OhForAGreavsie

Let's be optimistic. It could be exactly the same number of games. 🙂

Who knows how accurate the reporting is but it was reported that the spending ceiling would be £200m gross, not net. That's to say £200m including funds from any outgoing deals. Possibly true, possibly false, possibly an attempt to damp down sellers' expectations when negotiating, and possibly none of the above.

Well, if these reports are accurate, the new board will have to lay down a marker and walk away.

My belief is that Dembele has just been using the interest of other clubs to drive up Barca's offer but that staying put has been his preference all along. Only when he's certain that he's seen Barcelona's best offer will he actually make his decision' It would be no surprise if he accepted Barca even if they don't make the best offer.

This has looked the most likely outcome for a number of weeks now so at least we've had time to come to terms with it. I'd have preferred to sign Gnarby but I'd still have been delighted if we landed Dembele.

I don't think this is a suggestion of FFP issues specifically. The new owners are alerting HMRC that something does not look right with the tax paid or collected (VAT). Most likely it's some question about tax treatment of the incomes of big earners. We'll probably hear more details at some point.

I don't agree with this take. I say selling is all downside and no up. My first reason is just opinion but my second is rooted in observed data. The opinion is that Mando is not yet playing at the top of his potential. Talent wise he cannot improve of course but he will improve physically and grow in experience. I think we are two seasons away from seeing the best he can offer. I think that we can afford to turn down £35m while we look to see just how much more efficiency he can add and the observed data I mentioned plays into that calculation. I'm on record as saying that I think Mando is a better prospect than Tammy but look how well Tammy is doing in Serie A. If, after next season, TT decides that Mando has no future here there will still be a solid market for him in Italy and plenty of EPL clubs willing to believe that he has more development in him. A strong enough market to see bids of £35m or close to it. By this calculation the potential gain is big and the risk of loss is relatively small.

I'm ok with Buck's departure. Partly because 76 is a challenging age at which to hold an executive position in a large business, and partly because he favoured the Rickets. That last one was the end of the line for me.

I hope not because that would be dumb. Like any ambitious club CFC need to be wary of attackers who are not up to task. Better judgement is what's required, not a simple passport check: - When some posters pointed to the warning signs that, at his age, Hakim; was playing in Holland, had never achieved high status, and was not highly sought after, many others still believed that we were getting a wonderful player at a great price. There was plenty of push back when I said that Liverpool's, "We can't afford Timo Werner.", claim was just code for he's not worth the money. The fact that neither they nor Bayern were interested told us a lot but many preferred to believe Liverpool's lie and to get excited about the hype. When I expressed doubts about Pulli caused by the number of times was benched at Dortmund, especially behind Sancho, many put it down to his injury record only. Because some of those were people whose opinions I respect, I was persuaded by that claim too. It wasn't the first time, and it won't be the last, that I was wrong. I still respect the opinions of those who were as wrong as I was about Pulli. None of us are immune to bad judgement but, as everyone here is only too painfully aware our club has been getting its judgements wrong far too often, for far too long.

I always scoffed at the idea that Rafa's working relationship with Nando was a factor in his appointment as temporary manager. Before the end of their time together at Liverpool Benitez had seen through the number 9. We didn't appoint a man with a magic Torres wand, we appointed a manager who knew the truth that Fernando was then, and always had been, an ordinary footballer.

Are there reliable pieces of information which have become public and which indicate that Kounde is the board's preference and not TT's? If not, and it seems very unlikely that the club would allow this to become public if it is true, then there is nothing to base your accusation on.

Delete

Definitely sad but I read somewhere that Leipzig put a €100m price on his head. That would serve as a very good mop for sure.

👏

London over Manchester no argument but there is a compensation. No problem with a stadium and training facilities. Quite the opposite, the city was begging them to take it. Plenty of room to expand if they should ever need to and even on site parking for fans. In terms of PL capable graduates our academy has done better than City's in recent years but I don't agree that ours is better. The two are both excellent. The level of player emerging from an academy is dependent on their individual quality as much as it is on their education. As I put it, the only way for a Lionel Messi to come out of an academy is for a Lionel Messi to have walked in some years earlier. Supporting evidence for this point; despite the processes at Cobham being honed and mature the depth of quality there currently is as poor as it's been for a decade. Cobham and The CFA can give players everything but talent*. I like Bellingham, Dembele, Gavridol, Gnarby, Koulibaly, and Nkunku. If we asked them all to choose Man City, with one European trophy, or Chelsea with eight plus a world championship on top, how many would vote for the nine over the one? *Despite what I said above I think you are actually right about the academy being something in our favour. The impact of an academy comes down to perception. You'll remember that Cobham was heavily criticised for years because it was not seen to be producing any first team ready players. This was a stupid and ill informed opinion. As I argued in those days it was far too early to judge Cobham since it was new, needed a few years to settle down, to get the right people in the right places and to form the right partnerships with local institutions. Most of all it takes time to turn eight-year olds into twenty-year olds with no shortcuts available. For a time there was no shortage of know-nothing ex-footballers telling people; "I wouldn't send my son to Chelsea." The foolish perception that our academy was bad impacted our recruitment. Many of the better youngsters, those with a choice of more than one offer, were choosing to go elsewhere. The upshot of this undeserved reputation is in the fact I mentioned above. Our current crop is not good because, with a few exceptions of course, we didn't attract the best of their age group. There is every chance however that the lads we are recruiting now, when Cobham's reputation is very high, will be good. It will take many years until we know however.

I had not read about that. Thank you.

It's just one ingredient but it sours the cake.

I have been making this same point for years now. A point people seem unwilling to accept or to contemplate its implications. We are not an attractive club to top level players. We can list all the targets we want but, unless no one else wants them, they usually won't consider us. Justified or not, we have a reputation for; dour football, stinking up the joint in big international games, a crap stadium, poor home support, and misusing our players. The upshot is that it is far, far more difficult for us to sign big names than it is for clubs with a better reputation. Established elite players will not come here until they are mainly interested in boosting their pension plans, exciting youngsters will choose other destinations unless they are forced to accept that none of their preferred clubs want them. I have argued that we should never pay superstar prices because genuine, established, superstars don't join Chelsea. When we pay top prices we are wasting our money on a second tier player, at best. We need to shop super smart in 'our' market and gradually work on changing the way we are seen. That process should have started years ago but it must start now.

City have a higher FFP ceiling and more money in any case. They also have a manager who, probably more than any other, top players are eager to play for. On top of all that they have a reputation for a playing a style that potential recruits find appealing which is certainly not the case with us. Footballers simply find City a more attractive destination so, along with the money, it is far easier for them to land their targets. They aren't working any harder than we are. Quite the opposite probably.

None of us knows who ultimately made the football decision on this one and probably won't know for years, if ever. My own feeling however is that the person responsible has already left the club.

To be fair, and reading between the lines, the two CFCW signings were agreed before the sanctions were imposed and so were ready to go as soon as the takeover was done.

Is this so? If it is then he should have been on our list .

Craw. 🙂

Yep, if and when he is found guilty will be time enough for the world to show what it thinks of that behaviour.

Of course it does. People who don't see this can't be looking. 🙁