I'd just like to point out that the wiki entry that states Kolarov cost £19m is referenced with a link to a BBC article that suggests the widely accepted fee of £16m, why the wiki page says £19m is anyones guess x
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/m/man_city/8829949.stm
Obvious WUM or not by Mourinho you just have to laugh at the irony of anyone involved with Chelsea Football Club in the Abramovich era now complaining to the media about wages other clubs are paying to their players.
-----------------------------
Well whether you like it or not we are now in an FFP era where the rules have changed and you can't just spend what you like on players.
Also I don't remember Chelsea ever paying a £30 million transfer fee as well as £100,000 per week wages for an 18 year old.
Very few players we've ever signed for Chelsea have fetched that kind of huge combined transfer and wages. Let alone an 18 year old.
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 1 minute ago
Obvious WUM or not by Mourinho you just have to laugh at the irony of anyone involved with Chelsea Football Club in the Abramovich era now complaining to the media about wages other clubs are paying to their players.
-----------------------------
Well whether you like it or not we are now in an FFP era where the rules have changed and you can't just spend what you like on players.
Also I don't remember Chelsea ever paying a £30 million transfer fee as well as £100,000 per week wages for an 18 year old.
Very few players we've ever signed for Chelsea have fetched that kind of huge combined transfer and wages. Let alone an 18 year old.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to point out the outlay was 27m.
Now, i echo your sentiments and even endorse your perspective but let us not distort facts.
comment by Darkphoenix (U11503)
posted 2 hours, 14 minutes ago
comment byHe's French, He's Flash...(U9335)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Darkphoenix (U11503)
posted 4 minutes ago
What makes people think that Luke Shaw being here for 10 years plus factual?
I assume some people can see into the future...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably why people precede it with the word 'if.'
What about those who say he is too expensive? Also fortune tellers?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, 'if' he doesn't stay for 10 years, will he be an 'expensive' buy that the club was naive to pay?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess that depends how well he does in the meantime..
The fact of the matter is that we cant offer Champions League football and will have to overpay every player we sign until we can
It was an undisclosed fee in the region of £30m. That is what was reported. £27m is the low end of the estimates.
comment by The_Red_Cognoscente (U9741)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 1 minute ago
Obvious WUM or not by Mourinho you just have to laugh at the irony of anyone involved with Chelsea Football Club in the Abramovich era now complaining to the media about wages other clubs are paying to their players.
-----------------------------
Well whether you like it or not we are now in an FFP era where the rules have changed and you can't just spend what you like on players.
Also I don't remember Chelsea ever paying a £30 million transfer fee as well as £100,000 per week wages for an 18 year old.
Very few players we've ever signed for Chelsea have fetched that kind of huge combined transfer and wages. Let alone an 18 year old.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to point out the outlay was 27m.
Now, i echo your sentiments and even endorse your perspective but let us not distort facts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
£27 million then. I stand corrected
comment by He's French, He's Flash... (U9335)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Darkphoenix (U11503)
posted 2 hours, 14 minutes ago
comment byHe's French, He's Flash...(U9335)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Darkphoenix (U11503)
posted 4 minutes ago
What makes people think that Luke Shaw being here for 10 years plus factual?
I assume some people can see into the future...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably why people precede it with the word 'if.'
What about those who say he is too expensive? Also fortune tellers?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, 'if' he doesn't stay for 10 years, will he be an 'expensive' buy that the club was naive to pay?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess that depends how well he does in the meantime..
The fact of the matter is that we cant offer Champions League football and will have to overpay every player we sign until we can
----------------------------------------------------------------------
French, i said this before:
If the canards are to be believed...Shaw is a self-proclaimed Chelsea fan, he turns down his 'dream club' because they demur to his insane wage demands, am i the only who finds that to be dictionary definition of a 'mercenary'.
It does not bode well, does it?
If the canards are to be believed...Shaw is a self-proclaimed Chelsea fan, he turns down his 'dream club' because they demur to his insane wage demands, am i the only who finds that to be dictionary definition of a 'mercenary'.
It does not bode well, does it?
------------------------
In Shaw's defence all footballers are essentially merceneraries though.
Either way if Shaw really wanted to go to Chelsea he should have been far more realistic about his wage demands. Even at £50,000 per week I would have found that excessive.
What was he on at Southampton?
TRC,
10 years ago I would have wholeheartedly agreed. However, since then I have seen City and Chelsea flourish with mercenary squads. Times are changing and we must accept that the days of Neville dry humping the badge in front of the Kop are over.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
''Times are changing and we must accept that the days of Neville dry humping the badge in front of the Kop are over.''
Oh the halcyon days of yore
comment by The_Red_Cognoscente (U9741)
posted 1 minute ago
''Times are changing and we must accept that the days of Neville dry humping the badge in front of the Kop are over.''
Oh the halcyon days of yore
----------------------------------------------------------------------
We live in a world where Adidas are paying £750 million to make our kit.
When that kinda thing happens, paying a bit over the top for Shaw is fine.
Shaw was he the preferred left back in our poor world cup squad ?
No, is he a banker to make at the very top level , 70% i n favour 30% unknown.
We live In a world where LFC would have to sell two thirds of their club to buy Real Madrid's front four.
comment by ifarka,BOYCOTT QATAR22/8-STARDBLATTER (U8182)
posted 3 minutes ago
Shaw was he the preferred left back in our poor world cup squad ?
No, is he a banker to make at the very top level , 70% i n favour 30% unknown.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They say that 84.7% of percentages you read online aremade up..
I'd like to point out the outlay was 27m.
-----------------------
Have you seen the contract?
For transfer fees I like this site as they do a lot of research and check financials of both selling and buying clubs. Far more reliable than you just guessing.
Anyway, they have 33m
http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/luke-shaw/profil/spieler/183288
Shaw will be an essential part of the team and a nailed on starter.
Chelsea have easily spent more (on both fees and wages) on young players to then loan them out. We needed a lb and paid way over the odds but at least he will contribute to the first team
Why are fans of clubs who've plurged hundreds of millions on shìte so obsessed with what we've paid for a player?
Chelsea fans particularly have nothing to say. Their club is paying a teenager who has never played for the first team in a competitive game £2m a year
The Utd tradition was a lie
Friends ooooh... thumb smiley friends..
I think you lot are doing your own legs in a bit. Well Woodward is. He keeps telling everybody how much money you have to spend. That is terrible business management. I bet Shaw's agent's eyes lit up when you put the bid in.
He probably went in and asked for £200k a week. Knew you would start at £50k. Met somewhere in the middle.
comment by He's French, He's Flash... (U9335)
posted 44 minutes ago
Chelsea fans particularly have nothing to say. Their club is paying a teenager who has never played for the first team in a competitive game £2m a year
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you've seen Chelsea u21 players contracts have you?
Chelsea have easily spent more (on both fees and wages) on young players to then loan them out.
--------------------
Which player of his age have we done this with?
Sign in if you want to comment
Would Shaw Kill Manchester United?
Page 3 of 5
posted on 26/7/14
I'd just like to point out that the wiki entry that states Kolarov cost £19m is referenced with a link to a BBC article that suggests the widely accepted fee of £16m, why the wiki page says £19m is anyones guess x
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/m/man_city/8829949.stm
posted on 26/7/14
Obvious WUM or not by Mourinho you just have to laugh at the irony of anyone involved with Chelsea Football Club in the Abramovich era now complaining to the media about wages other clubs are paying to their players.
-----------------------------
Well whether you like it or not we are now in an FFP era where the rules have changed and you can't just spend what you like on players.
Also I don't remember Chelsea ever paying a £30 million transfer fee as well as £100,000 per week wages for an 18 year old.
Very few players we've ever signed for Chelsea have fetched that kind of huge combined transfer and wages. Let alone an 18 year old.
posted on 26/7/14
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 1 minute ago
Obvious WUM or not by Mourinho you just have to laugh at the irony of anyone involved with Chelsea Football Club in the Abramovich era now complaining to the media about wages other clubs are paying to their players.
-----------------------------
Well whether you like it or not we are now in an FFP era where the rules have changed and you can't just spend what you like on players.
Also I don't remember Chelsea ever paying a £30 million transfer fee as well as £100,000 per week wages for an 18 year old.
Very few players we've ever signed for Chelsea have fetched that kind of huge combined transfer and wages. Let alone an 18 year old.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to point out the outlay was 27m.
Now, i echo your sentiments and even endorse your perspective but let us not distort facts.
posted on 26/7/14
comment by Darkphoenix (U11503)
posted 2 hours, 14 minutes ago
comment byHe's French, He's Flash...(U9335)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Darkphoenix (U11503)
posted 4 minutes ago
What makes people think that Luke Shaw being here for 10 years plus factual?
I assume some people can see into the future...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably why people precede it with the word 'if.'
What about those who say he is too expensive? Also fortune tellers?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, 'if' he doesn't stay for 10 years, will he be an 'expensive' buy that the club was naive to pay?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess that depends how well he does in the meantime..
The fact of the matter is that we cant offer Champions League football and will have to overpay every player we sign until we can
posted on 26/7/14
It was an undisclosed fee in the region of £30m. That is what was reported. £27m is the low end of the estimates.
posted on 26/7/14
comment by The_Red_Cognoscente (U9741)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Superb (U6486)
posted 1 minute ago
Obvious WUM or not by Mourinho you just have to laugh at the irony of anyone involved with Chelsea Football Club in the Abramovich era now complaining to the media about wages other clubs are paying to their players.
-----------------------------
Well whether you like it or not we are now in an FFP era where the rules have changed and you can't just spend what you like on players.
Also I don't remember Chelsea ever paying a £30 million transfer fee as well as £100,000 per week wages for an 18 year old.
Very few players we've ever signed for Chelsea have fetched that kind of huge combined transfer and wages. Let alone an 18 year old.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd like to point out the outlay was 27m.
Now, i echo your sentiments and even endorse your perspective but let us not distort facts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
£27 million then. I stand corrected
posted on 26/7/14
comment by He's French, He's Flash... (U9335)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Darkphoenix (U11503)
posted 2 hours, 14 minutes ago
comment byHe's French, He's Flash...(U9335)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Darkphoenix (U11503)
posted 4 minutes ago
What makes people think that Luke Shaw being here for 10 years plus factual?
I assume some people can see into the future...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably why people precede it with the word 'if.'
What about those who say he is too expensive? Also fortune tellers?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So, 'if' he doesn't stay for 10 years, will he be an 'expensive' buy that the club was naive to pay?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I guess that depends how well he does in the meantime..
The fact of the matter is that we cant offer Champions League football and will have to overpay every player we sign until we can
----------------------------------------------------------------------
French, i said this before:
If the canards are to be believed...Shaw is a self-proclaimed Chelsea fan, he turns down his 'dream club' because they demur to his insane wage demands, am i the only who finds that to be dictionary definition of a 'mercenary'.
It does not bode well, does it?
posted on 26/7/14
If the canards are to be believed...Shaw is a self-proclaimed Chelsea fan, he turns down his 'dream club' because they demur to his insane wage demands, am i the only who finds that to be dictionary definition of a 'mercenary'.
It does not bode well, does it?
------------------------
In Shaw's defence all footballers are essentially merceneraries though.
Either way if Shaw really wanted to go to Chelsea he should have been far more realistic about his wage demands. Even at £50,000 per week I would have found that excessive.
What was he on at Southampton?
posted on 26/7/14
TRC,
10 years ago I would have wholeheartedly agreed. However, since then I have seen City and Chelsea flourish with mercenary squads. Times are changing and we must accept that the days of Neville dry humping the badge in front of the Kop are over.
posted on 26/7/14
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 26/7/14
''Times are changing and we must accept that the days of Neville dry humping the badge in front of the Kop are over.''
Oh the halcyon days of yore
posted on 26/7/14
comment by The_Red_Cognoscente (U9741)
posted 1 minute ago
''Times are changing and we must accept that the days of Neville dry humping the badge in front of the Kop are over.''
Oh the halcyon days of yore
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 26/7/14
We live in a world where Adidas are paying £750 million to make our kit.
When that kinda thing happens, paying a bit over the top for Shaw is fine.
posted on 26/7/14
Shaw was he the preferred left back in our poor world cup squad ?
No, is he a banker to make at the very top level , 70% i n favour 30% unknown.
posted on 26/7/14
We live In a world where LFC would have to sell two thirds of their club to buy Real Madrid's front four.
posted on 26/7/14
comment by ifarka,BOYCOTT QATAR22/8-STARDBLATTER (U8182)
posted 3 minutes ago
Shaw was he the preferred left back in our poor world cup squad ?
No, is he a banker to make at the very top level , 70% i n favour 30% unknown.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They say that 84.7% of percentages you read online aremade up..
posted on 26/7/14
I'd like to point out the outlay was 27m.
-----------------------
Have you seen the contract?
For transfer fees I like this site as they do a lot of research and check financials of both selling and buying clubs. Far more reliable than you just guessing.
Anyway, they have 33m
http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/luke-shaw/profil/spieler/183288
posted on 26/7/14
Shaw will be an essential part of the team and a nailed on starter.
Chelsea have easily spent more (on both fees and wages) on young players to then loan them out. We needed a lb and paid way over the odds but at least he will contribute to the first team
posted on 26/7/14
Why are fans of clubs who've plurged hundreds of millions on shìte so obsessed with what we've paid for a player?
posted on 26/7/14
Chelsea fans particularly have nothing to say. Their club is paying a teenager who has never played for the first team in a competitive game £2m a year
posted on 26/7/14
The Utd tradition was a lie
posted on 26/7/14
Friends ooooh... thumb smiley friends..
posted on 26/7/14
I think you lot are doing your own legs in a bit. Well Woodward is. He keeps telling everybody how much money you have to spend. That is terrible business management. I bet Shaw's agent's eyes lit up when you put the bid in.
He probably went in and asked for £200k a week. Knew you would start at £50k. Met somewhere in the middle.
posted on 26/7/14
comment by He's French, He's Flash... (U9335)
posted 44 minutes ago
Chelsea fans particularly have nothing to say. Their club is paying a teenager who has never played for the first team in a competitive game £2m a year
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So you've seen Chelsea u21 players contracts have you?
posted on 26/7/14
Chelsea have easily spent more (on both fees and wages) on young players to then loan them out.
--------------------
Which player of his age have we done this with?
Page 3 of 5