Of course we're a flawed side and yes, 4th is a tremendous achievement given the roster turnover we've had and still need. It's the idiotic shit talking that draws defense, usually coming from arsenal fans.
2023-2024 EPL Season
- Thread starter spintheblackcircle
- Start date
maclean
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2014
- 9,006
- 2,942
Oh, huh, when you said "idiotic shit talking" I automatically assumed you were talking about the ridiculous overhyping after Ange had a good five first games
spintheblackcircle
incoming!!!
- Mar 1, 2002
- 67,498
- 13,336
Reading back to see that people thought that at least 2 clubs would go 7-0 in their last 7 is funny, didn't even last a week.
spintheblackcircle
incoming!!!
- Mar 1, 2002
- 67,498
- 13,336
robertmac43
Forever 43!
- Mar 31, 2015
- 25,059
- 17,275
Chimaera
same ol' Caps
there's a lot of what could have been from this season.
It's not over... but City are where they are for a reason.
It's not over... but City are where they are for a reason.
maclean
Registered User
- Jan 4, 2014
- 9,006
- 2,942
Chimaera
same ol' Caps
spintheblackcircle
incoming!!!
- Mar 1, 2002
- 67,498
- 13,336
Alejandro Garnacho likes posts accusing Erik ten Hag of ‘throwing him under the bus’
Winger has been spoken to by Ten Hag after he liked posts calling out his manager for holding him up as the problem
www.telegraph.co.uk
Garnacho to Dortmund E4Alejandro Garnacho likes posts accusing Erik ten Hag of ‘throwing him under the bus’
Winger has been spoken to by Ten Hag after he liked posts calling out his manager for holding him up as the problem
bluesfan94
Registered User
robertmac43
Forever 43!
- Mar 31, 2015
- 25,059
- 17,275
Wee Baby Seamus
Yo, Goober, where's the meat?
chelsea secretly in a very very good position to finish 6th. and secretly undefeated since february 4. deeply annoyed at the burnley and sheffield draws, because we would be in sixth with a game in hand had we held onto those leads.
the lad simply does not f***ing care
and this is how excited he is about it
the lad simply does not f***ing care
Savant
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2013
- 38,367
- 11,469
That certainly checks out. Would be curious how much of that went to Caicedo’s agent
Chimaera
same ol' Caps
Savant
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2013
- 38,367
- 11,469
For sure. Not sure why everyone got so butt hurt when we said Chelsea was greasing their agents. That’s exactly what happened. I am on the right side of history for a lot of the stuff I got tarred and feathered for
KJS14
Registered User
- Jun 13, 2013
- 3,470
- 1,225
Well you're already mid victory lap after reading SEPH's unsourced post and seemingly without looking up any of the information.
Reported agent fee's from past summer/winter windows*:
- Chelsea £75.1M (18.8% of total transfer value)
- Man City £60.6M (27.3%)
- Man United £34.1M (19.7%)
- Liverpool £31.5M (21.4%)
- Arsenal £24.8M (12.4%)
I'm no expert on how agent fees are determined in transfers, but I would assume they are somewhat proportional to the total transfer value. Free transfers could throw that off. But Chelsea's % of agent fees to total transfer value isn't out of the ordinary.
Blender
Registered User
- Dec 2, 2009
- 52,698
- 46,482
Yea they are highest because they spent a stupid amount of money, the percentage paid doesn't seem out of line with what is often paid.
KJS14
Registered User
- Jun 13, 2013
- 3,470
- 1,225
Exactly. Doesn't seem out of the ordinary at all.
And the funny part is that Liverpool fans could just complain about Chelsea handing Caicedo and Lavia 8/7 year contracts on inflated wages, but they see a big number for agent fees with no context and their heads explode.
Savant
Registered User
- Oct 3, 2013
- 38,367
- 11,469
I don’t think that’s what it means at all. The percentage is just making a comparison I think; that’s how I’m reading that anyway
We do that too. And the big agent fees certainly mattered. No ones heads are exploding, those are not our problems.
KJS14
Registered User
- Jun 13, 2013
- 3,470
- 1,225
I calculated the percentages, which are comparing the % of agent fees to total transfer fees for each club. I don't understand what you're saying you think it means, but Chelsea having a lower % than Liverpool means that they proportionally spent less on agent fees. Which, as @Blender said, means that the reason their agent fees were higher in absolute $ value is because they spent a lot more on transfers overall.
bluesfan94
Registered User
Nothing like someone saying I told you so before putting in the legwork to understand if they're actually right. Chelsea paid more in gross agent fees because they paid a lot in gross transfer fees.
Not exactly a shock there. That's not greasing agents, that's common sense. In fact, given that Liverpool spent more on agent fees as a percentage of total transfer spend than Chelsea did, we can reasonably assume that Caicedo's agent would have gotten more from Liverpool.
Not exactly a shock there. That's not greasing agents, that's common sense. In fact, given that Liverpool spent more on agent fees as a percentage of total transfer spend than Chelsea did, we can reasonably assume that Caicedo's agent would have gotten more from Liverpool.
Ad
Latest posts
-
-
-
Rumor: Rumors & Proposals Thread | The Oilers Biggest Roster Need Is?
- Latest: Whoshattenkirkshoes
