Premier League 2024/25

[Cadno'r Cymoedd]

15 minutes ago, KansasFox said:

Nobody chooses to be ‘possibly welsh’

Quite a few in our international squad do before call up. 😂

[fox_up_north]

10 minutes ago, Cadno'r Cymoedd said:

Quite a few in our international squad do before call up. 😂

It's crazy that if I was an international footballer, I could choose to represent Ireland because my grandad was born there yet he still moved to England at the age of 2 and supports England.

[filbertway]

1 hour ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

2033 deal for Jackson at Chelsea.

 

When are they going to get investigated?

 

Absolutely stinks 

More power to them I say - the effects of this madness are going to be hilarious down the road

 

[st albans fox]

1 hour ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

2033 deal for Jackson at Chelsea.

 

When are they going to get investigated?

 

Absolutely stinks 

I’ve been told that these long deals are at ‘low’ salaries.  low for a rich six club.  Sub 100k 

these don’t help their psr position which are limited at 5 years from the date of purchase 

[st albans fox]

17 minutes ago, filbertway said:

More power to them I say - the effects of this madness are going to be hilarious down the road

 

It’s either inspired or madness 

If the salaries being paid on these long deals are correct then it could just be the former (there will be some bad decisions) 

 

imagine we’d signed Bouba on an 10 year deal but only paying him 40k/week.  The cost across his contract would be the same for us (at £20m) but the annual cost of his wages on psr would be half what they currently stand.  And we’d find it much easier to sell him as the buying club would likely be ok to pick up that wage.  obviously that’s a crude analogy but you get the picture 

[Sunbury Fox]

4 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

It’s either inspired or madness 

If the salaries being paid on these long deals are correct then it could just be the former (there will be some bad decisions) 

 

imagine we’d signed Bouba on an 10 year deal but only paying him 40k/week.  The cost across his contract would be the same for us (at £20m) but the annual cost of his wages on psr would be half what they currently stand.  And we’d find it much easier to sell him as the buying club would likely be ok to pick up that wage.  obviously that’s a crude analogy but you get the picture 

I’m surprised  that the kind of players at Chelsea would want to sign these deals, though. Such players would surely back themselves to get a couple of 5 year contracts on huge wages, as available at other clubs, rather than plump for the security of a v long contract on lower wages? Maybe not Nicholas Jackson but the likes of Palmer, Fernandez, etc.

[Ric Flair]

12 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

It’s either inspired or madness 

If the salaries being paid on these long deals are correct then it could just be the former (there will be some bad decisions) 

 

imagine we’d signed Bouba on an 10 year deal but only paying him 40k/week.  The cost across his contract would be the same for us (at £20m) but the annual cost of his wages on psr would be half what they currently stand.  And we’d find it much easier to sell him as the buying club would likely be ok to pick up that wage.  obviously that’s a crude analogy but you get the picture 

I just can't see how these players are agreeing to halve their wages just for the security of a 9 year contract. They're doing themselves out of half their mo ey because whilst there's no guarantee in football, they'd back themselves to have a successful career more than 5 years at which point they renew or get a big pay day elsewhere.

 

 

[st albans fox]

8 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

I just can't see how these players are agreeing to halve their wages just for the security of a 9 year contract. They're doing themselves out of half their mo ey because whilst there's no guarantee in football, they'd back themselves to have a successful career more than 5 years at which point they renew or get a big pay day elsewhere.

 

 

It could be that if they prove themselves over a season  (must be some kind of measurement agreed) that their salary increases ?? if the player believes in himself (they usually do) then they’ll take up that challenge.  It’s probably easier for a chelsea to do this than it would be for us because players want to go there. 

if the player doesn’t do the business then the club will find it easier to move them on than if they’re on a huge salary. 
 

a lot of their players are young. probably earning something like 10k on the continent.  if you’re offered 60k for 8 years at 20 or 21, what are you replying ? 

Edited 13 September by st albans fox

[filbertway]

29 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

It’s either inspired or madness 

If the salaries being paid on these long deals are correct then it could just be the former (there will be some bad decisions) 

 

imagine we’d signed Bouba on an 10 year deal but only paying him 40k/week.  The cost across his contract would be the same for us (at £20m) but the annual cost of his wages on psr would be half what they currently stand.  And we’d find it much easier to sell him as the buying club would likely be ok to pick up that wage.  obviously that’s a crude analogy but you get the picture 

All I know is that in baseball, there are players that get paid for  years and even decades after they have left due to the absurdly long contracts. If he's attempting to do that here it might serve him and the club well in the short term, but long term they're gonna be screwed.

 

I see you analogy though and there seems some sense to that. Also though, would bouba leave. Man can just chill out knowing he's not got to try for 10 years and he's gonna take £20m off us.

Collect 9 or 10 players like that over 4/5 years and see how those next 5 years treat you.

[pmcla26]

Surely there must be some sort of insurance against injuries in Chelsea's favour with these contracts? 

 

Hypothetically, if Jackson has a career ending injury next season, surely he's not on their pay roll until 2033 still? 

[kenny]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

I’ve been told that these long deals are at ‘low’ salaries.  low for a rich six club.  Sub 100k 

these don’t help their psr position which are limited at 5 years from the date of purchase 

But it reduces their annual wage bill. It was the only reason I could see for signing these long contracts.

 

They then hope the rules change by the time they are paying £600k per week for players that have left the club.

[Lambert09]

3 hours ago, Muzzy_no7 said:

2033 deal for Jackson at Chelsea.

 

When are they going to get investigated?

 

Absolutely stinks 

What’s funny is i can see them trying to sell him in the summer. 

 

Whenever i’ve watched jackson, he just sort of reminds me of Daka 

Edited 13 September by Lambert09

[Wymsey]

If Man City get found guilty of a good majority of the charges, they should be demoted to the Championship at least (seriously; see the Juventus and Rangers situations, albeit different cases, around 10 years ago).

 

But suspect that 'hush money' will probably mean that they'll get a reduced penalty to help them out of this..

Edited 13 September by Wymsey

[st albans fox]

6 minutes ago, Wymsey said:

If Man City get found guilty of a good majority of the charges, they should be demoted to the Championship at least (seriously; see the Juventus and Rangers situations, albeit different cases, around 10 years ago).

 

But suspect that 'hush money' will probably mean that they'll get a reduced penalty to help them out of this..

They could give them a fifty point sanction.

that would relegate pretty much every other club - it might not Man City though 

[Wymsey]

As it seems like Arteta brings out the best in a lot of players, wouldn't be surprised if he gets the best out of Sterling..

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c9353z4q3p7o

 

[BrummieFOX]

1 hour ago, Ric Flair said:

I just can't see how these players are agreeing to halve their wages just for the security of a 9 year contract. They're doing themselves out of half their mo ey because whilst there's no guarantee in football, they'd back themselves to have a successful career more than 5 years at which point they renew or get a big pay day elsewhere.

 

 

I believe they're heavily incentivised with app/goal bonuses etc.

[Ric Flair]

1 hour ago, st albans fox said:

It could be that if they prove themselves over a season  (must be some kind of measurement agreed) that their salary increases ?? if the player believes in himself (they usually do) then they’ll take up that challenge.  It’s probably easier for a chelsea to do this than it would be for us because players want to go there. 

if the player doesn’t do the business then the club will find it easier to move them on than if they’re on a huge salary. 
 

a lot of their players are young. probably earning something like 10k on the continent.  if you’re offered 60k for 8 years at 20 or 21, what are you replying ? 

They'd probably take £60k for 5 years in those scenarios too though.

[Torquay Gunner]

2 hours ago, Wymsey said:

As it seems like Arteta brings out the best in a lot of players, wouldn't be surprised if he gets the best out of Sterling..

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/c9353z4q3p7o

 

I hope so, but am not hugely confident. 

[Asha]

I know the situations aren’t identical, but it’s weird to me how people are enraged that Man City are even contesting the charges, that they’re all criminals and they should “just be relegated”, yet some random lawyer gets us off on a technicality and Leicester fans are rushing to put their tongues up his bumhole. 

As someone said on the previous page, they might have found loopholes, just as we have. 
 

Of all teams, we definitely shouldn’t be starting a Man City witch hunt. 

[Wymsey]

Have a feeling that Forest and Ipswich may both win..

[Thefox81]

24 minutes ago, Wymsey said:

Have a feeling that Forest and Ipswich may both win..

65/1 sky bet

[deep blue]

8 hours ago, Asha said:

I know the situations aren’t identical, but it’s weird to me how people are enraged that Man City are even contesting the charges, that they’re all criminals and they should “just be relegated”, yet some random lawyer gets us off on a technicality and Leicester fans are rushing to put their tongues up his bumhole. 

As someone said on the previous page, they might have found loopholes, just as we have. 
 

Of all teams, we definitely shouldn’t be starting a Man City witch hunt. 

I can't understand this apologetic response to our situation re PSR.

 

Talk about "technicalities" and "loopholes" is nonsense.

 

We abided by the written rules; full stop.

[FoyleFox]

2 minutes ago, deep blue said:

I can't understand this apologetic response to our situation re PSR.

 

Talk about "technicalities" and "loopholes" is nonsense.

 

We abided by the written rules; full stop.

Well, not really. We were relegated so, said the rules didn't apply on the date we were charged. Had we not been relegated, or not moved the accounting date,  we'd have been rightly penalised.

[grobyfox1990]

23 minutes ago, deep blue said:

I can't understand this apologetic response to our situation re PSR.

 

Talk about "technicalities" and "loopholes" is nonsense.

 

We abided by the written rules; full stop.

We didn’t abide by the rules at all. We smashed them to pieces. We got relegated, so there were no rules to abide by 

[Corky]

Where are the away fans at St Mary's now?