Superblue

The issue with this isn't just killing off a relationship with Benfica for the future (who themselves have proven in the past to be a bit of a talent factory, especially with South American talent) but that negotiation will do the rounds and we'll find it incredibly difficult to deal with a number of clubs moving forward who'll be weary of doing business with us. As I mentioned before, I can see especially at those figures there being multi million pound negotiations with regards to payment structures, add ons, etc. But over £40m I don't believe it.

Or he isn't a sheep and actually gets relevant information himself?

That would be my take too. Our enquiries and initial proposals have been enough to bring Benfica to the table to see what they could possibly get out of a deal, but there's clearly a large difference between valuations. Absolutely no way I'm willing to believe we'd told Benfica we'll pay 127m and then changed our minds and knocked a third of the fee off.

Here we are, 4 days ago he wasn't feeding the hype machine like every other journalist seemingly has who are now back tracking. He was seemingly bang on the money. I'd be much more inclined to believe and trust David Ornstein then the reports we were ready to pay 127m.

Romano was one of these pushing a couple of days ago that we were in talks for the 120-127m figure and now he's saying that was never our proposal. Let's have it out, he has a big following and he seems to have developed a niche for being someone to get in first when a deal is essentially happening but there are also a lot of transfer rumours he puts out which either amount to nothing or are lacking any real detail that allows him to sidestep away if it's not happening. I don't blame him, it's his job and it's a lucrative job being able to feed that beast. But he like many others are fed most of their information by agents who are spinning their own narrative to suit their own clients and agendas. It's why so much transfer information on the internet is complete horseshit. We used to be able to rely on Matt Law a lot more as he seemingly had a source within the club but now with Roman out, he too is on the outer (even admitted it on a podcast that it's much more of a struggle getting information from out of Chelsea now). The one person out there that I feel comfortable with being 95% confident in is David Ornstein who seems to be first with a lot of exclusives, many of which haven't even been rumoured or reported, and he generally remains very coy on a number of 'hot' transfer rumours doing the rounds, probably because he knows many are complete bollocks. Although I haven't seen anything myself yet, from what it appears on Twitter his stance has always been that Chelsea were looking at Enzo but with a price in mind that wasn't as high as the release clause. I think, like usual, this transfer report has gone into overdrive and too many people are trying to push an exclusive to be the first rather than the actual reality of the situation. Now one thing that Boehly does have to learn because it was clearly an issue in the summer, is a lot of clubs/agents/media seem to be using us at present to feed the media narrative, which was nowhere near as clear and obvious under Roman/Marina.

In fairness 85m euros is a huge amount of money whichever way you look at it. It's not a stretch that the club's enquiries have been enough to bring Benfica to the table initially, but there's too much distance between the two. I could see some negotiating and trying to get a few million off a deal or a lower fee and higher add-ons but I'd still be amazed if we've told Benfica we'd pay 127m and then only actually offered 85m. It's not just a case with damaging relations with Benfica in the future, but word will get around very quickly if that is how we're treating transfer negotiations and it will create multiple problems in the future. In the summer, Boehly was praised a lot from other clubs directors for how he conducted himself so for me it simply doesn't add up.

How do you take this as us lowballing Benfica? It says the proposal was never those figures.

Jake Cohen has proven very reliable with things like this and supports my own understanding of how it works for FFP purposes. The fact is on the assumption of the above, we would never have entertained activating the release clause and as a result Benfica could quite easily have just plainly refused to come to the negotiating table. The fact they have would suggest that broad terms have or are close to agreement with regards to fee, etc. The payment structure isn't impacting FFP, but has a significant impact on cashflow, borrowings, interest, etc. It's clearly the biggest point of negotiation and quite obviously we'll want to pay less up front and Benfica will want more. Just because an agreement hasn't been reached yet doesn't mean one won't. Benfica won't want to keep Enzo now with his head turned if they can help it, and we want the player. But like I said previously a deal of this magnitude is not being resolved and signed off on after one round of talks.

A standard release clause means a club can activate the clause by going to the selling club and paying the clause. As this is deemed a transfer fee it's amortised over the players contract like a normal transfer. i.e. if a player has a release clause of £50m and we activate it and sign him on a 5 year contract then we include £10m per season in the accounts for the next 5 years. If after 3 years, he extends for another 5 years then the remaining £20m of the transfer fee left to amortise is now spread again over a new five year period, etc, etc. These buyout clauses in Spain are mandatory agreements between player and club to allow a player to buy himself out of a contract. In order to activate these, the player must do so and therefore the buying club must give the money to the player to do it. This payment to the player isn't considered a transfer fee in the same sense and therefore it would be recorded as a one off expense in the year it happens. So going back to above example if we paid a player £50m to buy himself out of his contract then it's £50m on the books in that year and nothing then for the next 4 years. The way it was being reported, Enzo's clause sounds the same as the ones in Spain, i.e. he needs to activate it and this is a massive differential for FFP purposes.

I may be wrong with this but my understanding is Enzo has a buyout clause like the ones in Spain, not a simple release clause. For FFP purposes, because a buyout clause is between player and club and the player has to activate it, the buying club giving the money to the player to activate it isn't treated the same way as usual transfer fees that are amortised over a contract length. They are instead treated as the full amount in that first year for FFP purposes. If that interpretation is indeed true, there's absolutely no chance of us 'simply' activating the clause to guarantee his signing, and hence why Benfica have got negotiating power and they obviously know it too.

It's hardly like Boehly has come out on record and said he's blowing anyone out of the water for Mudryk. It's a usual sensationalist Twitter headline for clicks. I highly doubt Benfica would be looking at something like that and making huge boardroom decisions because some rag has put out that headline. They will have an idea already what they want going to the negotiation table and as we're not looking to pay the release clause in one lump, they know there's the opportunity to negotiate and try to get the best deal for themselves possible. They've always been tough negotiators, and I think this just needs a bit of time to see if an agreement can be reached. We're at the start of the window, Benfica could stretch this out if they choose, and may also be stalling a bit of time themselves to find a replacement.

A lot of these reports seem to be coming from Benfica's end and coincidentally after reported meetings last night where Rui Costa came to London. Not surprised at all, deals of this magnitude never go through completely smoothly. I do believe that a deal in principle has been agreed with regards to price but it's important to both clubs to get the right deal with regards to payment structure. Note that Arsenal are finding the exact same issues with Mudryk about a higher up front fee and now there's lots of rumours surrounding him which do seem to be coming from Shakhtar's end. If this falls through, my only hope is the club don't panic and buy an inferior option this window. Would much rather go back to the table in the summer or spend another 6 months scouting properly for alternatives than a panic buy that'll set us back even further. This season isn't far off a write off situation as it is, we don't need to be impacting next season with panic buys now.

He's gone down a couple of times now with Norwich hasn't he and still not made a move which probably suggests that his career has stagnated a little and maybe the Championship is his level. It might depend a little on availability, but if Fofana is back soon and Badiashile is signed, then I'd be inclined to give Chalobah a chance at right back when Reece is out injured. At some point this spending will need to be reigned in and we still have multiple positions that need improving. I know it's a bit of a weird one given how good Reece is in that right back position and the regularity of games he's missed in the last 12-18 months but I'm still of the feeling that backup and squad players should come from within unless it's a cheap young prospect being signed up or a deal for someone on the cheap with an expiring contract, which allows transfer budgets to be spent correctly getting a couple of players in each summer who genuinely impact that starting XI in a positive manner.

Someone mentioned the other day that Leao is looking more likely to resign with Milan now. With that in mind, it probably makes sense that Chelsea may have made contact with Shakhtar to gauge where their negotiations are with Arsenal as an alternative option. It's not out of the picture that negotiations break down with Arsenal and they end up looking elsewhere. If Shakhtar are using that to drive the bargain with Arsenal then so be it. I don't think Boehly particularly cares about that to be honest, it's Arsenal's problem.

Hazard esque?

What is this Mudryk actually like? I know Shakhtar are tough negotiators but that is a huge fee - he's only played 45 games for Shakhtar!

In the case though of Klopp and Pep, there is a huge difference between them building sides that go deep in multiple competitions every season compared to what we have had in this same period which was lighting in a bottle first year with Conte and first 6 months with Tuchel and besides that a squad capable on their day but inconsistent and ultimately not good enough for the full season grind. It might well be that Potter is the facilitator for someone better to take us on, in a similar way to what happened with Ranieri and Mourinho and to a lesser extent Lampard and Tuchel. But either way, we cannot continue to just sack managers left, right and centre and allow a number of squad players to get fresh starts every 6-12 months. It's the reason why we're left now with such an unbalanced squad with a number of players that are good on their day, but not really good enough for where we should want to be.

Yep, it would mean then trying to get a genuine DM in the summer - Rice, Caicedo, someone of that ilk. I would probably prefer someone that is more physically imposing alongside him in the middle.

I look at him in a similar mould to Bellingham, and the likes of Lampard and Gerrard before him in regards to position and the need for freedom. You could play him defensively and he'll do a job but it limits his full skillset. When you're talking about a £100m+ player, you want to really be building the team to ensure you maximise him. For me, that means long term he plays alongside a more defensive minded player that allows him to play his game freely as a box to box type.

I'm not comparing Potter in any way, but it's well documented that Fergie was a game or two away from the sack at United and it took him 3 or 4 years to win a trophy and 5 or 6 years to win the league. This being one of the most iconic managers in history, certainly on these shores. The biggest problem is Chelsea fans are used to immediate now, and it can't be helped. I started supporting Chelsea in the early 90's when we were crap, but it can be hard to revert back to a calmer, more patient mindset when we've enjoyed 20 years of unparalleled success in the most chaotic manner. Whilst the new ownership clearly have Chelsea as an investment, I don't for one minute see them viewing us as a cash cow. With what they have invested, it is vital that they build on the club's stature in football and grow it further. In order to do that, we still must be one of the biggest clubs competing for trophies. I am pleased with some of the steps they have made with regards to some of the non football appointments, they do look like they're identifying weaknesses in the chain at the club and trying to bring people in that will benefit the long term future of this club. It is likely to be a slower process than the boom and bust nature of Roman's reign, but when it isn't just simply a hobby, decisions being made become more critical and analysed in more detail, and hopefully it means we're putting in place things to ensure a lot of those decisions in the future are made better than a number of bad decisions made in Roman's reign.

I think there's a bit of recency bias with Arteta now. Besides that FA Cup win early on, for about 18 months they played some real poor stuff. They didn't create a lot, looked vulnerable at the back despite playing in a more defensive way, would be regularly dominated possession wise. Given Arsenal in recent times have always been able to fall back on their style of play being easy on the eye under Wenger, I can remember a lot of people complaining about what Arteta was doing. There were times he genuinely looked clueless early on. I think the least Potter does deserve is the opportunity to fix some of the issues in this squad and what does give me some confidence that it can be turned around is that seemingly his priority is in central midfield which should have been a priority position for the last couple of years.

Over a bank holiday weekend and one which both clubs played, if it's going to happen I'd expect things to ramp up again from now through the remainder of the week. Think this week is key. If it drags, I could see us backing away. Benfica still hold the cards if we're trying to negotiate a deal as opposed to exercising the release clause.

I think in this situation it will require a rough patch like this to be navigated with the club still backing Potter. Arsenal went through the same with Arteta when they were clamouring for him to be sacked, but the time and backing that he was given will almost certainly have given him the confidence to truly enforce his methods and ideas on the side or else they'd be shipped off. He was able to weed out the players that he didn't want or that he felt didn't suit him regardless of their status at the club. It may require similar circumstances here for us. It's easy to point out that there are new owners and they want to show a longer term plan but ultimately this is a club that for the last 20 years has done things with only short term in mind, and a fanbase that is used to this. Add to that the ownership showed quite a ruthless streak themselves by sacking Tuchel so early and I could understand if there are some doubts in Potter's mind just to how much 'time' he'll be afforded, and that could very easily impact his own decisions he makes in a long term vs short term approach.

Unless we nosedived into a relegation scrap, there's no chance he is being sacked this season. Given the investment made for him and the vibes they have given out that this is very much now a longer term approach to things compared to the boom and bust nature of the Abramovich years, they will not bite the bullet anytime soon. Personally I think he'll be given this season and next in order to show and prove that the club is on an upward trajectory. In fairness the squad has needed a balanced approach to a rebuild for years, and at the very least the players we have been looking to move for fill me with confidence that this could be done over time. The issue is us fans haven't been used to a project like this for 20+ years and that's what Potter is fighting I think more than anything.

Don't forget during this period we also won the Europa League, Champions League, Super Cup and Club World Cup too. And in many of those cup runs they involved turning over all the other big 6 on a number of occasions. The point remains that we showed more than enough times we were capable of beating all the other 'big' sides and competing with them, but have failed to show that strength and consistency to compete week after week in the league.