- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Chelsea 2023/24 Season-Long Thread: We’re Toast
Posted on 3/2/24 at 8:28 pm to olddawg26
Posted on 3/2/24 at 8:28 pm to olddawg26
quote:
Palmer, mudryk, gusto and occasionally Gallagher don’t suck.
This.
Add in Chilly and James, and that is the core.
Enzo and Calceido may be great in time, but that’s not now.
That being said, we are quite young. It’s one thing to allow a young player or two to feature. Having a shite ton of them is an issue (at least at this time). A decent forward and Chelsea has 10 more points (at a minimum), and a Cup title.
Sterling is fools gold, and Jackson is incredibly undisciplined.
As for Poch, he is serving a purpose for now, but I don’t think that he is the long term answer.
Just my .02
Posted on 3/2/24 at 8:31 pm to supatigah
quote:
the problem as I see it is too many long term guaranteed contracts for very young players
This is the format, and may be brilliant in the long run. It will be either boom or bust. That being said, with the way salaries have gone up, I don’t see us taking a Lukaku style bath on anyone.
quote:
CFC simply has too many guys on the roster and needs to move some bodies out
I see them waiting until the feeder clubs are fully aligned. Then I see some guys going out on loan (at a discounted rate).
Posted on 3/3/24 at 8:22 pm to In The Know
quote:
You can’t blame Boehly entirely- he spent crazy money on players his scouts said would work here.
Boehly is the public face of the problem, Behdad Eghbali is just as big a problem but he is behind the scenes
Posted on 3/3/24 at 8:42 pm to jimmy the leg
Jimmy this article will make you sick
You don’t see much of Todd Boehly these days. In the first weeks after he fronted the Clearlake takeover of Chelsea, he was a regular presence, telling European football what it could learn from US sport, proudly announcing his disruptive intent. Which is a shame: it would be good to know exactly where spending $1bn to transform a Champions League-winning side into one that sits 11th in the Premier League fits into his master plan.
There had been a thought around the turn of the year that things might be falling into place for Chelsea. They reached the Carabao Cup final and won three league games in a row to haul themselves into the top half of the table. Maybe Mauricio Pochettino was at last starting to find some order amid a chaotic squad. The last two games have obliterated that idea.
Having let in four while being comprehensively outplayed at Liverpool in midweek, they leaked another four at home to Wolves on Sunday. The former may be understandable, the latter is not. This wasn’t a team having four chances and taking them all; Wolves were much the better side and could easily have won by more. Chelsea were a shambles, players arguing among themselves as sections of the crowd called for Pochettino to be sacked and wistfully sung about the Roman Abramovich era.
The problems go far deeper than results. In the short term, Chelsea’s activities since the Boehly/Clearlake takeover are not a problem. The football finance expert Swiss Ramble noted in August that the transfer activity since the takeover was exactly neutral, with £143m in wages plus £116m in amortisation from purchases offset by a £192m reduction in wages and £62m in amortisation from sales. Even better, there was a £215m profit in terms of player sales.
Which looks excellent – in the short term. But Chelsea’s signings have committed them to £1.9bn of future spending. And this is a club that has posted operating losses in each of the past 10 seasons, a picture that has been getting worse in the past four years. In 2021-22 operating losses were £224m, bringing total losses over the decade to £944m. That has to an extent been balanced by £706m in player sales.
Taking into account the reduction in wage bill, and projecting other income and outgoings for this season, Swiss Ramble calculated estimated losses of £131.6m for 2023-24 to go with £70.2m last season and £121.4m the season before that. There are allowable deductions for ‘healthy’ spending such as that on the academy and women’s team, which can be estimated at £40m or so a season. Which, when the extra allowances for losses in the Covid season are taken into account, kept Chelsea just above the threshold of £105m in losses for the three-year period up to 2022-23.
For 2023-24, though, they would appear to be in big trouble, with Swiss Ramble estimating their losses for the three-year assessment period at £201m – and that was on an assumption they would finish sixth, which now looks extremely optimistic.
Uefa’s regulations are not immediately relevant but it is changing its FFP model to a cost control ratio, by which player wages, transfers and agent fees will by 2025 be limited to 70% of revenue and profit on player sales. At the moment, Chelsea’s is around 90%.
Chelsea are already being investigated for possible historical breaches of FFP in the Abramovich era, which could lead to points deductions (or worse) that would make their job even harder going forward. And it is extremely hard already. They just about kept their heads above water in the three-year period to last June but that was with exceptional sales. They don’t have many academy products or fully amortised players left. Say they sold Moisés Caicedo next summer for the £100m they paid for him: yes, they would reduce costs from his amortisation and wages, but his eight-year contract means the profit would only be £100m minus his book value which, with seven of the eight years of his contract remaining would be £87.5m: that is, £12.5m.
To keep making the sort of profits that have sustained them over the past decade will be extremely difficult. Those academy products who remain, the likes of Conor Gallagher and Reece James, are likely to find the owners extremely eager to listen to offers. And of course this is the reverse of standard footballing wisdom, that clubs benefit from having a core of players brought up in the ways of club, the John Terry and Frank Lampard figures, totemic whether through education or longevity, who have an attachment to the institution that goes beyond salary.
Perhaps Chelsea will be granted additional dispensation for losses suffered after the imposition of sanctions on Abramovich, although there are no guarantees, but with the likelihood of no Champions League football, it’s hard to see how revenues will rise significantly next season. With 12 players on contracts of eight years or more, the amortisation trick looks increasingly like an albatross.
This is a club in a terrible mess and the only people who can really be blamed are the disruptive new owners.
You don’t see much of Todd Boehly these days. In the first weeks after he fronted the Clearlake takeover of Chelsea, he was a regular presence, telling European football what it could learn from US sport, proudly announcing his disruptive intent. Which is a shame: it would be good to know exactly where spending $1bn to transform a Champions League-winning side into one that sits 11th in the Premier League fits into his master plan.
There had been a thought around the turn of the year that things might be falling into place for Chelsea. They reached the Carabao Cup final and won three league games in a row to haul themselves into the top half of the table. Maybe Mauricio Pochettino was at last starting to find some order amid a chaotic squad. The last two games have obliterated that idea.
Having let in four while being comprehensively outplayed at Liverpool in midweek, they leaked another four at home to Wolves on Sunday. The former may be understandable, the latter is not. This wasn’t a team having four chances and taking them all; Wolves were much the better side and could easily have won by more. Chelsea were a shambles, players arguing among themselves as sections of the crowd called for Pochettino to be sacked and wistfully sung about the Roman Abramovich era.
The problems go far deeper than results. In the short term, Chelsea’s activities since the Boehly/Clearlake takeover are not a problem. The football finance expert Swiss Ramble noted in August that the transfer activity since the takeover was exactly neutral, with £143m in wages plus £116m in amortisation from purchases offset by a £192m reduction in wages and £62m in amortisation from sales. Even better, there was a £215m profit in terms of player sales.
Which looks excellent – in the short term. But Chelsea’s signings have committed them to £1.9bn of future spending. And this is a club that has posted operating losses in each of the past 10 seasons, a picture that has been getting worse in the past four years. In 2021-22 operating losses were £224m, bringing total losses over the decade to £944m. That has to an extent been balanced by £706m in player sales.
Taking into account the reduction in wage bill, and projecting other income and outgoings for this season, Swiss Ramble calculated estimated losses of £131.6m for 2023-24 to go with £70.2m last season and £121.4m the season before that. There are allowable deductions for ‘healthy’ spending such as that on the academy and women’s team, which can be estimated at £40m or so a season. Which, when the extra allowances for losses in the Covid season are taken into account, kept Chelsea just above the threshold of £105m in losses for the three-year period up to 2022-23.
For 2023-24, though, they would appear to be in big trouble, with Swiss Ramble estimating their losses for the three-year assessment period at £201m – and that was on an assumption they would finish sixth, which now looks extremely optimistic.
Uefa’s regulations are not immediately relevant but it is changing its FFP model to a cost control ratio, by which player wages, transfers and agent fees will by 2025 be limited to 70% of revenue and profit on player sales. At the moment, Chelsea’s is around 90%.
Chelsea are already being investigated for possible historical breaches of FFP in the Abramovich era, which could lead to points deductions (or worse) that would make their job even harder going forward. And it is extremely hard already. They just about kept their heads above water in the three-year period to last June but that was with exceptional sales. They don’t have many academy products or fully amortised players left. Say they sold Moisés Caicedo next summer for the £100m they paid for him: yes, they would reduce costs from his amortisation and wages, but his eight-year contract means the profit would only be £100m minus his book value which, with seven of the eight years of his contract remaining would be £87.5m: that is, £12.5m.
To keep making the sort of profits that have sustained them over the past decade will be extremely difficult. Those academy products who remain, the likes of Conor Gallagher and Reece James, are likely to find the owners extremely eager to listen to offers. And of course this is the reverse of standard footballing wisdom, that clubs benefit from having a core of players brought up in the ways of club, the John Terry and Frank Lampard figures, totemic whether through education or longevity, who have an attachment to the institution that goes beyond salary.
Perhaps Chelsea will be granted additional dispensation for losses suffered after the imposition of sanctions on Abramovich, although there are no guarantees, but with the likelihood of no Champions League football, it’s hard to see how revenues will rise significantly next season. With 12 players on contracts of eight years or more, the amortisation trick looks increasingly like an albatross.
This is a club in a terrible mess and the only people who can really be blamed are the disruptive new owners.
Posted on 3/3/24 at 9:19 pm to supatigah
frick Putin
He cause us to lose Roman,Mariana and Tuchel
Bohley will spend $ but he buys names not players to fit the system.
The GM is a shite show
He cause us to lose Roman,Mariana and Tuchel
Bohley will spend $ but he buys names not players to fit the system.
The GM is a shite show
Posted on 3/5/24 at 5:52 am to supatigah
That article is a big what if.
My guess is that Chelsea move some players to get the books situated.
Chalobah would make straight cash.
Ditto Gallagher (although I don’t see this happening).
Chelsea is either going to be a dynasty, or a Circus where the big tents on fire.
Time will tell.
My guess is that Chelsea move some players to get the books situated.
Chalobah would make straight cash.
Ditto Gallagher (although I don’t see this happening).
Chelsea is either going to be a dynasty, or a Circus where the big tents on fire.
Time will tell.
Posted on 3/11/24 at 1:39 pm to jimmy the leg
how do we feel about today vs the magpies?
Posted on 3/11/24 at 3:51 pm to RandySavage
You know why every opponent presses high on Chelsea? Because our backs cannot fricking control, clear or pass to save their damn lives. Game after game after game. How doe this still happen?
Posted on 3/11/24 at 4:08 pm to In The Know
The goals we concede are hilarious. We suck so bad.
Posted on 3/11/24 at 5:17 pm to RandySavage
3-2 at home vs magpies is pretty timely
randy, you are too negative
need to find more joy in the world
randy, you are too negative
need to find more joy in the world
This post was edited on 3/11/24 at 5:18 pm
Posted on 3/11/24 at 6:55 pm to supatigah
quote:
randy, you are too negative
need to find more joy in the world
I've got plenty of joy, just none with regard to Chelsea at the moment.
Posted on 3/11/24 at 6:58 pm to supatigah
Defense was suspect, but offense was solid. Really liked what Jackson did today. He is just still raw, but it is coming together. Cucurella also had a better game than usual.
Posted on 3/11/24 at 7:01 pm to bulletprooftiger
you are good randy
can I just say
frick raheem sterling
Posted on 3/11/24 at 7:57 pm to supatigah
Yeah, if this was a real team with any leaders at all someone would have torn him apart by now
Posted on 3/12/24 at 5:57 am to RandySavage
The lead up to Newcastle's first goal was insane. Just Chelsea shitting down their legs in midfield.
The one guy, can't remember who, kicks a volley back over his head towards Newcastle's fricking goal. Never seen something so stupid.
The one guy, can't remember who, kicks a volley back over his head towards Newcastle's fricking goal. Never seen something so stupid.
Posted on 3/12/24 at 4:29 pm to RandySavage
quote:
Yeah, if this was a real team with any leaders at all someone would have torn him apart by now
yeah a Virgil Van Dijk type leader would be punching sterling in the face
Posted on 3/12/24 at 8:48 pm to supatigah
Sterling won’t be here next season. He’s a glory hog and selfish arse. Keep feeding Jackson and Palmer.
Posted on 3/14/24 at 4:32 pm to In The Know
Hopefully Saudi’s are willing to bail us out on Sterling.
Posted on 3/14/24 at 7:09 pm to In The Know
I still think it’s funny we didn’t give pulisic minutes because Sterling was the future. God we had some horrible ideas
Popular
Back to top


0





