HankMarvin Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May (edited) 38 minutes ago, CosbehFox said: If you look at a very basic consideration, the PSR/FFP allowance of £35m drops to £13m on the forthcoming calculation of it means you only have make up £12m as opposed to £22m. Hard cash, pure profit. You start to think we don’t need to lose Dewsbury Hall and maybe we get away with flogging squad players The 3 year limit will be 83m the last set of accounts we lost more than that in 1 season. The logic you have applied implies that we are simply on course to stay with in the 105m limit. Edited 22 May by HankMarvin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chocolate Teapot Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May 17 minutes ago, Fuchsocksblu said: Okay, I'll ask, why am I wrong? BINGO! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaphamFox Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May 7 minutes ago, Sol thewall Bamba said: If you can find a reputable source to say that compensation paid to LCFC for a member of our staff, wouldn't be counted as part of our turnover, I'm all ears. As am I. Really intrigued about this one. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chocolate Teapot Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May 3 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said: As am I. Really intrigued about this one. There isn't any because he's wrong. Rodgers massive salary is part of the problem we have including his compensation so he's talking shite. The line about him hoping PTT sponsor us is warning enough tbh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HybridFox Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May Another genius clause by our fantastic director of football though. £7/8m release clause is pocket change! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tuna Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May 1 minute ago, HybridFox said: Another genius clause by our fantastic director of football though. £7/8m release clause is pocket change! Hardly for an untried, untested manager and that clause went up with promotion 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaphamFox Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May 1 minute ago, HybridFox said: Another genius clause by our fantastic director of football though. £7/8m release clause is pocket change! A higher release clause would very likely mean we'd also have to give him more if we sacked him. Surely we've been too burnt to make that mistake again? 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May I’m generally on Maresca’s side on most matters since he’s joined the club and would prefer him to stay but I worry about this situation. I wouldn’t mind Maresca having more input on how the club operates and getting more support from club leadership. I won’t go into a rant about mess the club’s got itself in; I’ll just say think most fans might agree with Enzo’s perspective here. However, even if I’d prefer Enzo to get his way on more things, the club would be mad to try to meet Chelsea’s offer to Maresca and his staff because we simply cannot afford to pay the kind of money Chelsea throw at everything. Unfortunately, that then gets us into a situation where I can see our manager search essentially being run by agents pitching their candidates as opposed to the board drafting a carefully-considered short list. With the names being bandied around last spring and summer I was relieved we went with Maresca; I’m less confident we’ll make the right move two years in a row. “They have to get this right” is such a cliche about every manager search ever, but if we’re looking again this summer then I just pray the board don’t get this horribly wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HybridFox Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May Just now, ClaphamFox said: A higher release clause would very likely mean we'd also have to give him more if we sacked him. Surely we've been too burnt to make that mistake again? Good point Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcfcbluearmy Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May 33 minutes ago, Fuchsocksblu said: Tell me you don't understand PSR without telling me - BINGO! PSR equates to club turnover and PLAYER sales, not a manager sale. That includes cash revenue too which is why we need to find more cash flow. Hotels, sports complexes, brand deals, and international reach helps. We can't go to the EFL and be like 'Oh hi Mr EFL we've sold our manager, does that mean we can go now?' We would be managerless, squad would be very deflated and still be left with players that need to go. 10 million from Chelsea really doesn't mean a damn thing. Mate where do you think the manager sale goes to the void? A manager sale would be included in club turnover 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post VictorFox Posted 22 May Popular Post Share Posted 22 May After the Rodgers disaster I’m prepared to let any manager go, in current times most managers go stale after a season or two. Take the money while we can 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HybridFox Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May At least he can show his medal to Casadei 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fuchsocksblu Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May 1 minute ago, James_lcfc said: I was also intrigued by your comment. How do you know that manager compensation can't be used in the PSR calcs? So there's a couple of articles on how there's a difference between PSR and FFP. FFP is the UEFA regulations which is a 70% cap on player spending, obviously since we were playing top 6 wages and got relegated, we are going to break them. PSR counts for squad cost and it's measures, not management. PSR limits what a club can spend which is shaped by what a club can generate through its turnover. PSR is basically squad-cost control on wages and fees for those players. Losing Enzo and gaining that 10 mill, wouldn't solve issues because we still need to cut down our squad. It's the squad that is the crucial bit here. Fortunately, we can raise PSR through cup progression which we did, sponsorship, commercial rev (renaming Seagrave to FBS training centre for eg). Broadcasting rights are pitiful in the EFL. The reason why Man Utd, Chelsea don't have the same restrictions as the other 14 clubs is because of their power in commercial, stock-market, and international departments. Also because they are traditionally big sides, more people watch, buy and generally pay more to see them. It comes down to Location, Prestige and customers. Sacking Rodgers was a negative in the accounting, it was the last thing they wanted it do because the club and Brendan knew it was money that couldn't put back in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sol thewall Bamba Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May 18 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said: As am I. Really intrigued about this one. Would surely mean that the Rodgers compensation package wouldn't have been included either.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClaphamFox Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May 6 minutes ago, Fuchsocksblu said: So there's a couple of articles on how there's a difference between PSR and FFP. FFP is the UEFA regulations which is a 70% cap on player spending, obviously since we were playing top 6 wages and got relegated, we are going to break them. PSR counts for squad cost and it's measures, not management. PSR limits what a club can spend which is shaped by what a club can generate through its turnover. PSR is basically squad-cost control on wages and fees for those players. Losing Enzo and gaining that 10 mill, wouldn't solve issues because we still need to cut down our squad. It's the squad that is the crucial bit here. Fortunately, we can raise PSR through cup progression which we did, sponsorship, commercial rev (renaming Seagrave to FBS training centre for eg). Broadcasting rights are pitiful in the EFL. The reason why Man Utd, Chelsea don't have the same restrictions as the other 14 clubs is because of their power in commercial, stock-market, and international departments. Also because they are traditionally big sides, more people watch, buy and generally pay more to see them. It comes down to Location, Prestige and customers. Sacking Rodgers was a negative in the accounting, it was the last thing they wanted it do because the club and Brendan knew it was money that couldn't put back in. You still haven't explained why compensation received for a departing manager would not be counted as income for PSR purposes when compensation paid to a sacked manager would count as a loss for PSR. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
themightyfin Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May 6 minutes ago, ClaphamFox said: You still haven't explained why compensation received for a departing manager would not be counted as income for PSR purposes when compensation paid to a sacked manager would count as a loss for PSR. There is no explanation because it's wrong. Of course it counts. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hales Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May (edited) He would be crazy to go to Chelsea this early on in his management career....the pressure...the owners....he wouldnt last long. Chelsea are becoming a club most managers would question now i think. Crazy to get rid of Poch. Chelsea are like kids in a sweet shop, see something good and want it....they waste stupid money. He would be an idiot to go there..look at Potter..... Edited 22 May by Hales Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
foxile5 Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May 1 hour ago, HybridFox said: Enzo should look at Xabi Alonso resisting big offers to stay with Leverkusen. His stock will only rise if he stays and can establish us next year. The Chelsea job comes around far more often than you think This cuts both ways. If we go down - and that is probably more likely than not - then he'll look like a manager who got a team promoted from a league which persued them for financial irregularities and made a meal of it. Then whom couldn't manage a difficult situation. At least with Chelsea he won't take a reputation dent. Everyone knows they're a circus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dahnsouff Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May Looking on the Shed End, general consensus is that top 4 or GTFO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teblin Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May His assistant is a former Chelsea player too isn’t he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_77 Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May “Michael Thomas” is definitely the middle of consecutive all-nighters in the editing room putting together a 20-minute video of our passing sequences against Huddersfield Town and Birmingham City. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Fox Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May 2 minutes ago, teblin said: His assistant is a former Chelsea player too isn’t he? Yes , Willy Caballero played for Chelsea between 2017-2021. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HankMarvin Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May 1 minute ago, Happy Fox said: Yes , Willy Caballero played for Chelsea between 2017-2021. Everyone knows Enzo will keep talking Willy everywhere he goes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teblin Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May He’s kinda win win, if it works out his stock would be high. If not he’ll get another job and Chelsea’s ownership is all over the place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gurru991 Posted 22 May Share Posted 22 May 6 minutes ago, HankMarvin said: Everyone knows Enzo will keep talking Willy everywhere he goes That typo made me laugh !! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts