CHOULO19

He's happy that he didn't get a massive pay out despite literally being in the exact same position?! Really? It had nothing to do with the fact that the media got all behind Carneiro who is famous for being an attractive woman while barely anyone even mentioned Fearn's name? She didn't get this pay out because she deserved it. Don't get me wrong, she was treated unfairly and deserved compensation; certainly not in the millions but then again all the money involved in football at this level is outrageous. But the undeniable fact is that she got the compensation because the media enabled her to.

Honestly? I don't see Hazard lasting too long under Conte...unless he is willing to sacrifice part of his attacking game. You can argue that would be bad for the team but I think that is how Conte would act. And I don't think Hazard can play the second striker role, if anything that role would require a player with a bigger defensive work-rate than a winger because for a modern 4-4-2 to work the second striker must be willing to drop back and prevent the midfielders from being outnumbered. Tevez and Rooney play that role ideally, but I think Costa can do it too. If he can do it as well, then we can probably afford a Cesc in midfield. Of course, all of this is speculation as we don't have any clue as to what formation Conte has in mind.

Didn't necessarily mean to cross to inside the box, but more someone for the other striker to play off. Diego doesn't AT ALL have the aerial nor the ball retention abilities to play that role.

I doubt that the rumor is true, but this actually makes sense, at least to me. If we are going to play with 2 strikers under Conte (which I REALLY hope is the case) we are going to need one of them to be a big player who can be the focal point of the attack, like Benteke.

Wow, when did that happen? Swear he was in hi mid twenties a couple of seasons ago I'd still take him, tbh because his game was never about pace so I don't think he'll decline fast any time soon.

Filipe Luis at 29 for 14m (18m with addons) pounds is a great signing, but Stephan, who has actually been consistently a top RB for years now, at 30 for 12m euros is an awful signing? I really don't get this forum sometimes...

Should wait for Sky Sport Nigeria before we start getting excited!

Probably exaggerated to sell books. Probably not written by Carlo himself either, at least not in the way it appeared in the book. Remember when Maka's autobiography included something like it was JT who got Jose fired the first time?

If you believe the transfer rumors, we're basically buying Roma this summer...

That generally applies to the entire experience of being a football (and more generally sports) spectator..unless you plan on doing like that fan who ran onto the pitch a few years back and took the FK

Can't see the scores changing, tbh. Maybe Real with a second deep into the second half. Atleti just don't look like scoring..

I think JT just proved otherwise last week as he has several time during his career here. But yes, that is the general trend unfortunately.

Sadiki, no offense, but I can barely understand spoken Tunisian Arabic, let alone written! Basically I think they are both very similar and while Lukaku is homegrown and better aerially, Costa's movement is on a different level and creates so many chances for his teammates. His pressing and defensive work is miles better as well which I believe will be key under Conte. Also you can get into motivational and leadership qualities... Please see above.

For that kind of sum it really goes down to a simple question, for me at least: Is he an upgrade on Diego Costa? Now, I'm one of Costa's biggest critics, but Romelu simply is not better, at least not yet.

Apparently his signature too! Don't ask me, copyright crap makes less than zero sense to me. How the hell you can own information is beyond me...

Deal still some way from being over from what is being reported. Apparently we (Chelsea football club) own the name 'Jose Mourinho' which is creating some legal issues.

Obviously I wouldn't have known about your knowledge of accounting and of course I didn't mean to come off as patronizing. Yes, all that you said is true, but the key difference between the two scenarios, the one I've been trying to point out from the start is that in the one where JT signs (thankfully a reality now) and we sign an extra player this season we'll have that extra player and JT as a CB back up while in the other scenario we'll have the new back up CB but won't have the new other player till next season even though the FFP budget is exactly the same we'll get a new player a full season earlier. I'm sorry, I'm not very good at expressing, I hope you can see the difference I've been trying to point out from the start...

Can we please remove the cringe-worthy poll at the top already? It's kind of embarrassing...

@OhForAGreavsie I didn't want to derail an already 'rampant' JT thread further, so I'll reply here if you don't mind. Let me give an example: Scenario A: JT leaves, we sign a back up CB for say 10m on a 4-year deal (assume same wages) then next year we sign another player we need for 10m on a 4-year deal as well. The extra cost on the FFP budget for the next 5 seasons will be: 2016/17: 10m/4 = 2.5m 2017/18: 2.5 + 2.5 = 5m 2018/19: 2.5 + 2.5 = 5m 2019/20: 2.5 + 2.5 = 5m 2020/21: 2.5m Scenario B: Terry renews and we sign back up CB next season instead and the other player we need this season instead of next. The FFP budget would look like: 2016/17: 2.5m 2017/18: 2.5 + 2.5 = 5m 2018/19: 2.5 + 2.5 = 5m 2019/20: 2.5 + 2.5 = 5m 2020/21: 2.5m Exactly identical. Do see what I mean now? Yes, I know it's a lot more complicated and the fees will likely be different and the wages play a role and then of course the contracts of the signed players will not be left to run out and instead will be renews, but the idea is basically the same. Yeah, obviously the actual cash flow and budget will be different, but I don't think we (the club) really care about that nearly as much as FFP.

So your method of judging what the club offered him is to consider what the club offered him to be the bench mark? Yeah, that makes sense... I think there would be quite a few English clubs who would offer him 5m+, but of course he would not player for another club in the league. The thing about the manager has already been debunked several times in this thread as well as about him going to the media and players rights to get answers from the club 5-6 months before their contracts expire...

But that's the thing, it doesn't equate that at all because the fee is amortized. I'm too sleepy to give a practical example but see how FFP costs are calculated here to get an idea of what I mean: http://weaintgotnohistory.sbnation.com/2014/10/16/6968855/chelsea-ffp-database Yes, wages in football are ridiculous for all sorts of reasons that would take hours to get into. But in the context of wages in football and how they usually work, not in relation to your salary or the average wages in the UK or China, a direct transition from 150K to 60K is very extreme. All I'm saying is that it is incredibly rare for football players to take 60% wage cuts. That's just a fact.

How is it nil? The fee is amortized for the length of the contract, so you'd be saving a year without that amortized fee, which can be used to sign another player we need a year earlier without affecting the budget. The only youth player who's remotely ready to come into the side is Christensen and he's made it fairly clear that he's like to stay at Gladbach another season.

The way the club treated him this season surely left no place whatsoever for this matter to end 'gracefully'. The reality is, he is worth 60k per week? Based on what exactly? What are the economic or mathematical methods you used to arrive at this. The way I ended up at 100-120K is I considered his current wage and factored in that usually in football, no one ever takes a wage cut higher than 30%... We can talk about the 'role' all we want, but ultimately that will be decided by performances and injuries. Everyone was talking about his 'role' at the end of Rafa's time too.... Also, for someone who 'played like shit' (and I'm in no way saying he was good this season) he was still our best CB over the entire season, even over Zouma who had incredible games, but still regularly made amateurish mistakes, especially with his positioning and reading of the game.

It's not AT ALL a financial issue for the club. They offered this contract because no player would accept a 60% wage cut. As I've already pointed out in this thread, any back up Cb we'd get instead of JT, even would with half the wages, would still cost us more because of the transfer fee. Even if we give JT the 100K-120K he deserves and should get he would still cost less on FFP than the majority of the first team including back up players. It IS however financial for JT who will be playing at best the season before his last in football after which his income will drastically decrease. Of course he has to consider this. Pretty sure we surrounded JT with top players so that the club could win trophies. I don't think JT's medal collection was ever of concern to Roman and the board, tbh... The club has 'shat' on JT in several clear ways regarding this contract, from not even contacting him or giving him any answers until the last week of the season, to delivering a PR low blow by publicly announcing offering him a new deal. Did either Giggs or Scholes take a 60% wage cut from one contract to the next? I don't know but I would be willing to bet that they did not...