We are bloated with fillers already. 
 

There is absolutely NO circumstance in which this sale benefits us. NONE. 

 

It's simply not possible to buy a better than reasonable player for £35 million. I did not know this. 

 

Given that's about as high as we'd ever go it certainly helps take the worry out of us not signing anyone. 

 

 

(it is clearly possible. That last para is risible) 

 

[Foxxed]

Not getting European football has really buggered the club. If what I read above is true, Fofana’s transfer funds won’t help us with the main problem, our wage bill, anyway. Vestergaard wanting to stay here on his current salary was and is bigger and more troubling news. 

[Guest itude]

Not much good news is there ? I did read that Fulham offered £12 million ? I would have been ok with 10. He doesn't want it, wants to "fight for his place" ?? I don't think so. Who on earth came up with the idea of signing him in the first place ? I had a look at Southamptons fan zone posts when we took those two, they were laughing their heads off..at us