So it's Pochettino *Officially Chelsea Manager*

[El regreso]

4 hours ago, WhiteWall said:

I'm not sure he said they would be gone. I think he said they would be out.  I interpreted that as being dropped from the team/squad

Probably right, dropped was a better word to use.

[WhiteWall]

2 minutes ago, El regreso said:

Probably right, dropped was a better word to use.

But hey, I bet it'll be something the press will jump on if another incident occurs. Can see it now. Poch Crumbles - Having said players would be gone [out] he only dropped XYZ player for one game

[Gordon Bennett]

39 minutes ago, WhiteWall said:

But hey, I bet it'll be something the press will jump on if another incident occurs. Can see it now. Poch Crumbles - Having said players would be gone [out] he only dropped XYZ player for one game

The media are c**ts. We win 6-0 and the big story is all about the pen incident. Bag of bollocks.

UTC.

[evissy]

If we need to sell players in the summer (and we will have to) I hope players stay who deserve to stay. Conor Gallagher is the main name naturally here. If we sell him we will send so weird and undermining message to every player and fan. It would say merit means nothing. It would also be a feeder club move if there ever was one. We absolutely can't let that happen.

If we need to gain money lets sell Broja, Chalobah, Kepa, Maatsen, Lukaku, Ziyech. Even if we can't get a good price. 

[WhiteWall]

2 hours ago, evissy said:

If we need to sell players in the summer (and we will have to) I hope players stay who deserve to stay. Conor Gallagher is the main name naturally here. If we sell him we will send so weird and undermining message to every player and fan. It would say merit means nothing. It would also be a feeder club move if there ever was one. We absolutely can't let that happen.

If we need to gain money lets sell Broja, Chalobah, Kepa, Maatsen, Lukaku, Ziyech. Even if we can't get a good price. 

To my mind, if i have this correct, which i probably don't, this may well be our future model regardless.

Unless we have some additional revenue affecting our PSR, such as CL income, major sponsorship or merchandising gains, or indeed selling off assets, then surely it will be about short term sales counting in entirety against amortized purchases.

If i am right (big if) and we take Jackson as an example. Lets say Poch has taken a very dim view of this penalty issue and previous shows of petulance and he wants Jackson out. We bought him for €35m on an 8 year deal. €4.375m per year, lets call it €4.5m. If Poch sells him this summer for, let's say the same €35m, there is no overall profit and he is not an FFP free hit. But in the PSR books it will show a €30.5m (€35m-€4.5m) profit for this year. Going forwards it will show a €4.5m loss each year with no asset against it, but effectively Clearlake, with some creative accounting, will be able to continue to kick this can down the road turning these players over until such times as those additional external revenue streams takes away this burden.

EDIT: similarly DD Fofana was signed on a 7 year deal for £10.6m. That'll amortize to virtually nothing per year. If they get £30m for him this year just off of his Burnley performances, why not!

Edited April 18 by WhiteWall

[forbzy]

1 hour ago, WhiteWall said:

To my mind, if i have this correct, which i probably don't, this may well be our future model regardless.

Unless we have some additional revenue affecting our PSR, such as CL income, major sponsorship or merchandising gains, or indeed selling off assets, then surely it will be about short term sales counting in entirety against amortized purchases.

If i am right (big if) and we take Jackson as an example. Lets say Poch has taken a very dim view of this penalty issue and previous shows of petulance and he wants Jackson out. We bought him for €35m on an 8 year deal. €4.375m per year, lets call it €4.5m. If Poch sells him this summer for, let's say the same €35m, there is no overall profit and he is not an FFP free hit. But in the PSR books it will show a €30.5m (€35m-€4.5m) profit for this year. Going forwards it will show a €4.5m loss each year with no asset against it, but effectively Clearlake, with some creative accounting, will be able to continue to kick this can down the road turning these players over until such times as those additional external revenue streams takes away this burden.

EDIT: similarly DD Fofana was signed on a 7 year deal for £10.6m. That'll amortize to virtually nothing per year. If they get £30m for him this year just off of his Burnley performances, why not!

That sounds about right although I think costs of players signed from last summer onwards could only be amortized over 5 years after changes in rules. On the flip side of this approach, the long term amortization of costs means we carry an increasing annual cost that has to be factored in long term as we buy more players. A few million per player may seem relatively low but when you multiply it by the number we have brought in over the last few years it quickly adds up.

In contrast if we managed to sell Broja for say 20m that would be classed as 100% profit for reporting.

[Sconnie Blue]

Yeah that is where the likes of Hall, Maatsen, Chalobah, Broja, and Gallagher have ownership licking their lips. It's 100% profit. They will be doing this year after year until the club eventually gets Champions League football and brings in additional revenue streams. Angelo's remaining book value in 2026 will be £5m. If he continues to impress in Ligue 1, PSG may come knocking on the door and table a £40m offer. Same can be done for the likes of Hutchinson, Santos, Fofana, etc.  It's very much a long term game. Clearlake appear to have no intentions of not complying with FFP.

The only issue that raises criticism is the endless cycle of selling/making a profit just to get European football off the back of a unproven model. Not to mention selling our academy players as a consequence. Disasi isn't £40m better than Chalobah and I doubt Shields can save us every season when we have to replace an important academy figure like he did with Palmer and Mount. 

Another saving grace is that the Club World Cup in 2025 is going to count towards our 24/25 fiscal year. Qualification is €50m whereas the potential winner can walk away with around €100m. 

[forbzy]

9 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Yeah that is where the likes of Hall, Maatsen, Chalobah, Broja, and Gallagher have ownership licking their lips. It's 100% profit. They will be doing this year after year until the club eventually gets Champions League football and brings in additional revenue streams. Angelo's remaining book value in 2026 will be £5m. If he continues to impress in Ligue 1, PSG may come knocking on the door and table a £40m offer. Same can be done for the likes of Hutchinson, Santos, Fofana, etc.  It's very much a long term game. Clearlake appear to have no intentions of not complying with FFP.

The only issue that raises criticism is the endless cycle of selling/making a profit just to get European football off the back of a unproven model. Not to mention selling our academy players as a consequence. Disasi isn't £40m better than Chalobah and I doubt Shields can save us every season when we have to replace an important academy figure like he did with Palmer and Mount. 

Another saving grace is that the Club World Cup in 2025 is going to count towards our 24/25 fiscal year. Qualification is €50m whereas the potential winner can walk away with around €100m. 

Agreed. While Chalobah has done well in the last few games, I still suspect Clearlake will target him as one of the academy players to sell. If anything his current form and playing time is likely to give them a better chance of getting a decent price. Based on contracts etc., I think Humphreys and Gilchrist are the 2 academy CB players that will likely be kept around. Unless Fofana is finally able to get past the injuries we will likely need to bring another option at the back. There have been a few rumours that Badiashile may be sold in the summer too.

[Victor90]

5 hours ago, evissy said:

If we need to sell players in the summer (and we will have to) I hope players stay who deserve to stay. Conor Gallagher is the main name naturally here. If we sell him we will send so weird and undermining message to every player and fan. It would say merit means nothing. It would also be a feeder club move if there ever was one. We absolutely can't let that happen.

If we need to gain money lets sell Broja, Chalobah, Kepa, Maatsen, Lukaku, Ziyech. Even if we can't get a good price. 

Could've said the same with Mason Mount and we haven't exactly missed him have we? And Mason was the far better player. 

If we can get over 50m for Conor we should jump at the chance. The problem is can you rely on our current squad of players to have an injury record close to his? No, you can't sadly. 

[Nibs]

28 minutes ago, forbzy said:

Agreed. While Chalobah has done well in the last few games, I still suspect Clearlake will target him as one of the academy players to sell. If anything his current form and playing time is likely to give them a better chance of getting a decent price. Based on contracts etc., I think Humphreys and Gilchrist are the 2 academy CB players that will likely be kept around. Unless Fofana is finally able to get past the injuries we will likely need to bring another option at the back. There have been a few rumours that Badiashile may be sold in the summer too.

I started those rumours - more out of hope than anything.

 

[JM7]

I think Saturday isna massive opportunity for Poch and the players to prove something. They messed up badly in the league cup final. Getting to two finals with a young, developing squad should be considered an achievement. 

[The Rising Sun]

Arsenal fans moaning last night that....

They play too slow 

Too many sideways and short passes.

No enough desire.

Team is inexperienced.

What has our manager ever won ?

Now they know what it's like !!🏆😜

Best moan was ..." "Arsenal are a big club with a small manager"!!

😜😜😜

[Gol15]

Has Palmer scoring 4 goals as the central attacking midfielder

Plays Palmer wide the next big match because Enzo has to be the central midfielder now

Also plays Gallagher on the left because Enzo has to be the central midfielder now

None of those mentioned have an impact and everyone is surprised and wonder why.

 

[El regreso]

4 minutes ago, Gol15 said:

Has Palmer scoring 4 goals as the central attacking midfielder

Plays Palmer wide the next big match because Enzo has to be the central midfielder now

Also plays Gallagher on the left because Enzo has to be the central midfielder now

None of those mentioned have an impact and everyone is surprised and wonder why.

 

We didn’t lose because the of any of those decisions. We had by far the better chances however Jackson just can’t shoot.

[Sconnie Blue]

Just now, El regreso said:

We didn’t lose because the of any of those decisions. We had by far the better chances however Jackson just can’t shoot.

Enzo played a ball that any striker would’ve loved and converted

[Scott Harris]

I didn't like the idea of Gallagher on the left, but it's not the reason why we lost. If Jackson takes his chances, nobody is complaining about the tactics. 

[Niall1905]

5 minutes ago, Gol15 said:

Has Palmer scoring 4 goals as the central attacking midfielder

Plays Palmer wide the next big match because Enzo has to be the central midfielder now

Also plays Gallagher on the left because Enzo has to be the central midfielder now

None of those mentioned have an impact and everyone is surprised and wonder why.

 

None of those have an impact is a brave statement.

Whether they were tired or not, Poch did enough to beat City today. Some awful finishing and some awful refereeing cost us.

If you think he can set up like we did against Everton and get the same result, your head needs a wobble.

Gallagher was wide and frustrating going forward, but was tucking in on Foden who was hardly in the game.

Palmer out wide keeps him away from a congested midfield with Rodri who is arguably the best defensive midfielder in the world and a spare city centre half tucking in. Palmer had space when he wanted it.

[Gol15]

2 minutes ago, El regreso said:

We didn’t lose because the of any of those decisions. We had by far the better chances however Jackson just can’t shoot.

We kinda did though, all the tinkering and your key players all bombed?

[El regreso]

Also looking back on the free kick handball it get’s worst he clearly loved his hands towards the ball. 
Michael Oliver and his mates bottled it!!

[El regreso]

3 minutes ago, Gol15 said:

We kinda did though, all the tinkering and your key players all bombed?

If Jackson scored all his opportunities is our chance of winning higher or lower?

[Gol15]

1 minute ago, Niall1905 said:

None of those have an impact is a brave statement.

Whether they were tired or not, Poch did enough to beat City today. Some awful finishing and some awful refereeing cost us.

If you think he can set up like we did against Everton and get the same result, your head needs a wobble.

Gallagher was wide and frustrating going forward, but was tucking in on Foden who was hardly in the game.

Palmer out wide keeps him away from a congested midfield with Rodri who is arguably the best defensive midfielder in the world and a spare city centre half tucking in. Palmer had space when he wanted it.

Man City's goal kind of showed that Enzo was too slow for De Bruyne and it was like the 10th time he was in our box just during that second half.

Gallagher on the left didn't help us for the goal either, I get it he does a lot of dirty work and you can't trust Cucurella but Bernardo was there and that's it. 

Palmer couldn't get nearly enough possession, that's not good tinkering.

[Niall1905]

1 minute ago, Gol15 said:

Man City's goal kind of showed that Enzo was too slow for De Bruyne and it was like the 10th time he was in our box just during that second half.

Gallagher on the left didn't help us for the goal either, I get it he does a lot of dirty work and you can't trust Cucurella but Bernardo was there and that's it. 

Palmer couldn't get nearly enough possession, that's not good tinkering.

Gallagher was on the right for the goal, so if anything you’re proving the point. He’d helped keep that side quiet all game. Cucurella followed the ball in and onto the line, Mudryk didn’t tuck in and cover.

Whether you like it or not, we needed bodies to help out defensively today. City’s main attacking move is a ball wide, hold it up and then players running beyond from deep are played through.

That meant sacrificing a traditional forward/winger in place of someone who can play wide and tuck in defensively and track those runs. Gallagher is the best fit for that. Enzo didn’t come in because he’s Enzo, he came it because once Gallagher is outside of that centre 2, Enzo is the next best option.

 

[Gunslinger]

Seasons done so just get rid of him now.

A failure from day 1

 

[axman2526]

Not a fan nor do I want him to stay.

However, even though I don't agree with his call to start Enzo, it was Enzo that sent Jackson in with a peach of a pass he should bury.

3 best chances all fall to us, and we have a fair claim for a pen. Poch did a decent job overall.

[Gol15]

9 minutes ago, Niall1905 said:

Gallagher was on the right for the goal, so if anything you’re proving the point. He’d helped keep that side quiet all game. Cucurella followed the ball in and onto the line, Mudryk didn’t tuck in and cover.

Whether you like it or not, we needed bodies to help out defensively today. City’s main attacking move is a ball wide, hold it up and then players running beyond from deep are played through.

That meant sacrificing a traditional forward/winger in place of someone who can play wide and tuck in defensively and track those runs. Gallagher is the best fit for that. Enzo didn’t come in because he’s Enzo, he came it because once Gallagher is outside of that centre 2, Enzo is the next best option.

 

In the end of the day it didn't work, De Bruyne did what he wanted and it didn't matter where Gallagher was.

Their most influential player did the job, De Bruyne was MOTM while Palmer couldn't do it for us and having him wide in order to implement all the other stuff didn't pay off, you don't put Messi somewhere else after he just scored a few from his best position.

We are flattering ourselves here by trying to make it look as if the manager won the tactical battle, the ball was coming to our box from both sides in the second half, Man City looked better.