6 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

So we should be able to spend what is needed to back Alonso with 3 or 4 world class players then?

Absolutely, albeit funded by player sales from the existing squad thanks to UEFA's restrictions.

The money isn't the problem, it's the idiots in charge of spending it. We could raise ~250m from selling Fernandez, Neto, Garnacho/Gittens, Fofana, Gusto etc but I have no faith they could spend that on anyone remotely capable of replacing them.

These people have both the means and intention to throw good money after bad in narcissistic pursuit of their 'model' until someone else is left with the clean-up job.

Edited May 19May 19 by SydneyChelsea

3 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

The 'mess' is being overstated. We are not in financial trouble nor are we in danger from the regulators. It was a conscious, deliberate ploy to essentially dump all the big losses on to last season's accounts. The stakeholders in BlueCo probably need to have a long and honest conversation about where they are getting their individual financing from, but that is of little consequence to the club because BlueCo is limited by PSR/FFP rules in how much money in can put into the club, and the independent directors and make up of the board at Chelsea (in theory) restricts how much any individual BlueCo stakeholder can take out of the club to pay his own debts.

This season's (25/26) accounts will reflect the bulk of the CWC windfall, on top of decent CL revenue. We will take a hit thanks to the league position, the repeated failure to secure a shirt sponsor and the payout of Raheem Sterling. Any revenue from player sales would round out the pot nicely.

In theory, we could raise a lot of money from player sales but the players we want to sell are unlikely to attract the fees we need or want. Last season, the club at least had decent demand for Madueke, Dewsbury-Hall, Petrovic, Broja, Chukwumeka and Ugochukwu, and the sales of Nkunku and Felix were a cherry on top of that cake that took us over 300m raised in sales. Ideally, we are able to sell Fernandez, Neto, Fofana, Gusto etc but interest is limited and that caps prices hard - we are unlikely to get more than 200m for that lot, and with Saudi reining in its spending there are no once-in-a-lifetime windfalls remaining either.

Well said.i think this I spot on. I think they could also raise quite a bit with lots of under the radar sales but I am not sure on a book value basis. There is probably another 100m+ to be had on top of your list just for shifting Chalobah, Disasi, Garnacho and George for reasonable 25m-30m sums. Jackson also, for instance. At the 60m they were quoting its laughable but I bet somebody would pay 45m for him. I Reckon Newcastle would.

This is when a experienced respected negotiator is needed “Marina”

She would have fleeced every single club she selling to.

The clowns we have are not respected by anyone in the game. The are a joke and buying clubs know this.

4 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

Absolutely, albeit funded by player sales from the existing squad thanks to UEFA's restrictions.

The money isn't the problem, it's the idiots in charge of spending it. We could raise ~250m from selling Fernandez, Neto, Garnacho/Gittens, Fofana, Gusto etc but I have no faith they could spend that on anyone remotely capable of replacing them.

These people have both the means and intention to throw good money after bad in narcissistic pursuit of their 'model' until someone else is left with the clean-up job.

Selling them for 250m would do nothing as thats probably below their combined book value. So you'd be six players down and have less money to spend than before

5 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

Absolutely, albeit funded by player sales from the existing squad thanks to UEFA's restrictions.

The money isn't the problem, it's the idiots in charge of spending it. We could raise ~250m from selling Fernandez, Neto, Garnacho/Gittens, Fofana, Gusto etc but I have no faith they could spend that on anyone remotely capable of replacing them.

These people have both the means and intention to throw good money after bad in narcissistic pursuit of their 'model' until someone else is left with the clean-up job.

Here we enter into the unknown. Alonso's input. I would be staggered if he has settled for the status quo.

7 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

Absolutely, albeit funded by player sales from the existing squad thanks to UEFA's restrictions.

The money isn't the problem, it's the idiots in charge of spending it. We could raise ~250m from selling Fernandez, Neto, Garnacho/Gittens, Fofana, Gusto etc but I have no faith they could spend that on anyone remotely capable of replacing them.

These people have both the means and intention to throw good money after bad in narcissistic pursuit of their 'model' until someone else is left with the clean-up job.

Most of that money coming from Enzo's sale, but I have a feeling Alonso will want to keep him and convince him to stay. I don't see us selling Neto, Gittens or Gusto if Im honest, but the £5 million from the Garnacho sale is a start.

2 minutes ago, DarkMata said:

Most of that money coming from Enzo's sale, but I have a feeling Alonso will want to keep him and convince him to stay. I don't see us selling Neto, Gittens or Gusto if Im honest, but the £5 million from the Garnacho sale is a start.

Why?

10 minutes ago, dermott said:

Why?

I think he will rate him as most football pundits seem to and being one of the perceived leaders he would want to keep him. I think his priorities will be centre backs and attackers and he will be confident in himself to get the best out of what I believe is a good player. Plus I don't think Clearlake will be happy selling one of their precious marquee players as it would show more mismanagement and weakness on their part.

9 hours ago, SydneyChelsea said:

The 'mess' is being overstated. We are not in financial trouble nor are we in danger from the regulators. It was a conscious, deliberate ploy to essentially dump all the big losses on to last season's accounts. The stakeholders in BlueCo probably need to have a long and honest conversation about where they are getting their individual financing from, but that is of little consequence to the club because BlueCo is limited by PSR/FFP rules in how much money in can put into the club, and the independent directors and make up of the board at Chelsea (in theory) restricts how much any individual BlueCo stakeholder can take out of the club to pay his own debts.

This season's (25/26) accounts will reflect the bulk of the CWC windfall, on top of decent CL revenue. We will take a hit thanks to the league position, the repeated failure to secure a shirt sponsor and the payout of Raheem Sterling. Any revenue from player sales would round out the pot nicely.

In theory, we could raise a lot of money from player sales but the players we want to sell are unlikely to attract the fees we need or want. Last season, the club at least had decent demand for Madueke, Dewsbury-Hall, Petrovic, Broja, Chukwumeka and Ugochukwu, and the sales of Nkunku and Felix were a cherry on top of that cake that took us over 300m raised in sales. Ideally, we are able to sell Fernandez, Neto, Fofana, Gusto etc but interest is limited and that caps prices hard - we are unlikely to get more than 200m for that lot, and with Saudi reining in its spending there are no once-in-a-lifetime windfalls remaining either.

Did I not see that BlueCo have taken loans out for £500m and £800m against the Chelsea FC name, with one loan due to be paid back in the next couple of years, and the other by 2033? These loans are also accruing interest to add to the repayments. Was on " the rest is football " special when Rosenior was sacked.

In terms of transfers, we don't actually need a complete clear out and change imho. We need a few solid signings - grown up players in some key areas. I think that some of our 'kids' - that are not very popular around here - are actually really good players. I am looking at the two French lads Malo Gusto [23] and Wes Fofana [25]. They are good players and worth keeping around in the team/squad. There are of course players that never worked out - Garnacho [21] and Delap [23] - and they should just move on. Then you have a player like Gittens [21] and the jury is still out, because i have yet to see enough of him to know if there is anything/something there. Maybe there is a footballer in Gittens somewhere?

19 minutes ago, DarkMata said:

I think he will rate him as most football pundits seem to and being one of the perceived leaders he would want to keep him.

I would hope he doesnt give 2 sh*ts what any of the pundits think or say as the vast majority are clueless imbeciles.

2 minutes ago, dkw said:

I would hope he doesnt give 2 sh*ts what any of the pundits think or say as the vast majority are clueless imbeciles.

Agreed. This is not about what we would do, this is about what our new manager would do. what types of players are Alonso players? Who will he keep around? Who will he get rid of? Bearing in mind he is unlikely to be able to get rid of everybody and start again from scratch.

3 hours ago, dermott said:

Here we enter into the unknown. Alonso's input. I would be staggered if he has settled for the status quo.

Which is why the excitement around Alonso's appointment died pretty quick.

We still have no one upstairs experienced enough to work well the manager and build a top team.

28 minutes ago, DarkMata said:

I think he will rate him as most football pundits seem to and being one of the perceived leaders he would want to keep him. I think his priorities will be centre backs and attackers and he will be confident in himself to get the best out of what I believe is a good player. Plus I don't think Clearlake will be happy selling one of their precious marquee players as it would show more mismanagement and weakness on their part.

Enzo will just be a luxury player in Alonso's set up.

I think he's the most nailed on to leave if we don't have Champions League football.

3 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Enzo will just be a luxury player in Alonso's set up.

I think he's the most nailed on to leave if we don't have Champions League football.

Where does Enzo go? Realistically who can afford him? Who would want him?

8 minutes ago, TheCeleryKing said:

Where does Enzo go? Realistically who can afford him? Who would want him?

City to replace Silva maybe. (Now Maresca is there).

Real Madrid or Atletico.

24 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

City to replace Silva maybe. (Now Maresca is there).

Real Madrid or Atletico.

Enzo and Mbappe as team mates might be a bit of a stretch?

Citeh - possibly - that team is full of Chelsea rejects

3 hours ago, dermott said:

Here we enter into the unknown. Alonso's input. I would be staggered if he has settled for the status quo.

I dont see him keeping the status quo, i imagine Eghbali has said whatever you want.

38 minutes ago, Sconnie Blue said:

Which is why the excitement around Alonso's appointment died pretty quick.

We still have no one upstairs experienced enough to work well the manager and build a top team.

Enzo will just be a luxury player in Alonso's set up.

I think he's the most nailed on to leave if we don't have Champions League football.

I came to the opposite conclusion regarding Enzo.

Arda Guler became a pivotal figure in his Real Madrid setup and I thought Enzo would probably do something similar when it comes to the way he might look to setup at Chelsea, this is mainly based on his ability to drop deep to pick up the ball and being the spare man in the final third at times.

1 hour ago, dkw said:

I would hope he doesnt give 2 sh*ts what any of the pundits think or say as the vast majority are clueless imbeciles.

I just have a feeling Alonso will see him as one of his main players in his team. It's not that I think Alonso is going to take advice off of pundits more that I'm yet to see anyone in the football sphere ex players/mangers say anything bad about Enzo. I think the hatred for him on this forum is over the top and not a reflection of the wider opinion. Actually in our sh*tist of times under Rosenior he was one of the players that looked to have not completely given up. The 9 goals from midfield he scored this season in this team is nothing to be sniffed at either, not just stat padding as some like to put it.

I personally think under the guidance of Alonso Enzo has the potential to be a top player, and I think Alonso will fight to keep him.

29 minutes ago, Imran_CFC said:

I came to the opposite conclusion regarding Enzo.

Arda Guler became a pivotal figure in his Real Madrid setup and I thought Enzo would probably do something similar when it comes to the way he might look to setup at Chelsea, this is mainly based on his ability to drop deep to pick up the ball and being the spare man in the final third at times.

29 minutes ago, Imran_CFC said:

I came to the opposite conclusion regarding Enzo.

Arda Guler became a pivotal figure in his Real Madrid setup and I thought Enzo would probably do something similar when it comes to the way he might look to setup at Chelsea, this is mainly based on his ability to drop deep to pick up the ball and being the spare man in the final third at times.

Guler can actually dribble and bypass players.

1 hour ago, TheCeleryKing said:

Where does Enzo go? Realistically who can afford him? Who would want him?

No doubt Cucu, Enzo and Gusto will all want to go and play in Manchester now.

7 minutes ago, Bebe1980 said:

No doubt Cucu, Enzo and Gusto will all want to go and play in Manchester now.

It's why we should all believe that good times are a-coming.

5 hours ago, AndyDowsleftflank said:

Selling them for 250m would do nothing as thats probably below their combined book value. So you'd be six players down and have less money to spend than before

Its a bit more complicated than that, but if we sold Enzo F for his book value (~65m), we'd still be able to sign someone for 62.5m without it being a hit on the books, as we'd amortise that cost as well. Rodgers could be available for a similar fee. I worry we will end up signing Alex Scott.

We could replace Fofana - if we sold for 30m - with someone for 50m. Murillo might be difficult to get for that price, but wouldnt be far off. Probably get the Dutch guy from Brighton though.

I think Gittens/Garnacho would need to go on loans, no ones buying them, personally I'd look to replace them with that more experienced talent we don't have - Gnabry or Brandt or f**k it, Harvey Elliott might be a smart purchase. Picking up one of those for less than 20m and shifting the two on loan won't affect our book and they are Definitely a better option than Gittens or Garnacho.

I would keep Neto and Gusto, like to see how they do under a decent coaching set up. I'm also on the fence about Garnacho, there's a player in there that needs coaching out.

Either way, there are options. And it's likely we will not be in Europe so we don't need as stacked a squad.

23 minutes ago, bisright1 said:

Its a bit more complicated than that, but if we sold Enzo F for his book value (~65m), we'd still be able to sign someone for 62.5m without it being a hit on the books, as we'd amortise that cost as well. Rodgers could be available for a similar fee. I worry we will end up signing Alex Scott.

We could replace Fofana - if we sold for 30m - with someone for 50m. Murillo might be difficult to get for that price, but wouldnt be far off. Probably get the Dutch guy from Brighton though.

I think Gittens/Garnacho would need to go on loans, no ones buying them, personally I'd look to replace them with that more experienced talent we don't have - Gnabry or Brandt or f**k it, Harvey Elliott might be a smart purchase. Picking up one of those for less than 20m and shifting the two on loan won't affect our book and they are Definitely a better option than Gittens or Garnacho.

I would keep Neto and Gusto, like to see how they do under a decent coaching set up. I'm also on the fence about Garnacho, there's a player in there that needs coaching out.

Either way, there are options. And it's likely we will not be in Europe so we don't need as stacked a squad.

Spending almost 70m for Gittens and then loaning him is the biggest indictment of our sporting directors being absolute amateurs.

Garnacho is another case of loaning with options until his book value is low enough where someone will buy him.

The hierarchy must have already sat down with Alonso to thrash out his 4 year deal and they may well have already gone through the squad but I would imagine there will still be some awkward conversations when he officially starts in July and he lists a whole number of players who he deems not good enough and shouldn't have been bought in the first place. A puppet like Rosenoir just had to get on with it and work with what he was given, but you don't appoint someone like Alonso and expect him to happily do likewise.