• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Cheatski are still scum

Lilbaz said:
Their wages and amortisation are currently at 76% of turnover (not including wages for the coaching staff or agents fees). Sacking potter would put them at 87%. They'd have to sell players in the summer to meet the new spending rules. (Although you are allowed a €60m loss over 3 years).
Click to expand...
Selling Mount and Gallagher would help massively....zero cost, all profit.
 
LemonadeMoney said:
Pays well, lots of young talent, chairman will probably buy whoever you want, the only way is up. Is there a better job on paper? I'm sure Poch would never go to Arsenal, but where does the loyalty stop, not sure I've ever heard him say he wouldn't go to Chelsea?
Click to expand...
It's the best job you can land if you keep your focus on the payout.
 
Raziel said:
Of course it makes sense sacking Potter, part of it is a message on what is acceptable.

Sack him, get the manager you want, have him work with the players for the rest of season with zero pressure, pick who stays, who goes (lots have to) and who you need for summer
Click to expand...

It would never be pressure free though. New man comes in and loses a few between now and the summer and the pressure would already be there to replace him (This is Chelsea!). If I was a manager I'd wait rather than join the circus now with no real upside
 
dingdongo said:
It would never be pressure free though. New man comes in and loses a few between now and the summer and the pressure would already be there to replace him (This is Chelsea!). If I was a manager I'd wait rather than join the circus now with no real upside
Click to expand...

Fair point, but you would at least get some games to try to decipher which of the 200 players you want to keep by actually seeing them play in meaningful competition.
 
Raziel said:
get the manager you want,
Click to expand...
Potter WAS the manager they wanted. He's already there. There aren't many available now, so you could end up with someone far down your list. Also, they'll have huge problems getting rid of players they've signed on huge wages and forever contracts. It won't be 'just choose who to stay and who will go'.
 
Last edited:
DeanoAustin said:
F**king hate that shower with an absolute passion but feel for Potter. He has the look of a man whose reputation is evaporating in front of his eyes and there is absolutely nothing he can do to stop it.

Wrong job for him but he couldn't turn it down really. I hope he gets to rebuild his career somewhere else at a decent level. There are question marks over him for sure but, while he was never the genius he was portrayed as, he also isn't as clueless as he's gonna be portrayed when this comes to an end.
Click to expand...

Pretty much my thoughts as well, when some of our fans were speculating about him being our new manager not so long ago i was always dubious about it. He did well at Brighton for sure but i really would not have wanted him here.
 
Raziel said:
Fair point, but you would at least get some games to try to decipher which of the 200 players you want to keep by actually seeing them play in meaningful competition.
Click to expand...

Yeah if I was Zidane or whoever they wanted I would just agree for the summer, watch all the games and tell them who I wanted rid of at the end of season lol
 
Kandi1977 said:
Potter WAS the manager they wanted. He's already there. There aren't many available now, so you could end up with someone far down your list. Also, they'll have huge problems getting rid of players they've signed on huge wages and forever contracts. It won't be 'just choose who to stay and who will go'.
Click to expand...

Then they are bigger idiots than they look.

If your plan was to spend £600M from the start, how the fudge do you end up with Potter being your #1?
 
Kandi1977 said:
Because he's a good coach and has been very successful in building teams?
He was the preferred choice of most in here to replace Mourinho.
Click to expand...

You give £600M to proven product, not a learn on the job, take a risk.

And for the same £50M commitment they could have given anyone a £20M x 30 month contract.

Very different from Spurs, where you are probably have £100M-£150M/yr with expectation to develop 1 or 2 promising young players.
 
Potter is in a unwinnable position, he get loads of players, he never wanted, and told to make them a team, if he turns it around it cause they spent millions on talent, if he cant cause they are the wrong players, he is out.
 
As I don't no anything about American sports.my question is this. Is this how owners in NFL & baseball operate simply buy all the talent they can get then tell the manager win the competition. If so it might explain some of the crazy spending
 
Last edited:
kb 1984 said:
As I don't no anything about American sports.my question is this. Is this how owners in NFL & baseball operate simply buy all the talent they can get then tell the manager win the competition. If so it might explain some of the crazy spending
Click to expand...

No but it seems to be how clearlake do business. They buy a company then invest in it buying other companies similar. Fatten it up then sell for a profit. Usually within around 5 years. Don't see how it would work for football though. Unless they think the values of those players will rise.

Even their stadium plans. It's going to take years.
 
kb 1984 said:
As I don't no anything about American sports.my question is this. Is this how owners in NFL & baseball operate simply buy all the talent they can get then tell the manager win the competition. If so it might explain some of the crazy spending
Click to expand...
Yes and no.
It's a bit easier in NFL for example, as the roles of each player is so specific. It's less about creating a working unit.
 
Kandi1977 said:
Yes and no.
It's a bit easier in NFL for example, as the roles of each player is so specific. It's less about creating a working unit.
Click to expand...
Often an NFL player will take up to a season to acclimatise to the style and tactics of a team but it's certainly true that if you want a linebacker, you just go and get the best one and expect them to fit.
 
kb 1984 said:
As I don't no anything about American sports.my question is this. Is this how owners in NFL & baseball operate simply buy all the talent they can get then tell the manager win the competition. If so it might explain some of the crazy spending
Click to expand...
no there are salary caps and drafts, the new york yankees and dallas cowboys are by far the richest teams in their respective sports but because of the rules in place, they cant just spend and they've won f@ck all due to mismanagement
 
Lilbaz said:
No but it seems to be how clearlake do business. They buy a company then invest in it buying other companies similar. Fatten it up then sell for a profit. Usually within around 5 years. Don't see how it would work for football though. Unless they think the values of those players will rise.

Even their stadium plans. It's going to take years.
Click to expand...

stadium permissions, building planbs and budgets are all they need to interest other buyers. especially if it is a multi event stadium as a market has already been established but in a less central/accessible part of london :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back