For me, it was actually incredible watching Kelmann against Man City in the cup. Man City were struggling with him at times. He has come a very long way as a player. I'd be very excited to see him play for us this season. He clearly knows where the net is and how to get the ball in it. He is no where near the player we saw in him a few seasons back when he was playing for us. I have no doubt he'll be a contender for top scorer and can see him scoring more than 10 goals in the championship, at least. Don't forget, he's 23 and can still develop and improve as a player.
Don’t really care where he goes as long as he goes. Obviously it would be nice for him to succeed somewhere else instead but the club getting some wonga is by far the main thing. Still think he’ll end up at Arsenal FWIW.
I read this morning that Chelsea were shocked at Eze's 'package' demands. Also they want payments in longer installments than Palace are offering. Arsenal & Bayern Munich are the main contenders if he does go which is by no means certain...
Nah, if Kelman won't sign an extension and we can get north of £2 million for him, he's got to go. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see him play for us but, if he walked away on a free at the end of the season, I doubt his contribution for 2025/6 would have been worth £2million+. I don't like it but that's where we're at as a club: we can't afford to effectively pay someone over £2million, plus wages, for one season's work, no matter how good they might be. MIGHT be. And if the bidding gets significantly greater than £2million, my argument is even stronger.
You are probably right but in my heart I know he’ll bang in 20 leading to a decade of success ending with breaking the club’s goalscoring record.
The number of players we are linked with is ridiculous. We can’t make this bloated squad any bigger until we offload a few, surely.
I agree we seem to be signing loads (most I've never even heard of their club let alone the player). They are all about 14 though so can officially sit in the development squad. This said they will still be picking up wages.
Lots of them going into the development squad. Perhaps we're trying to do a Chelsea and create a "puppy farm".... some of the squad will make the grade and we can either keep them or sell them on.
But as Mick points out we still have to pay them, and they won’t be free, on proper professional contracts. We need to offload a few. Kelman, Kolli, Lloyd, whoever.
I don't know how the figures work out at Chelsea but they have a very large "development" contingent (whatever they call it) and they do do seem to approach it as a business. Presumably, on the credit side, you have the value of those who make it and are either sold or end up forming part of their first team squad. On the other (debit) side, you have some relatively low transfer costs and the wages for the youngsters and coaches. You'd need to be smart but it might work as a business model. Anyway, Nourry does seem to be keen on signing lots of young, promising players nowadays and it does seem an attractive strategy, rather than going to the expense of buying the ready-made article, something we can't generally afford. But, yes, we do have a lot of players in and around the first team squad, so that needs to be trimmed back, one way or another, to a manageable level.
Bored myself reading this. Bring back the days of clubs being run by the bloke who owns the local factory and a maximum wage you can barely live on. Under Financial Fair Play (FFP) rules, investment in youth development is generally excluded from the break-even calculation, meaning it doesn't count against a club's permitted losses. This exclusion is intended to encourage clubs to invest in their youth academies and promote the development of young players. Here's a more detailed explanation: FFP and Break-Even: FFP regulations, particularly the break-even requirement, aim to ensure clubs operate with financial sustainability. Exclusions from Break-Even: Certain expenditures are excluded from the break-even calculation, including investments in infrastructure, training facilities, and youth development. Promoting Youth Development: This exclusion is designed to incentivize clubs to invest in their youth academies and develop young players, rather than solely relying on expensive transfers. Potential for Imbalance: While intended to promote youth development, this exclusion can also create an advantage for larger clubs with established academies, potentially widening the gap between them and smaller clubs. Example: Chelsea's long-term contracts for young players, while seemingly exploiting a loophole, can be seen as a strategy to build a strong, sustainable team, even if it creates an advantage within FFP. Ongoing Debate: The impact of this exclusion on competitive balance in football remains a topic of discussion and debate, with some arguing it entrenches existing inequalities in the sport.
