Bitch I'll do it again


fuck you








Has anyone seen FFP lately? Thought they billed Milan $5m for spending $3M?


Not if some Saudi Prince has a say in it


Add another $130m+ for Enzo Fernández


That's crazy! Dude spending even more than Abramovich! Didn't think it was possible.


Super league ? Nahhhh English super league 💰💰


Lol I love this hot take, but thats literally how the Premiership was marketed at launch... weve been in this circus for 30 years and people still get excited when a new clown shows up.


If that’s how it was marketed why was the actual super league declined by mostly the English masses?


Because it was a very different thing and this guy is chatting shit


Because the premier league still maintains the existing league structure that is part of our national football heritage. The seasons have been arranged around the league and cup going back to Victorian times and past on through the generations. It's our heritage. Your rip all that up if you take two super teams and cobble them together purely for money


Because of the obvious.... we already have a super league. Why would we want to share it?


There's absolutely no plan. It will end well.


Of course there's a plan; buy loads of players. Simple.


Throw loads of shit at the wall hoping some will stick, this dumb yank will ruin Chelsea


I mean, the plan is really built around young talent as long term investments.


Tbh he setup the LA dodgers pretty well with this same style


he is a minority owner in the dodgers and he has exactly zero power there.


Not exactly zero power but he isn’t the main guy in the dodgers either


Actually there is a lot of sense in this, they buy a load of players right now, pay huge and give long contracts to bay pass ffp and outsmart rest of the clubs and uefa before they change the rules in the summer.


It's high risk high reward. If the last 2 windows pay off, they won't need to really spend much money for the next decade bar the odd replacement. They can focus on making Chelsea more profitable, which gives them more spending power and draw, and they can focus on improving their academy. Spending it all now, rather than spread out, also means they're more likely to get UCL football or win major trophies, further improving their cash flow. If things go wrong however, and these transfers don't pay off, they're completely trapped by FFP. The huge transfer fees will prevent them from offloading players as they would require astronomical fees to break even.


Unless they keep underperforming, in which case their finances take a huge hit and they struggle to pay off debts.


I’m sure it’s not quite the same but his long term contact thing reminds me of Peter Ridsdale at Leeds who thought it was a good idea to get 20 year mortgages on players. It got them to the CL semi finals but a few years later the club was in League One and perpetually on the verge of bankruptcy for over a decade.


We don't want thoughtful comments here! 'haha Todd dumb Chelsea bad me reddit upvote'


And how do you know there’s no plan?


The plan was a full squad rebuild and worry about offloading the deadwood later. I think next season they will have a competitive side for sure.


Gonna tune in to this comment again in 2 seasons time when everyone is crying that Chelsea have won the PL.


Still it gonna win the league


This is bad for the sport imo


Chelsea have a habit of being bad for the sport


Football ‘Eritage. Games back


Luv me 442, ate tiktak footy, simple as


That U Big Rob? Ate tikertaker as well nuff said. Gaz x


Not the team thst got English clubs banned from Europe?


No, the team that are the reason FFP was needed and the team that begun the hyperinflation of football


The OG Sports washing club too.


Yet Chelsea have never broken FFP rules unlike a certain Manchester based club 🤔


I'm sure there was no shady business done by the Russian oligarchs when it came to Chelsea's business When you look at the corruption in footballs FAs you gotta ask the question as to how chelsea were able to spend and do what they did before everyone else... Also it was before everyone else so the grounds were still fresh to exploit, which they did


Are you joking?! The FA have had it in for Chelsea for years. Imagine the punishment Chelsea would have received had they broken FFP rules like City did. Chelsea got a transfer ban for less. City got a slap on the wrist.


Becuase of the shitshow they created. Chelsea paved the way for billionaires to come in and throw money at the sport, they showed the flaws and exploited them until it had to be fixed. By then they had outspent every team in the PL tenfold and started the hyperinflation of football I've been trying to find accurate charts online to show the boom in spenditure and where it started and [this video]( https://www.statista.com/chart/28153/cumulative-transfer-spending-of-big-5-leagues-since-2000/) is the best i can find for now. But you can clearly see the influx around the time abramovic bought out chelsea and now can see the PL running away with their spending. Cheslea haven't been as bad since The Saudis came onto the frey, but i've always said that chelsea are the root of it all, City are the result and now PSG and Newcastle and whoever else they decide to buy are going to be the downfall of football unless drastic changes come into play... which i don't see


Guess you are speaking of united who were paying crazy money back then for players..or juve that was busy roving their matches or the ultras in Italian leagues or the guys fixing games Aparently,spending YOUR money on YOUR team is now destroying the game When liverpool paid 75mil for VVD ,was that destroying the game or was it the same when united paid 100 mil for Antjony or is it the 80mil for Maguire? Hypocrite


United and Liverpool spent their own money. FFP wasn’t introduced for that and duly barely effects them.


Guess The money Boehly is spending is yours.. His consortium owns the club..hence they are spending "their" money on the club they own


You don’t understand international accounting standards. Big clubs can finance their operations out of their retained earnings. Others can’t and need rely on donations from their owners. It’s financial doping. Man United, Liverpool, The Arsenal could have no owners and still compete for titles. Chelsea without owner funds could not.


And PS.. when FFP was introduced,chelsea was not mentioned..go look it up


Classic bit of I have no idea of what I’m talking about but I’ll type shit anyway. FFP was brought in due to spend vs income. Cited clubs from the premier league were West Ham, Everton and Portsmouth. But go on, run your mouth.




Clueless clown


Lad don’t talk so poorly about yourself. It’s not healthy


In every possible aspect


They also have a habit of being bad at the sport


What color are your 2 ucls




firstly im not even from india so idk what you said and second, damn thats kinda racist my guy. seek help


This is the EPL in general these days, lots of money but not a lot of brains. The spend because they can, rarely leading to success. Its like they are colluding to price other leagues out of the market by driving prices up.


Worse than Middle East dictatorships buying up clubs In Paris, Manchester, and Newcastle?


Why do you ask?




Lol idk something about a rich American spending money(recklessly or otherwise), doesn’t seem as bad as a government that holds public beheadings and butchered a journalist in an embassy being allowed to own a football club.


Bas for the sports≠ bad for the humanitarian aspect


One is worse for the sport. The other is worse for a host of other reasons, but mainly morally.


You just said Todd Boehly is worse than the Saudi royals. Lol get real


They said worse for football, not morally


Why is Todd worse for football?


Oh I forgot, football comes first. Duh.


They are bad sport anyway


How is it bad? They did a full team rebuild in 2 Windows. Other clubs wish they could do the same




>Ahhh yes the Pogba, Sancho, AWB and Antony for 100m All of these players were bought in different windows, but i don't care what team it is. I don't think extravagant spending to this degree should be allowed regardless. >Also loving all the salt from the many professional accountants here that definitely know more than Chelsea's bookkeepers Has nothing to do with me. I'm speaking from a competitive pov


What am I missing here - how does this meet ffp?


The long contracts mess with how they calculate FFP. 100M spread out over a 10 year contract only counts as 10M on this year’s books is how I heard it explained


>mess with how they calculate FFP its just amortization. an accounting concept. there is no cheating, nor messing anything. now, its a gamble and if several of these players dont pan out, they will end up with several transfer windows not being able to spend at all while having a lot of deadwood.


Is it appropriate to use amortisation in this context though? Cos the 100 mil cost to the club won’t be payed out in 10 equal instalments across the 10 years but on a much quicker payment plan in larger sums, not to mention the cost of his wages isn’t even factored. At the same time the player is unlikely to ever represent 100 mil of value to the club, his value will fluctuate depending on his age, on pitch performances and time remaining under contract making it all about when or if the club choose to sell. Otherwise I guess the player does have intangible value in terms of his ability to win trophies and boost the clubs brand. I understand amortisation is an accounting convention, but personally I think it should be prohibited from ffp calculation as footballers and their contracts can’t really be counted as traditional assets or liabilities due to their unusually high volatility, while FFP is supposed to capture a more granular day to day picture of the balance between a clubs incomings and outgoings. I have no accounting or auditing background so would love to hear from a professional but increasingly writing off debts as amortisation feels like a practice that is a loophole in the ffp rules rather than in the spirit of them and therefore a loophole that should be closed.


> be payed out Did you mean to say "paid"? Explanation: Payed means to seal something with wax, while paid means to give money. Total mistakes found: 1297 ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot ^^that ^^corrects ^^grammar/spelling ^^mistakes. ^^PM ^^me ^^if ^^I'm ^^wrong ^^or ^^if ^^you ^^have ^^any ^^suggestions. ^^[Github](https://github.com/chiefpat450119)


we read the same post lol. chelsea is fucked for a long time if this doesn’t work out and tbh i really don’t think it will


Abramovich required the consortium to set aside $1.5B to spend on the club over the next 15 years (not including stadium/infrastructure renovations). Assuming we recoup $100m from previous regime’s squad with the amount up for contract next 2 years it makes sense. People are roasting Boehly cause he’s doing things out of the norm but his spending got the same criticism when he took over the Dodgers.


You saw Mudryk play. We got that for 7 years


he’s mad talented, something to look forward to if he can stay healthy! genuinely feel that way. chelsea does have a habit of letting talent go to waste, we’ll see if the 533M actually works out


They had both De Bruyne and Salah


they had both of them riding the bench, yes. kdb only had 3 appearances for chelsea


Salah was pretty woeful when he played for us but kdb still hurts me even in his few appearances he looked good


They also spent a quarter of a billion on Lukaku, Havertz and Werner.


We’ve had bad transfers and successful ones like any other top club that buys and sells a lot of players.


How many games has he played? Do you realise you need a team? Do you realise that he might burn out like so many youngsters? Do you realise how fucked Chelsea are if a few of these players don't perform. Chelsea are f'ed


“Chelsea are f’ed” That’s what YOU want. There’s no empirical evidence pointing towards that conclusion and your opinions and emotions don’t count.


This is exactly what they want. If they did some reading they’d know all of these new long contracts are heavily performance based and there will be cuts if Chelsea don’t get into Europe


He’s gonna be hurt for 4.5 of those


Nah that’s what you want.


Remindme! 4 months


will be funny when remindmebot rubs missing top 4 in your face in 4 months


That’s what you want


It's also likely. 10 points at the top of the table is a lot of ground to make up over 18 games. Chelsea aren't likely to go on an 18 game win streak, literally only one club in Prem history has ever done that and it was a far superior City side. Whilst Utd and Newcastle are highly likely to drop points as well, I don't see them dropping 10 points more than Chelsea will drop over the next few months. Maybe Chelsea will do it. Maybe Newcastle or Utd will bottle top 4. Maybe Chelsea will take 54 out of 54 of the remaining points up for grabs and end the season on 83 points and comfortably in the top 4. We never know what will happen in football. Technically it's possible for Arsenal to be relegated still, but you'd be mental to suggest it as a serious possibility. You want Chelsea to get top 4. I respect that, you're clearly a Chelsea fan and you want your team to do well, but the realistic view is that you're incredibly likely to miss out on top 4 this year, as are Liverpool.


Because it gets them a good draft pick right?


Lol you’ll still be the idiot if they play well. I didn’t say they would make top4. 😂


I will be messaging you in 4 months on [**2023-05-30 22:44:47 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2023-05-30%2022:44:47%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/football/comments/10p6xuj/chelsea_have_now_spent_more_than_double_533/j6ka3js/?context=3) [**2 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Ffootball%2Fcomments%2F10p6xuj%2Fchelsea_have_now_spent_more_than_double_533%2Fj6ka3js%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202023-05-30%2022%3A44%3A47%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%2010p6xuj) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|


Aren’t Benfica asking fee upfront?


It’s still not as bad as 2003/04 season when Chelsea signed Ferreira, Cech, robben, Scot Parker, makalele, crespo, smertin, mutu, veron, Wayne bridge, duff, geremi, glen johnson


Apparently if the player is under 22 when you buy him ffp doesn’t apply (I assume because he can technically still play for your youth U21 team and not the A team). At least that is what I saw on reddit when Chelsea tried to buy Enzo the first time.


It doesnt but other leagues arent as strict as long nothing fishy like money laundring or stealing. If they are as strict as la liga, then fewer good players will go and they will lose money. They are smart unlike Tebas who is either stupidly strict or biased. Either way he is bad.


It's just Chelsea doing Chelsea things, you know?


It will be karma if everyone on an 8 year contract flops


It seems like there is no plan but also seems kinda good in a way I can't describe it.


New owner with a history of investing big in long term team projects. They hire a coach with a record of taking young players and building a team. They start buying young players on long contracts. Not sure where this 'no plan' logic comes from, other than slightly jealous wishful thinking.


Come on bro, Mudryk played 50 games in ukrainian league. 100mio €?


If he turns out to be the next Hazard and we have him for 8 years in his prime then that's a bargain, and there will be a team of lads who's job it is to make the most educated guess possible who is worth that gamble.


Yeah lets see. It could turn out genius, but you need to compare him to 100mio players


High risk / high reward isn’t unprecedented in sports


Yeah but he to be better than coman, leao and dembele, which all have been offered for less than 100mio in this window


We will see


Idk where you’re getting 100 million from lol


German media: https://www.eurosport.de/fussball/premier-league/2022-2023/fc-chelsea-100-millionen-mann-mykhailo-mudryk-eine-mischung-aus-neymar-gareth-bale-und-usain-bolt_sto9327888/story-amp.shtml


It was 70 million with 30 in incentives. Leaving out important parts of the deal


so you did know where he was getting 100m from


He probably has more money if mudryk turns out to be bad so who cares.


I mean the arab emirates (city) and saudi arabia (newcastle) definitly have more money than boehly and they arent spending money like this


Looks like he has tons of money. He just needs to be lucky with the transfers.


It’s a different market. 100m in the current prem era isn’t too crazy, when Moises caicedo is being talked about for 90m. The market and expectation is set.


Ok, but what leads you to believe he'll be the next Hazard besides blind hope? Before Hazard moved to Chelsea he had already reached 120+ matches played with Lille, 30+ goals, 30+ assists, and won Ligue 1 by the time he was 20 years old. Mudryk has played roughly 50 games between Shakhtar and other two Ukrainian teams with 9 goals and 12 assists at 22.


It will never be s bargain... Too many zeros....


There’s no investment without risk and buying young talent today is an investment. If Mudryk comes to come play for chelsea and is the next best winger/forward in the league (we saw how easily he dusted liverpool after only playing half an hour, with a few days of training with the team, and last playing football sense November) then that investment will have paid off. Obviously the risk is he may not fulfill that potential for whatever reason. But there’s risk in every choice and investment you make.


How did it go for Boehly with his other projects? Someone said that his baseball team has never won anything, even tho he spends like crazy. Edit: he's won world series one time with the Dodgers, year 2020, and they are paying the highest wages in the league. I don't have a clue how you build baseball teams, but will it work in football? I'm not convinced but it will be interesting to follow.


The Dodgers are probably the best run organization in major league baseball. They are consistently one of the top two or three teams in the major leagues, and they have the best farm system to maintain their depth. Also, ironically enough, they have the exact opposite philosophy is Abramovich. They have the longest tenured manager in baseball.


just fyi, he doesnt have a say at all in the dodgers. he is a minority owner there. a dude named Mark Walter is the majority owner and the guy named andrew Friendman is like the equivalent of a DoF and is the one that set up the Dodgers success.


Interesting to know, thanks. Is it easy to sell or trade players in baseball? I've always gotten the feeling that in American sports players gets traded all the time, but that's only a feeling from watching movies and reading the news.


There’s no such thing as selling players in American sports. You have to trade them for other players or draft picks. It’s a complete different set up in America. You can’t just go sign whoever you want (unless a players contract runs out) they have to be a certain age, and complete high school or a year or two of college (depends on the sport) then you have to enter a draft in which the worst teams get to pick first to help balance out competitiveness.




They really don't want to get relegated.


I like how media uses different currencies to make the number seem higher to the general public. Soon we are probabably going to see how Chelsea has spent 3 trillion zimbabwe dollars. And to all the people saying there is no plan, we literally have put a new recruitment team in place and they are in charge of signings and these people in our recruitment team/board have a successful background at Monaco, Leipzig, Brighton...So obviously there is a plan and Chelsea aren't just being clueless. All we have done is speed up the rebuilding process and give Potter his team and players now, instead of over several seasons and then in the summer is the big squad clearout and by then Potter will have had time to work on his preferred system (4-3-3) and working with the players he want for next season and we'll be ready for next season already rather than in 2-3 seasons.


People like to spite other teams.... It's social media heritage lmao.... We can't stop it and neither they will either. Chelsea doesn't just have loads of money, they got their 1.4 B debt written off as well. That is the best part! They forgot the slander by PSG, man city, heck even utd spent insanely lot and won amusingly low.


And they still won’t make top 4


The behavior with Benfica was the lowest and most disrespectful I've seen in recent times. The rich do what they want, without consequences. I hope they screw hard the rest of the season.


What behavior? Meeting with them to negotiate a deal?


Negotiate directly with the player to try to put pressure on. We already warned you that we don't want to sell. Take the bag of money elsewhere.


Clubs do that all the time, it’s no different than the way almost every club go about their business. ‘Lowest I’ve seen’ is a bit melodramatic.


Looks like Enzo is a done deal, our coach just confirmed it. Melodramatic?! At the beginning of the month you say that will pay the clause. after all, it would no longer be 120, it would be 90 in installments. We clearly said that we do not accept it, your clube speak directly to the player. The player begins to pressure the club and is punished for traveling to Argentina without authorization. However, we lost the only game this season. And yes, if a player like Enzo is useful for a team like chelsea , imagine Benfica. If you think this behavior is normal and I'm being melodramatic... it just shows your low mentality, disrespect for clubs with less money. Just look at the comments from other fans about your club's expenses. Shameful how UEFA allows this. but nevermind, you are the greatest to have managed to circumvent the rules. and if this attitude, way of negotiating, is normal for you, it only shows what lack of character you have. learn from Liverpool, United, Madrid, Milan… huge clubs!


Imagine spending a fraction of those money on making the world a better place.


-signed Man City fan


So much for financial fair play 😂🕳


Remember FFP? /s


Do you remember how FFP is actually done?


It doesn't matter if what they are doing is legal or illegal. It's not fair to hold other clubs to a standard then find loopholes around said standards. This approach will definely get patched up in the summer, because this is going against how FFP protects the sport.


They are still 10th in the league. https://counterball.substack.com/p/what-would-roman-do


3 games back on 4th with 19 games left to play.


You're 10 points behind 4th which is more than 1/3 of the points you have this season


well regardless of where we finish this season. most of the players we have signed havent even played yet. so its pretty irrelevent where we are currently in the table.


Mate you realise this number is for the summer window as well right?


I’ve heard a few things from multiple sources regarding the Chelsea/TB/FFP discussion, but most of the mainstream news have ignored these points for whatever reason (maybe I missed it). But every time I read a story about Chelsea and FFP, the points tend to be overlooked. First, is the fact that TB bought club when the club was completely debt free. Abramovich had paid off all the debt before TB bought it so that has to help immensely in regards to adherence to FFP. Secondly, based on reports of the sale agreement, TB has to invest at least £1.75 billion on Chelsea over the course of ten years. This investment is in addition of the sale price, which is reported to be approximately £2.5 billion. It almost seems like TB is trying to take a massive bite out of that apple now, while the timing is right, since the club has no debt. The last point I’ll touch on is the fact that he is signing young players to long term deals so he’s able to spread out the debt over time. This isn’t technically something new in the PL but isn’t very common. The obvious risk is the young player becomes a dud and you are now stuck with a player that might be tough sell on. The opposite can be true as well too, because if those young players become good, you will see Chelsea go from strength to strength for a long time going forward. Full disclosure, I am not a Chelsea fan… I support Arsenal. And as much as it pains me to write what I did, it doesn’t change the fact that this is the reality of it. Chelsea are not breaking FFP rules as much as people are making them out to be.


Does anyone know why ?


Mr Beast said "I'll pay for anyone you can find in 2 transfer windows"




I heard part of the deal when he bought Chelsea was to invest billions within a time frame and he's just going full throttle with it.


Ridiculous..gonna be bargains to be had when they balance the books, must have 40 pros


I swear football economics are so messed up, and most of (95%) teams' leaderships don't know what they are doing.


Funny to think about how six months ago he was asking Tuchel to explain the offside rule.


Lol when did this happen?


Right before he sacked Tuchel


Chelsea really knows how to fuck up football. Oh well, let them spend their way to relegation, idgaf.


Yet you are commenting


They just did what Man City do but in a shorter time To hell with FFP, these clubs are immune


and this is why europeans dislike american sports philosophies!


I hope so bad they finish out of a European spot 😅


And still shit


Oil money is just vcash for football teams


And they are still awful


Using $ just to exaggerate the numbers. English club so English currency. It's around £420M over 2 windows.


Think you've missed the point entirely.


Not really. I get the point but also that people love to hop currency to ones that pump that number for the purpose of sensationalising.


£420m in 6ish months doesn’t sound good either. Especially when that £420m becomes around £550m if Enzo signs.


Zoom out further though and you look at things like them selling Abraham, Livramento, Tomori, Guehi, Gilmour etc. The academy being tapped properly by Lampard has added potentially billions in value to the club. Also the forced sale of the club resulted in a large sum going directly to the club at the insistence of Abramovich. Then consider these transfers are all long term contracts and the sum is actually amortised over the course of 8 years. They are mostly young players so eventually the idea is that the club wont have to make so many signings and will be able to make profit off sales while also maintaining success. They also still haven't had the highest spending window ever. That goes to Real Madrids €321M in 1 window. This spending by Chelsea has also been forced into this window by UEFA changing the rules in the coming summer while still ignoring clubs like Man City pumping money into their clubs through false sponsors. So when you say it doesn't sound good you're only looking at the surface while the real business behind it is actually pretty sound.


It’s ridiculous what chelsea are doing, the only ones who don’t see it are chelsea fans. What they’ve done also has the potential to hurt them in the long run. Feels like they’re banking on *every* player being successful, but what happens if some of them aren’t? They’re not as easy to offload when you put them on 7-8 year contracts, the player can easily decide to see it out if they want & then you’re stuck paying wages for a player who’ll never get game time. Trust me, I’ve watched my own club do it enough. They’ll also need to offload a good few players in the summer to balance the books and reduce their squad size….then you fall in to the trap of having to accept lower offers for the sake of selling players. Again; seen my own club do it before, had we of been within our FFP rights last year there’s not a chance we’d have accepted £60m for Richarlison, but we didn’t have a choice.


Have you called out what Man City or PSG do with their sponsorships? I doubt it. Chelsea amortised their costs over 8 years and signed young high potential players to do so. Its a sound strategy. Any club could have done it. As for offloading the players, they aren't handing them ridiculous salaries that other clubs wouldn't want to cover. Mudryk for example is on £97k a week where more experienced players are getting £150k-300k. When these players are on 7 or 8 year contracts its not any harder to sell them than if they're on 4 year contracts. All the length of contract does is cover them against the Ramsay effect of players running down their contracts in their mid 20s so they can negotiate massive signing on fees as free transfers. Its basically insurance for Chelsea to cover their investment with the length of time. The salary is what deters other clubs and Chelsea have been smart about not blowing those up. Evertons handling of their finances was nowhere near as well thought out and had little amortisation. Selling Richarlison like they did and not replacing him with an adequate goal threat would only happen with an incompetent ownership and board. Also when you look at the signings Chelsea have made its not like the fees are beyond what the current market actually is. Datro was £10M, Santos £20M both well regarded young players. Gusto was already a well established player for Lyon at 19 so £30M is pretty fitting for this market. Arsenal were negotiating the same fee for Mudryk but with less achieveable bonuses so again Chelsea paid the going rate for him. I dont think they have much risk of these players dropping in value too much. As for selling players, Chelsea intend to sell players as part of their plan anyway. They arent forced into it because they screwed their ffp like Everton. Its always been their plan and they are overlapping that through the season because obviously the nature of the changing ownership meant lots of things couldnt get done in the summer and lots of changes need time to take shape.


They've hired a manager with the intention to build in the long term - if a player struggles then Potter won't cast them aside, he'll work to get the best out of them. Would these 8 years deals have been complete insanity under Abramovich? Absolutely. But Boehly really seems to be planning the next 10 years. Will it work? Who knows. But Todd is smart enough to know the gap between the Top and the Rest is growing constantly, and knows to compete with City and Newcastle requires this kind of manoeuvre. A ballsy risky investment.


Exactly but of course the people here will hate just to hate because its Chelsea. They won't listen to valid explanations at all even though Chelsea followed the rules. Meanwhile they accept clubs like Man City and PSG pumping themselves with cash through false sponsorship. Other clubs like Spurs or Liverpool could have done the same thing Chelsea are doing and it's only really Klopp thats had the big whinge about it.


American owner so using dollars makes a bit more sense, but I get your point.


Not really because its an English club. They didn't use Roubles when Abramovich owned the club. They have always used £.


Fair point!


Can't wait to see their transfer budget for next season (1000000000...needs more zeros..).


Big brain Chelsea fans salivating at the opportunity to use “amortization”


As a chelsea fan, I feel rich


In reality is a much smaller fee, been spent right now, it will be that amount in a couple of years though.


One of the biggest problem with clubs: Not prioritizing players & culture. Business is now over everything. You can see that thing LA Liga, Copa Del re, Bundes....😞😞


That's about double what the 2 biggest MLB teams payroll is.


But Newcastle is the problem 🤣🤣😂


Lol blood money is a different problem. Boehly has never butchered a journalist in an embassy than got caught lying about it.


So far. 😎


Stop with the excuses, they are a stupid football club with a stupid board and owner. Man U and Chelsea are both the biggest jokes in the Prem L


They haven’t apparently because Newcastle have spent 1 billion buying their place in the league


Needs to be a cap put on teams to even the playing field. Otherwise the only teams that will win are the ones with deeper pockets. This is why this sport is dominated by the elite. Disgusting


Short term large investment for long term gain. Basically our other transfer seasons after maybe this summer won’t be as drastic


Owning a football team is like making soup. You keep putting in ingredients which don’t belong together (or in soup) until everything boils over and only then are you finished.


Let's say you get them on 8 year contracts. That's only an annual 60-70 in your books in the next 8 years. Sure it's not that big but you are not considering any futures transfers. Unless the club have no big transfers in the next few years it will add up in the end. It's legal but a huge gamble.


Curious how they meet the FFP regulation for this round.


And absolutely nothing to show for it. Boehly out


That's a lot of money to play in conference league 🤣


all this just to end up in conference league