Yes, but writing off 71m in january means they arent ****** it comes to spending more. Thats why they paid so much, better to spend 50m in jan than 30m in summer
They still need to do a MASSIVE overhaul, a bit too late to worry about FFP.
Yes, but writing off 71m in january means they arent ****** it comes to spending more. Thats why they paid so much, better to spend 50m in jan than 30m in summer
That depends on your pov. I'd rather spend 30m wisely than make a rash call and spend 50 in a dud.
I've mentioned about the reputation Roman has about sacking managers before, as far as I can tell he has only directly made a decision to sack 3 Chelsea managers - Ranieri, Mourinho and Ancelotti.
De Visser has a lot less power at Chelsea this season, the Torres/Luiz signings actually indicated that he no longer had a crucial and final say at the club. Buck has a lot to do with this, having a close relationship with Roman and picking Emenalo over De Visser for the director's job.
Can't see AVB being sacked, Scolari got sacked because he lacked intensity and focus in training which led to complacency and lack of concentration. Grant got sacked because he did almost nothing except keep the players happy and play dull football. Ancelotti got sacked because nothing was changing and the slide was getting worse, freshness was needed both in playing personnel and coaching staff.
As far as I can tell AVB certainly doesn't play dull football; lack focus or intensity; lack philosophy or lack the will to drop players if it isn't working.
That's just the basic logical reason as to why he wont get sacked.
FFPR wise, I suspect the club will just make it across the line of acceptable debt going into FFPR.
Strange I thought Torres was 27 and playing in a system, and with players, totally unsuited to him. Lets see how he plays after Chelsea invest.
Except he isnt a dud... the whole side is in transition. you completely miss the point about FFPR, they had to spend in jan, not this summer window.
Whatever you've already decided he's a flop using short term thinking, so ill leave it at that
Kalou's contract is running down along with Anelka's, Drogba unfortunately is renegotiating his at the moment. Malouda's on close to 6 figures a week, he needs to be moved on for sure.
The problem AVB has is that most of these players are settled in London and have gotten to be too comfortable with life. Even become lazy and disinterested because they've won the titles, this is the most important season for Chelsea for years there's no question about that. This will have to be the thing that the previous 3 managers have feared inconceivably, change.
Alex will be moved on, he will probably be the first to go in January, which will mean a young centre back is needed possibly someone in the mould of a Amat or Botia rather than a Cahill.
If at least 2 more wingers aren't brought in in January I will be shocked, De Bruyne would be one and the other will hopefully be Pereira.
Which is my point, why spend 50m in a player that doesn't suit your system? It was clearly a vanity buy by Roman rather than a needed player.
Plus, the FFP argument falls apart when you admit you'll have to invest to get Torres firing. You've spent 50m and you'll have to spend more to get him to work.
Feel free to call it short-term thinking, but Chelsea is a 'short-term' club, and so far, 50m for 3 goals in a year is hardly a good rate of return.
That depends on your pov. I'd rather spend 30m wisely than make a rash call and spend 50 in a dud.
You have failed to grasp the point that chelsea are trying to move away from being a short term club, hence the signing of younger players, like Romeu, Lukaku, Mata? And with the appointment of AVB, knowing that he played a completely different game to what the players where used to?
And no the FFP argument doesnt fall apart since wasnt just about Torres, they were looking for players right through the squad. The fact that you obsess about Torres is arugably why you consistently missed the issue They can write off a certain amount per year. They moved for Torres and Luiz in jan, becuase they could get them then AND write off that huge figure. so they could then purchase the winger and cms they needed, only they failed with Modric. the whole signing with Torres is to get the club playing a different type of football, with different types of players
Next jan summer they will slash the wage bill, freeing them up to make two big purchases in each window ( that is Bucks aim at any rate)
And there: 8 players in 4 windows without overly stretching the FFPR.
Consider Roman's POV, i.e the guy that actually matters. He doesn't care about the £50m, it's a tiny fraction of his wealth. In the FFP books it may as well be £0, because the accounts only start counting in summer. £20m saved is nothing to Roman compared to reducing the expenditure for FFP.
Question - does anyone know whether Bruma's loan is 1 year with the option of a 2nd, or 2 years? Got to say I think it may be better bringing him back next summer because this loan is doing him the world of good, and he would be a good back-up/rotation player by next year, then maybe another year and he could be first-team. Although if it is 2 years, then as long as we don't let him go after that I'll be happy because he's only going to improve with this loan, and in my eyes he has a big role in Chelsea's future; fits our new style, and on top of that he is a very good defender. Just a shame that Töre wasn't a loan deal :'( Was a big mistake letting him go.
You miss my point, 30m well spent would've produced better results than 50m Torres.
It's all good and well on paper but it's all speculation - old habits die hard, and I can see Roman giving AvB the boot if he doesn't perform and I can certainly see Torres still failing come next season. I'm all for managerial stability regardless of the club and I'll be gladly be proven wrong if AvB is still in charge even if he fails, but Torres will still be a bad buy unless he pulls off some miraculous recovery in the next 6 months.
Name who.
That's the manager's call, not mine, nor should it be Roman's. If you insist on names, though, I think 30m would get you all three of Osvaldo, Gervinho and Cabaye. Wouldn't have been bad business at all if you ask me.
thats also speculation, if you want to go down that route. if torres is **** for the rest of the season then has a brilliant next 3 years then is he a bad buy? no. classic short term thinking. by your rating nani would be a bad buy... oh wait hes one of the best right wingers in the world ( didnt sparkle for 3 years)
In each of those three seasons Nani did more than Torres if you ask me, and for less than half the price.
And I was trying to stick to the immediate future, speculating about years to come is not really my thing.