VillaChris Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 Just now, MrBlack said: Why would they? It protects the players. They've banned using that length of contract to amortise a player over though. The max you can do that is 5 years regardless of length. Interesting. So Chelsea are still giving out ridiculous contract lengths for the sake of it rather than being able to spread payment to satisfy FFP requirements. Felix won't even be at Chelsea for half that contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 (edited) 28 minutes ago, VillaChris said: Interesting. So Chelsea are still giving out ridiculous contract lengths for the sake of it rather than being able to spread payment to satisfy FFP requirements. Felix won't even be at Chelsea for half that contract. The thinking is that they're paying them less per year so instead of say 10m per year for 5 years they pay, 7m per year for 7 or whatever. Lower's their annual wage budget but players still get as much money as they get a payout of the remaining contract when they're sold anyway usually Edited August 21 by MrBlack 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zatman Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 22 minutes ago, VillaChris said: Interesting. So Chelsea are still giving out ridiculous contract lengths for the sake of it rather than being able to spread payment to satisfy FFP requirements. Felix won't even be at Chelsea for half that contract. PSR on long contracts only cover 5 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 32 minutes ago, MrBlack said: The thinking is that they're paying them less per year so instead of say 10m per year for 5 years they pay, 7m per year for 7 or whatever. Lower's their annual wage budget but players still get as much money as they get a payout of the remaining contract when they're sold anyway usually It’s not really the same though, £10m x5 is £50m, then they get a new contract or club and get another £10m for years 6 and 7. Event if they had 50% wage reduction in years 6 and 7 they are better off. It’s better than £7m a year x7. I’m really confuse at what Chelsea and the players they sign are doing. Something doesn’t add up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted August 21 Share Posted August 21 55 minutes ago, Genie said: It’s not really the same though, £10m x5 is £50m, then they get a new contract or club and get another £10m for years 6 and 7. Event if they had 50% wage reduction in years 6 and 7 they are better off. It’s better than £7m a year x7. I’m really confuse at what Chelsea and the players they sign are doing. Something doesn’t add up. The downside risk for the players is lower in model 2 though, and in practice they're probably gambling that if they're a key player by year 4 or 5 that Chelsea will be offering them a bumper new deal regardless (they've done that with Palmer after all). I think it's clear what Chelsea are attempting to do, which is to get as many talents in as they can while reducing their exposure on the incoming 'Squad Cost Control' (or whatever it's called) metric, which is purely about wage costs. We'll probably end up going down this road ourselves soon enough, it's the rational response to the end of PSR and start of the new rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Genie Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 7 hours ago, HanoiVillan said: The downside risk for the players is lower in model 2 though, and in practice they're probably gambling that if they're a key player by year 4 or 5 that Chelsea will be offering them a bumper new deal regardless (they've done that with Palmer after all). How is the downside risk less? I’d much rather have £10x 5 and then see what happens in year 6 than have £7m x7. After 5 years of scenario 1 I have been paid £50m and now free to move as a free agent or sign a new deal with Chelsea. With scenario 2 I’ve only been paid £35m but have 2 more seasons at Chelsea. Scenario 1 is definitely the better one which is why it’s not clear what Chelsea and the players are doing. Maybe there are big loyalty bonuses added for the latter years of the deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrBlack Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 3 hours ago, Genie said: How is the downside risk less? I’d much rather have £10x 5 and then see what happens in year 6 than have £7m x7. After 5 years of scenario 1 I have been paid £50m and now free to move as a free agent or sign a new deal with Chelsea. With scenario 2 I’ve only been paid £35m but have 2 more seasons at Chelsea. Scenario 1 is definitely the better one which is why it’s not clear what Chelsea and the players are doing. Maybe there are big loyalty bonuses added for the latter years of the deals. I'd expect that the last component is true. They're almost definitely being told that they'll get bonuses and/or a new contract and/or loyalty payments of the rest of the contract if they're sold before it ends. Maybe the longer period pays 8m, so you get 56m over 7 years instead of 50m over 5. Chelsea pay 2m less to their annual psr/scp bill, players get more money everyone's happy. The point is, the 50m over 5years isn't on the table. Chelsea can't afford that. They're still getting paid a massive increase on their previous contract so the players probably don't care. Chelsea sell them "you'll get XXm playing for us", but spread it over a longer period to enable them to do so. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HanoiVillan Posted August 22 Share Posted August 22 (edited) 10 hours ago, Genie said: How is the downside risk less? I’d much rather have £10x 5 and then see what happens in year 6 than have £7m x7. After 5 years of scenario 1 I have been paid £50m and now free to move as a free agent or sign a new deal with Chelsea. With scenario 2 I’ve only been paid £35m but have 2 more seasons at Chelsea. Scenario 1 is definitely the better one which is why it’s not clear what Chelsea and the players are doing. Maybe there are big loyalty bonuses added for the latter years of the deals. MrBlack is right to say that we don't actually know that the money is less over the lifetime of the contract anyway. But regardless, the downside risk is less because with a shorter contract you're banking on being fit and having played well in recent memory if you're planning to go on a free. And if Chelsea have achieved nothing else, they've certainly given themselves enough squad depth that they won't *have to* play anyone nearing contract expiry, they could just be frozen out (and players may well be noticing that is already happening to former 'we're so happy to have thems' like Badiashile, Disasi, Madueke and Mudryk). Edited August 22 by HanoiVillan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaTO Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tayls Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 Goalllll the lads quality. We should have tried to get him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pongo Waring Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 I hate him 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VillaTO Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 Can see why Chelsea wanted him. Without him it would have only been 5-2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xela Posted August 25 Share Posted August 25 Good job he wanted champions league football. rocket polisher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marka Ragnos Posted September 1 VT Supporter Share Posted September 1 (edited) Nice draw today. No wonder he went to glamourous Chelsea. He got to be subbed in at 58 minutes. And accomplished nothing. Against Crystal Palace. Edited September 1 by Marka Ragnos 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa89 Posted September 1 Share Posted September 1 We'll probably sign him on loan next summer when he's in the new Chelsea bomb squad. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts