[Football] Mudryk and his 8.5 years

[Herr Tubthumper]

I believe what they're actually doing is amortising the transfer fee over a huge number of years to dodge FFP.

This is just for the fee I presume i.e. they will have to pay his salary for these extra years? i.e. it's an expensive way to get around FFP?

 

[Doonhamer7]

New owners have spent £400m since May - obviously no one has told them about FFP

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Massive investment in someone whose only played in a farmers league.

Rubbish neck tats as well.

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

Massive investment in someone whose only played in a farmers league.

And a handful of games.

 

[chrisg]

Imagine if we had given Locadia and Ali J a 8 year contract each!
A lot of risk if the player isn’t top notch

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Rubbish neck tats as well.

As ye olde golde Viz thing goes:

Q. How do you acquire that EPL look?
A. Scribble all over your arm with a biro

 

[Hugo Rune]

If I was a player I don't think I'd sign a contract for that long. It's too much of a risk of being tied to a club that could leave you on the bench or just go through a long period of transition/relative irrelevance . Careers are fairly short and he's tied to them until he's 30, so all of his best years.

Yes. But if he ends up being shite, he’ll still have a contract worth £60m+ I’d imagine. If the player turns out like Dele Ali or Wilshire, Chelsea would have made a huge mistake.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

This new era for Chelsea is going to end in tears.

 

[Stat Brother]

This is just for the fee I presume i.e. they will have to pay his salary for these extra years? i.e. it's an expensive way to get around FFP?

Tis the American way - certainly the baseball way.
Overpay on double digit years of contract.
With a view of winning now then loaning out halfway through the contract while still performing.
Only to take the financial hit, in the last third, handing out a bargain to a lesser team.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

This new era for Chelsea is going to end in tears.

It'll bankrupt them twice over

 

[Super Steve Earle]

7.5 years or 8.5 years is weird. I understand the amortizing possibilities, but if Chelsea ever want to sell the players, who will be able to afford the Chelsea wages, even on a free transfer if they fail?

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

Yes. But if he ends up being shite, he’ll still have a contract worth £60m+ I’d imagine. If the player turns out like Dele Ali or Wilshire, Chelsea would have made a huge mistake.

I'd be surprised if that's how professionals at that level(or possibly any level) think.

And if that is his concern he'd still be on a hefty wage for a four year contract and could command a decent wage from his next club simply from being a Chelsea player and his earlier reputation. So he might earn a little less but he'd be playing and would have choice over his career moves rather than being shipped out on loan or left kicking his heels in the stands.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

If I was a player I don't think I'd sign a contract for that long. It's too much of a risk of being tied to a club that could leave you on the bench or just go through a long period of transition/relative irrelevance . Careers are fairly short and he's tied to them until he's 30, so all of his best years.

Alternatively you get severely injured tomorrow and have 8 years of £250,000 a week regardless

Winston Bogarde didn’t mind, saying that only £50,000 a week!

 

[LennyTee]

There is long term planning and there is stupidity. Can't see this ending well for Chelsea.
Their customers seem quite excited by it though.

 

[raymondo]

I believe what they're actually doing is amortising the transfer fee over a huge number of years to dodge FFP.

Why only 8.5 I wonder, I'd have thought 12 years would give them more flexibility

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Say the guy decides to throw a strop after 6 months? What's his club going to do? Make him train with the U23s for 8 years? And who would have the money or desire to buy up his contract? Football should maybe just shoot itself in the head

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Why only 8.5 I wonder, I'd have thought 12 years would give them more flexibility

Why not just sign up his unborn child?

 

[deletebeepbeepbeep]

Why only 8.5 I wonder, I'd have thought 12 years would give them more flexibility

To be honest I thought there was some changes as a result of the Bosman ruling that meant the maximum contract length could be 5 years but things change.

 

[Garry Nelson's Left Foot]

Alternatively you get severely injured tomorrow and have 8 years of £250,000 a week regardless

Winston Bogarde didn’t mind, saying that only £50,000 a week!

That's true but the alternative isn't a one year contract on peanuts, it'll be the same 250grand a week but for most probably four years. So you'd hardly be struggling for money and like I said in my reply to Hugo Rune I don't think players think like that, or with the example of Bogarde in mind, most professionals.

 

[Paulie Gualtieri]

That's true but the alternative isn't a one year contract on peanuts, it'll be the same 250grand a week but for most probably four years. So you'd hardly be struggling for money and like I said in my reply to Hugo Rune I don't think players think like that, or with the example of Bogarde in mind, most professionals.

I think most players these look at the bottom line first for family security then success on the pitch

As much as this protects Chelsea from a bid with a longer contract, the player can still act like a prick at anytime they want to leave with the mistake becoming more noticeable if they aren’t playing but being paid x amount.

This is simply to adhere to FFP, I’m sure there are break clauses for both sides somewhere in there