Mykhaylo Mudryk - Chelsea Beat Arsenal to Signing Winger

[Danny]

I hate the fact that oil clubs exist but lets be honest, what ruined competition in English football was the creation of the Premier League, Champions League and the monopoly that those financial windfalls created.

Without Chelsea it is likely that just Man Utd, Arsenal and Liverpool would have dominated the league for years with the occasional push from a Chelsea or Newcastle. Even more likely that United would have dominated mostly by themselves.

Without City this decade the title would have solely been between Liverpool and Man Utd, alternatively Arsenal would have been in a much healthier position over the last decade and so would probably have effected that too.

Maybe Leicester still win the league, Spurs maybe win a league title if Chelsea aren’t involved. Even then the likelihood is that Arsenal and United have a built dominance from years of sweeping everything up.

If you back back 3 decades before the introduction of the PL you have in each decade; 5, 5 and 7 different winners. Go forward 2 decades and that number goes down to 3. It is only the last decade the number has been at 5, partially because of the Leicester anomaly and mainly because of City.

I don’t want the league in its current format, but anyone looking back at the first 2 decades of the Prem as the glory days of competition either don’t remember watching football then or support United, Chelsea or Arsenal lol.

[True Blue]

Dislike the Boelhy's approach to buying every single soul. It's like he is trying to flex to show we have money, goes back to Roman 2003 when every available player was on the radar. I was the happiest in the period Frank was manager, with all the talented kids who really did well all things considered. Shame it was just that season because of the ban and we were at it again. Some things will never change.

[Bluewolf]

Apparently Potter had a say in this transfer or at least approved of it so let's see what he does with him and how he performs.. It's a huge gamble for the money involved given his age and how some of our signings have worked out.. If he flops it will be a huge 110Mill 7 year contract flop of epic proportions... I also understand there could be at least two more signings to come believe it or not.. some players are going to have to go for sure to balance the books.. 

[True Blue]

1 hour ago, Bluewolf said:

Apparently Potter had a say in this transfer or at least approved of it so let's see what he does with him and how he performs.. It's a huge gamble for the money involved given his age and how some of our signings have worked out.. If he flops it will be a huge 110Mill 7 year contract flop of epic proportions... I also understand there could be at least two more signings to come believe it or not.. some players are going to have to go for sure to balance the books.. 

The deal is on 8 and a half years 

Also i fully expect a massive exodus this summer, i could see us get rid of 10 players

[Cicero]

Lot of faith riding on this lad. Looks explosive and a profile I don't ever remember us having.

14 hours ago, True Blue said:

Also i fully expect a massive exodus this summer, i could see us get rid of 10 players

Pulisic, Ziyech, Jorginho, Aubameyang, Bakayoko, Mendy, Gallagher, Silva, CHO, Azpiicueta, Ruben, 

Probably even more. 

[Danny]

Deal to 2030 means that the fee can be paid out over 7 years, which means Chelsea won’t be in too much shit with the fee over the next 3 years of the FFP cycle.

[Cicero]

36 minutes ago, Danny said:

Deal to 2030 means that the fee can be paid out over 7 years, which means Chelsea won’t be in too much shit with the fee over the next 3 years of the FFP cycle.

There is your answer @OrangeKhrush

[OrangeKhrush]

2 hours ago, Cicero said:

There is your answer @OrangeKhrush

You are going for longer amortisation period,  which itself comes with risk.   ie: The player may flop in which case no team will be able to take him due to his wages unless chelsea are prepared to take a loss to write off his salary for the next seven years.    It is a high risk high reward strategy,  it also back loads debt and hits harder on FFP rules as you get to year 6 and 7 particularly if you don't have early success. 

[Cicero]

26 minutes ago, OrangeKhrush said:

You are going for longer amortisation period,  which itself comes with risk.   ie: The player may flop in which case no team will be able to take him due to his wages unless chelsea are prepared to take a loss to write off his salary for the next seven years.    It is a high risk high reward strategy,  it also back loads debt and hits harder on FFP rules as you get to year 6 and 7 particularly if you don't have early success. 

The debt being cleared when Boehly bought the club gave them confidence in moving forward with such risk. On paper it is a good strategy, particularly when you consider the names we've brought in on our recruitment team/technical advisor roles given they all have an eye for spotting talent. You then have Potter and his team who excel at developing young talent. It's essentially why we are spending big now in the hope these young players develop at a rate where we don't need to spend in 3 years time. 

It is a high risk high reward strategy where we deserve the benefit along with the downfall.

 

[Cicero]

Seems Shaktar's relationship with Arsenal went a bit sour since October when Arsenal contacted the player without their permission .

[Dr. Gonzo]

On 17/01/2023 at 04:37, Cicero said:

Seems Shaktar's relationship with Arsenal went a bit sour since October when Arsenal contacted the player without their permission .

Everyone’s relationship with Shaktar went sour if they’re all forced to pay £100m for someone with 35 appearances in the Ukrainian league.

[Cicero]

12 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Everyone’s relationship with Shaktar went sour if they’re all forced to pay £100m for someone with 35 appearances in the Ukrainian league.

*£62m

[Danny]

17 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Everyone’s relationship with Shaktar went sour if they’re all forced to pay £100m for someone with 35 appearances in the Ukrainian league.

In fairness Shaktar were gutted by clubs for their foreign players as the war hit, they deserve a big fee for this.

[Michael]

1 hour ago, Cicero said:

*£62m

Yes, £62 million up front, but the total transfer fee will more than likely go up to £89 million over the next few years, as the add-ons are very achievable we are told.

[Michael]

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Everyone’s relationship with Shaktar went sour if they’re all forced to pay £100m for someone with 35 appearances in the Ukrainian league.

Not Chelsea's relationship with them apparently, lol.

At least £20 million of that transfer fee will be donated to the Ukrainian soldiers defending Ukraine from the Russian aggression. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

2 hours ago, Cicero said:

*£62m

Oooooh that makes it soooo much more reasonable 

2 hours ago, Danny said:

In fairness Shaktar were gutted by clubs for their foreign players as the war hit, they deserve a big fee for this.

I'm sure they're not the only Ukrainian club that's suffered due to the war though. I think it's pretty easy to look at this and think any club getting involved in buying him is getting absolutely fleeced. I think Shaktar and the player himself (8.5 year contract! lol) are the big winners here and if this doesn't pan out for Chelsea... they're going to really hate the long contract they've offered.

1 hour ago, Michael said:

Not Chelsea's relationship with them apparently, lol.

At least £20 million of that transfer fee will be donated to the Ukrainian soldiers defending Ukraine from the Russian aggression. 

The cynic in me sees that and thinks "tax write off!" the person in me that wants to see Putin's Russia fuck off to irrelevance thinks "cool."

[Cicero]

16 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Oooooh that makes it soooo much more reasonable 

Not £100m though. That's like me saying you lot spent £100 on the Uruguayan Timo Werner. 

1 hour ago, Michael said:

Yes, £62 million up front, but the total transfer fee will more than likely go up to £89 million over the next few years, as the add-ons are very achievable we are told.

Winning the League and Champions League activates the add ons. So what ever Boehly sold to Shaktar they certainly bought it. 

[Dr. Gonzo]

14 minutes ago, Cicero said:

Not £100m though. That's like me saying you lot spent £100 on the Uruguayan Timo Werner. 

Winning the League and Champions League activates the add ons. So what ever Boehly sold to Shaktar they certainly bought it. 

We basically did spend £100m on the shitlad who’s still better than Werner, with the add ons. Which I’m sure for both players is mostly appearance based because most clubs fleecing other clubs, like we’ve been fleeced, aren’t fucking stupid.

[True Blue]

The deal is on eight and a half years

[Cicero]

24 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

We basically did spend £100m on the shitlad who’s still better than Werner, with the add ons. Which I’m sure for both players is mostly appearance based because most clubs fleecing other clubs, like we’ve been fleeced, aren’t fucking stupid.