Transfer: 2024 Summer Transfer Window - Open Window Discussion

Paulie Gualtieri

R.I.P. Tony Sirico
May 18, 2016
12,483
3,147
It's clear that these teams are working together in an attempt to circumvent any PSR penalty. I can't say how they are doing it, don't have a deep enough understanding of the rules, but I hardly think all this is just a coincidence.
 
Last edited:

Blender

Registered User
Dec 2, 2009
51,705
45,512
It's clear that these teams are working together in an attempt to circumvent PSR. I can't say how they are doing it, don't have a deep enough understanding of the rules, but I hardly think all this is just a coincidence.
Purchases are amortized over the length of the deal, capped at 5 years now, while sales count immediately. I don't know the actual contract lengths here, but just for example:

Maatsen - £37.5m / 5 = £7.5m cost per season for Villa, Chelsea gets £37.5m credit.
Kellyman - £19m / 5 = £3.8m cost per season, Villa gets £19m credit.

The Kellyman sale covers Villa for the Maatsen purchase, while Chelsea only has a small cost on Kellyman for a huge benefit from Maatsen.

This only works with players that haven't been purchased recently for big money or home grown players of course. This can also back fire on you hard over time if you can't end up covering the transfer values in years 3/4/5 for example.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bluesfan94

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
37,687
11,068
Is there a fair market committee for transfers too? This shit is just so overtly rotten.
Juventus (and I think Barca) got sanctioned for the Arthur/Pjanic deal for this reason.

PL just run by morons. They probably thought this would incentivize keeping HG talent. It’s done the opposite
 

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
37,687
11,068
Purchases are amortized over the length of the deal, capped at 5 years now, while sales count immediately. I don't know the actual contract lengths here, but just for example:

Maatsen - £37.5m / 5 = £7.5m cost per season for Villa, Chelsea gets £37.5m credit.
Kellyman - £19m / 5 = £3.8m cost per season, Villa gets £19m credit.

The Kellyman sale covers Villa for the Maatsen purchase, while Chelsea only has a small cost on Kellyman for a huge benefit from Maatsen.

This only works with players that haven't been purchased recently for big money or home grown players of course. This can also back fire on you hard over time if you can't end up covering the transfer values in years 3/4/5 for example.
Yeah I mean it’s clear that these transfer values were dictated by nothing but a calculator.

What isn’t explained is how to justify a 20m transfer fee for Kellyman.
 

JPBolts

Registered User
Jun 21, 2019
1,177
329
it's been clear to me that since the PL voted to not increase the PSR loss limit & the Sawiris article interview came out, Villa have been calling other clubs in similar PSR situations offering "swap" deals that will help with balancing the books. It feels rotten but it's allowed in the rules -- and the sale of academy graduates is even rewarded through PSR
 

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
37,687
11,068
it's been clear to me that since the PL voted to not increase the PSR loss limit & the Sawiris article interview came out, Villa have been calling other clubs in similar PSR situations offering "swap" deals that will help with balancing the books. It feels rotten but it's allowed in the rules -- and the sale of academy graduates is even rewarded through PSR
Some good logical takes on this.







god forbid any kind of common sense here
 
  • Like
Reactions: JPBolts

hatterson

Registered User
Apr 12, 2010
35,753
13,256
North Tonawanda, NY
Yeah I mean it’s clear that these transfer values were dictated by nothing but a calculator.

What isn’t explained is how to justify a 20m transfer fee for Kellyman.
It wouldn’t surprise me if Chelsea inflated his fee a bit to convince Villa to do the deal now instead of waiting and/or Villa said they could only do the Maatsen deal if they got money for this guy.

Basically Villa said “hey we’ll buy him, but can only do it this year if you help us out on PSR buy buying this rando academy guy for 20m instead of 8-10”
 
  • Like
Reactions: JPBolts

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
37,687
11,068
It wouldn’t surprise me if Chelsea inflated his fee a bit to convince Villa to do the deal now instead of waiting and/or Villa said they could only do the Maatsen deal if they got money for this guy.

Basically Villa said “hey we’ll buy him, but can only do it this year if you help us out on PSR buy buying this rando academy guy for 20m instead of 8-10”
And how is that different from the Arthur/Pjanic deal?
 
  • Like
Reactions: JPBolts

Jersey Fresh

Video Et Taceo
Feb 23, 2004
26,452
9,421
T.A.
it's been clear to me that since the PL voted to not increase the PSR loss limit & the Sawiris article interview came out, Villa have been calling other clubs in similar PSR situations offering "swap" deals that will help with balancing the books. It feels rotten but it's allowed in the rules -- and the sale of academy graduates is even rewarded through PSR
When you say “allowed in the rules”, you mean swap deals. Under the table deals with clearly inflated transfer values is so nakedly contrary to the spirit of the game.

If the PL is going to enforce related party market values, they should do the same for player transfers.
 

cgf

FireBednarsSuccessor
Oct 15, 2010
60,858
19,509
w/ Renly's Peach



Like @luiginb said, a WTF transfer. He was hot for a bit in La Liga, but IMO he’s a mid-table player at best. I was surprised Bayern moved for him. Somebody in our keeper league took that bait too and went in for him, granted they didn’t pay much and FM ratings sometimes trump real life.



Wow, they paid that much?!? He was doing so well with Braga before the move, but thats about 50% more than I would have thought they’d pay. Had him in my keeper setup, but I think I dropped him (not sure if I was able to offload him in a trade).

Yeah, I wonder who was actually responsible for that one. Can't remember if Eberl had already taken charge or if that was still the previous regime.
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Blender

JPBolts

Registered User
Jun 21, 2019
1,177
329
And how is that different from the Arthur/Pjanic deal?
Weren't those fees like astronomically high? Like 60m or 70m?

When you say “allowed in the rules”, you mean swap deals. Under the table deals with clearly inflated transfer values is so nakedly contrary to the spirit of the game.

If the PL is going to enforce related party market values, they should do the same for player transfers.
yeah, though the counter argument is are they clearly inflated? Chelsea is spending a ton of money on youth players. Also, signed Chukwuemeka for a similar value in 2022 with a similar background.

I'd assume that the PL would have to vote to bring that in, and that might be difficult?
 

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
37,687
11,068
Weren't those fees like astronomically high? Like 60m or 70m?
This is all astronomically high
yeah, though the counter argument is are they clearly inflated? Chelsea is spending a ton of money on youth players. Also, signed Chukwuemeka for a similar value in 2022 with a similar background.

I'd assume that the PL would have to vote to bring that in, and that might be difficult?
Yes it’s clearly inflated. No one else is giving 20m for Kellyman. If we want to compare him to Chukwuemeka we can, but Chukwuemeka certainly has more on his CV than Kellyman. I’d say. MOre people knew who Chukwuemeka was at time of transfer too. The point is 19m was the number that needed to go in the financial calculator, and Kellyman was just who they agreed to staple it to. The player himself is kind of irrelevant here
 
  • Like
Reactions: luiginb

JPBolts

Registered User
Jun 21, 2019
1,177
329
I’m sure they’ll give him the minutes they earmarked Olise for, and not try to sign someone else this window to push him further down the depth chart
him and all the other young attackers that they have signed/will be signing. utter craze but who knows.

This is all astronomically high

Yes it’s clearly inflated. No one else is giving 20m for Kellyman. If we want to compare him to Chukwuemeka we can, but Chukwuemeka certainly has more on his CV than Kellyman. I’d say. MOre people knew who Chukwuemeka was at time of transfer too. The point is 19m was the number that needed to go in the financial calculator, and Kellyman was just who they agreed to staple it to. The player himself is kind of irrelevant here
I mean I'd say that 19m for our best youth academy prospect isn't the worst valuation -- he also would've gotten more minutes last season but had an injury that kept him out for a while. Chelsea signing Estêvão for close to double the fee (with a lot of addons to go on top of that) seems more inflated
 

Jersey Fresh

Video Et Taceo
Feb 23, 2004
26,452
9,421
T.A.
Weren't those fees like astronomically high? Like 60m or 70m?


yeah, though the counter argument is are they clearly inflated? Chelsea is spending a ton of money on youth players. Also, signed Chukwuemeka for a similar value in 2022 with a similar background.

I'd assume that the PL would have to vote to bring that in, and that might be difficult?
Definitely a fraught topic. Given both club's PSR situations and Sawiris comments, it's pretty difficult to try and make the case that this isn't a "scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" situation.

As for Chukwumeka, I don't think they're all that similar. If I have my timeline correct, Chukwumeka had just come off winning the u19 championship for England as their best player. And on top of that he had 10x the first-team experience Kellyman does. That still doesn't equate to a ton of actual match time, but that only highlights how raw a prospect this other kid is.
I'll take that bet.

There's got to be a dozen other u19 "wunderkids" Chelsea have already signed (and will yet sign) - what happens to them and on what basis does this kid with zero experience leapfrog them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: JPBolts and Savant

bleedblue1223

Registered User
Jan 21, 2011
52,262
15,355
People like us don't have a good read on what a prospect's value is. Compare this to Casadei too. It might end up being a bad deal, might be one that is mutually beneficial, but it's not a ridiculous fee.
 

Savant

HFBoards Sponsor
Sponsor
Oct 3, 2013
37,687
11,068
People like us don't have a good read on what a prospect's value is. Compare this to Casadei too. It might end up being a bad deal, might be one that is mutually beneficial, but it's not a ridiculous fee.
Oh piss off with this nonsense.

It is a ridiculous fee. It’s a calculator fee
 

Ad

Upcoming events

Ad

Ad