Chelsea’s contract policy starts to look foolish

[James 5,199]

Sport Witness last night had quotes from Italian sources discussing Olivier Giroud’s future. The Frenchman almost left Chelsea in January, and Frank Lampard openly admitted in press conferences that offers had been accepted for Giroud, with a move dependent on the Blues finding a replacement. They didn’t and the 32 year old was forced to […]

View the full article

[OneMoSalah 8,778]

The policy has been bullshit for years. Ever since Belletti, Ballack and Joe Cole didn't get offered more than 1 year contracts. It should be done on a case by case basis.

I dont see the gripe with Lampard not getting a 2 year deal tbf he was past it and what he did for City and New York would of hardly justified a 2 seasons deal here. The sentimental side yes it is maybe why people wanted him to get it but at what age 35 or 36? 2 year deal to most likely warm the bench? 

[Tomo 21,733]

4 minutes ago, OneMoSalah said:

The policy has been bullshit for years. Ever since Belletti, Ballack and Joe Cole didn't get offered more than 1 year contracts. It should be done on a case by case basis.

I dont see the gripe with Lampard not getting a 2 year deal tbf he was past it and what he did for City and New York would of hardly justified a 2 seasons deal here. The sentimental side yes it is maybe why people wanted him to get it but at what age 35 or 36? 2 year deal to most likely warm the bench? 

I don't agree and i'm very disapointed the board have scrapped it.

In your 30's you're vulnerable to a sharp decline pretty much at the drop of that, remember what happened to us in 10/11? We went from free scoring to being unable to create proper chances in next to no time, leaving us stuck with player's who were barely even PL quality anymore, and looking at how Ballack and especially Joe Cole fared after leaving keeping them would have only made the situation even worse.

Imagine if we gave in and gave Willy his three years and next year did a post double Malouda? He's frustrating at the best of times let alone post a decline.

[OneMoSalah 8,778]

1 hour ago, Tomo said:

I don't agree and i'm very disapointed the board have scrapped it.

In your 30's you're vulnerable to a sharp decline pretty much at the drop of that, remember what happened to us in 10/11? We went from free scoring to being unable to create proper chances in next to no time, leaving us stuck with player's who were barely even PL quality anymore, and looking at how Ballack and especially Joe Cole fared after leaving keeping them would have only made the situation even worse.

Imagine if we gave in and gave Willy his three years and next year did a post double Malouda? He's frustrating at the best of times let alone post a decline.

Perhaps but again on a case by case basis, its not the worst idea because not every player is finished at age 30, 31 or even 32. I mean there is a lot who do finish up and it is a fine line but for instance there are still players aged 30 or over who can do a job at a lot of clubs and even then its not as if they have to play every week either. 

 

I do see your point, the team did drop off and we did need to refresh the squad but again I dont think replacing Joe Cole with Youssi Benayoun was exactly a good move and while Ramires was signed again he lacked the versatility and top level experience that Ballack had although he had boundless energy and became a huge part of our team under Villas-Boas. Suppose some had to be the sacrifical lambs so to speak in terms of being moved on but wouldnt say they werent good enough to be offered 2 year deals for instance. We should have had an eye on changing personnel in some areas earlier too though or identifying eventual replacements, Drogba and Anelka were 30 plus, countless others too like Ferreira, Ash Cole, Lampard, Benayoun, Malouda... were all 30 or over. The planning or gradual way of overhauling the squad was poorly planned. I mean instead of Benayoun why didnt the club not sign somebody at a similar age to what Ramires was for instance who would of been able to have been able to contribute more long term? Why was Luiz not signed in the summer when Carvalho was sold etc? 

Regarding Willian and Malouda, yeah spot on. I hope Willian doesnt get the 3 year deal, even doing it on case by case basis he doesnt warrant 3 years. David Luiz didnt warrant 2 years either. 

[Superblue 6,370]

6 hours ago, Tomo said:

I don't agree and i'm very disapointed the board have scrapped it.

In your 30's you're vulnerable to a sharp decline pretty much at the drop of that, remember what happened to us in 10/11? We went from free scoring to being unable to create proper chances in next to no time, leaving us stuck with player's who were barely even PL quality anymore, and looking at how Ballack and especially Joe Cole fared after leaving keeping them would have only made the situation even worse.

Imagine if we gave in and gave Willy his three years and next year did a post double Malouda? He's frustrating at the best of times let alone post a decline.

I still think it needs to be a case by case basis rather than a blanket decision.

When you consider how well the likes of Terry, Ashley Cole, Lampard and Drogba all played well into their 30's, it would have been a monumental cock up if we'd lost any of these at the age of 30-31 because of a one year contract offer.

I agree that the vast majority of players will start to decline into their 30's but usually you can still get good mileage out of players at least in their early 30's and different positions usually do not see the decline so drastically (e.g. centre backs and strikers compared to full backs and wingers)

On the point of Willian I would agree however. Three years for a 31 year old who can be frustratingly inconsistent would be silly. If the player in question however was somebody like Hazard or one of the players mentioned above, in my opinion a 2 or 3 year contract should be considered if it ties them down to the club rather than letting them walk into another team on a free.

[NikkiCFC 7,952]

1 hour ago, Superblue_1986 said:

I still think it needs to be a case by case basis rather than a blanket decision.

Could not agree more with this. Nothing is black and white. 

For example one of the mistakes we made was Pirlo.

Pirlo appears similarly baffled by the way Chelsea conduct their transfer business. Carlo Ancelotti wanted to bring him to Stamford Bridge in 2009, but the club's rules on signing older players scuppered a deal.

He insists, however, that he has no regrets about not playing in the Premier League, having also rejected the opportunity to join Manchester City in 2011.

'I had the chance to come (to the Premier League) with (Carlo) Ancelotti to Chelsea and with Manchester City when I went to Juventus,' he says.

'Chelsea said that I was very old - 30 years old! And the other time I preferred to come to Juventus.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7064089/ANDREA-PIRLO-EXCLUSIVE-Footballs-coolest-man-Chelsea-Cristiano-Ronaldo.html

 

30 years old Pirlo? Would happily give him 4 or 5 years contract! But we did not.

Now we have Giroud and Willian situation. Ofc and we all agree that Willian does not deserve even 2 years contract... But if we do not renew Giroud over we offer him one year and he wants two that would be another mistake by the club.

 

Also at this point I would rather give two or three years contract to someone like Cavani or Cristiano to be our next striker than sign someone like Dembele for +50m...

 

[Vesper 28,818]

3 hours ago, NikkiCFC said:

Could not agree more with this. Nothing is black and white. 

For example one of the mistakes we made was Pirlo.

Pirlo appears similarly baffled by the way Chelsea conduct their transfer business. Carlo Ancelotti wanted to bring him to Stamford Bridge in 2009, but the club's rules on signing older players scuppered a deal.

He insists, however, that he has no regrets about not playing in the Premier League, having also rejected the opportunity to join Manchester City in 2011.

'I had the chance to come (to the Premier League) with (Carlo) Ancelotti to Chelsea and with Manchester City when I went to Juventus,' he says.

'Chelsea said that I was very old - 30 years old! And the other time I preferred to come to Juventus.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7064089/ANDREA-PIRLO-EXCLUSIVE-Footballs-coolest-man-Chelsea-Cristiano-Ronaldo.html

 

30 years old Pirlo? Would happily give him 4 or 5 years contract! But we did not.

Now we have Giroud and Willian situation. Ofc and we all agree that Willian does not deserve even 2 years contract... But if we do not renew Giroud over we offer him one year and he wants two that would be another mistake by the club.

 

Also at this point I would rather give two or three years contract to someone like Cavani or Cristiano to be our next striker than sign someone like Dembele for +50m...

 

Pirlo's SIX major years after we refused to sign him

The first 2 are with AC Milan

48 assists as well, the majority with Juve, including 25 in 2 seasons  (2011-2013)

Honours in that period

Juventus

Serie A: 2011–12, 2012–13, 2013–14, 2014–15
Coppa Italia: 2014–15
Supercoppa Italiana: 2012, 2013

Italy

UEFA European Championship runner-up: 2012
FIFA Confederations Cup third place: 2013

Individual

FFHS World's Best Playmaker: 4th place 2012, 3rd place 2013, 3rd place 2015

FIFA FIFPro World XI 3rd team: 2013, 2014

Ballon d'Or: 2012 (7th place)

ESM Team of the Year: 2011–12
Pallone d'Argento: 2011–12
Pallone Azzurro: 2012
Guerin d'Oro: 2012
UEFA European Championship Teams of the Tournament: 2012
UEFA Best Player in Europe Award: 2012 (4th place), 2015 (7th place)
UEFA Team of the Year: 2012
2011–12 Serie A Top Assist Provider
Serie A Team of the Year: 2011–12, 2012–13, 2013–14,2014–15
Serie A Midfielder of the Year: 2012
Serie A Footballer of the Year: 2012, 2013, 2014
Premio Nazionale Carriera Esemplare "Gaetano Scirea": 2013
FIFA Confederations Cup Team of the Tournament: 2013
FIFA Confederations Cup Castrol Index Top XI: 2013
UEFA Europa League Team of the Season: 2013–14
UEFA Champions League Team of the Season: 2014–15

 

[Superblue 6,370]

11 hours ago, NikkiCFC said:

Could not agree more with this. Nothing is black and white. 

For example one of the mistakes we made was Pirlo.

Pirlo appears similarly baffled by the way Chelsea conduct their transfer business. Carlo Ancelotti wanted to bring him to Stamford Bridge in 2009, but the club's rules on signing older players scuppered a deal.

He insists, however, that he has no regrets about not playing in the Premier League, having also rejected the opportunity to join Manchester City in 2011.

'I had the chance to come (to the Premier League) with (Carlo) Ancelotti to Chelsea and with Manchester City when I went to Juventus,' he says.

'Chelsea said that I was very old - 30 years old! And the other time I preferred to come to Juventus.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-7064089/ANDREA-PIRLO-EXCLUSIVE-Footballs-coolest-man-Chelsea-Cristiano-Ronaldo.html

 

30 years old Pirlo? Would happily give him 4 or 5 years contract! But we did not.

Now we have Giroud and Willian situation. Ofc and we all agree that Willian does not deserve even 2 years contract... But if we do not renew Giroud over we offer him one year and he wants two that would be another mistake by the club.

 

Also at this point I would rather give two or three years contract to someone like Cavani or Cristiano to be our next striker than sign someone like Dembele for +50m...

 

I can remember us being linked with Pirlo and the talk was a swap deal involving Essien.

At the time I thought it looked the most ridiculous deal I'd ever seen. In hindsight it could have been an incredible deal for Chelsea as that year was pretty much the end for Essien at the top level.

[Tomo 21,733]

15 hours ago, Superblue_1986 said:

I still think it needs to be a case by case basis rather than a blanket decision.

When you consider how well the likes of Terry, Ashley Cole, Lampard and Drogba all played well into their 30's, it would have been a monumental cock up if we'd lost any of these at the age of 30-31 because of a one year contract offer.

I agree that the vast majority of players will start to decline into their 30's but usually you can still get good mileage out of players at least in their early 30's and different positions usually do not see the decline so drastically (e.g. centre backs and strikers compared to full backs and wingers)

On the point of Willian I would agree however. Three years for a 31 year old who can be frustratingly inconsistent would be silly. If the player in question however was somebody like Hazard or one of the players mentioned above, in my opinion a 2 or 3 year contract should be considered if it ties them down to the club rather than letting them walk into another team on a free.

I'm fairness most of our long term players sign new deals at 27-28 so this situation only really comes to the fore at 32-33 anyway.

There would have been emotional torment saying goodbye to three legends at once but honestly from a footballing perspective if Cole, Lampard and Drogba left in 2011 I wouldn't have been that fussed at the time and the only reason I'm glad it didn't happen in hindsight is Munich (which we could have never guessed or factored in at that point as we all made peace that the chance had seemingly gone) and to an extent Frank getting the record. I thought they were well past their best at that point and I wouldn't have wanted multiple year contracts handed out to them either.

It's hard to work on case by case aswell, the case in point would be the sheer difference between our players in 09/10 and 10/11. After the double it would have looked a good idea to give most of that team good deals but it would have quickly turned into a disastrous decision.

Ofcourse they'll be exceptions where it would have worked out, like with Pirlo, but in general I think risk outweighs reward, especially from 32 onwards.

[Superblue 6,370]

23 minutes ago, Tomo said:

I'm fairness most of our long term players sign new deals at 27-28 so this situation only really comes to the fore at 32-33 anyway.

There would have been emotional torment saying goodbye to three legends at once but honestly from a footballing perspective if Cole, Lampard and Drogba left in 2011 I wouldn't have been that fussed at the time and the only reason I'm glad it didn't happen in hindsight is Munich (which we could have never guessed or factored in at that point as we all made peace that the chance had seemingly gone) and to an extent Frank getting the record. I thought they were well past their best at that point and I wouldn't have wanted multiple year contracts handed out to them either.

It's hard to work on case by case aswell, the case in point would be the sheer difference between our players in 09/10 and 10/11. After the double it would have looked a good idea to give most of that team good deals but it would have quickly turned into a disastrous decision.

Ofcourse they'll be exceptions where it would have worked out, like with Pirlo, but in general I think risk outweighs reward, especially from 32 onwards.

I understand what you're saying and I think when players do reach 32-33 it would have to be a very special case or perhaps a goalkeeper to command longer than a year contract. However I'm sure there have been a number of situations where the club in the past few years have extended a 28 or 29 year old to a new 3, 4, 5 year contract. In that situation, is it really much different to a player who is 30 wanting a 2 or 3 year contract?

I think the players that we currently have in that position such as Willian, Pedro and Giroud the club are probably right with what they are doing. Maybe Willian could get a 2 year contract if the club were really loathe to let him leave for free, but in no way a 3 year deal.

However look at some of the top players in world football on the wrong side of 30, especially strikers. If the club had Aguero or Suarez or Lewandowski at the club, would you be happy to see them leave for free and move to a rival big club either domestically or in europe because we would only sanction a one year contract instead of perhaps a 2 or 3 year deal?