Who cares what Roman wants?

RDM is a devotee of attacking footie if Roman didnt know. He just has common sense unlike AVB.

I am sure the break clause in the contract would allow RDM to leave with a nice sum of money when Roman goes for Guardiola.

Some guys might be in for a shocker when Guardiola appears. I dont trust any Barca manager till I see him take control of a different team.

I remember our running discussions about Frank Rijkaard on here in 2008. I dont see anyone calling for Rijkaard now.

Roman would soon learn that players play footie, not managers.

Jose Mourinho lost to Barca, Di matteo didn't lose to Barca huge diff.

Di Matteo won the trophy whle bayern was playing on their home turf in front of their own fans, Inter Milan didn't

Di matteo played 6 CL games won 4 drew 2 at some of the most difficult stadiums in Europe.

@dayokanu,
the level of patience you have shown here goes a long way to show how informed you are with what you are saying. look at anyone insulting ppl on this forum, you will agree with me that they have nothing to offer.
you have on several occasions backed ur arguments with valuable facts and figures.
let those calling for RDM's head tell us which of the fifa/uefa rules he broke.
the mourinho that man is praising here has been accused of been the originator of defensive football so am surprised that a manure fan is now talking good of mourinho.
in epl, match fixing is going on year in and year out especially with man u and howard webb romance but the compromised fa has decided to remain blind but a day will surely come.
leave these guys as they have nothing to offer apart from insults and unfortunately, their friend who happens to be the moderator sees nothing wrong in their insults.

The 1 year deal is just speculation it seems.
Still no word from the official website.

Oh dear PETR CECH drops another clanger..........

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcukBvWNkDI

move to the gyal them. . .

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNwDqJBJSY8&feature=g-vrec

This is what its about!!. I still get high on this win. . .

Garden of Eden . . .


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAlgxvRYAow&feature=plcp

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RdbNJ9AQhi8&feature=related

bluediva thinks Hulk is selfish . .check this out, especially 2:06

nateevs:

And this is just the joke of the century. I believe this was said without much thought.

RDM despite the CL win is not yet a high profile manager and his pay will very much reflect that.
To put things in perspective, any other manager offered a year's contract after a CL and FA Cup win will turn off their phones.
RDM, conversely, will jump at the chance and ultimately surrenders the opportunity to demand high wages.

If I put a figure to it, he won't get more than £2.5m - £3m a year.
Are u saying Roman is trying to balance the books on £2.5 - £3m a year wages in case he fires him? Joke?

Are you simply unable to read? Who said he was trying to 'balance the books' on lower wages? Who mentioned how much he was being paid apart from you?

It is unreasonable to continue exposing yourself to huge liabilities in the form of compensation to managers, especially untested ones like RDM or AVB. With the emergence of FFP as the prevailing environment, this (a one year deal) is a relatively simple way to both give RDM a chance to succeed (call it an extended trial if you will) as well as hedging against the likelihood of failure that is often higher with inexperienced coaches.

I have not said this is indeed the reason, but it is very plausible that it was a consideration in giving a one year deal.

Or that Roman henceforth, will continue to offer Managers "one year contracts" because of imminent compensation?

I never said that - I mentioned this particular case. Again, a simple sentence seems too difficult for you to comprehend.

Whichever way you look at it, what you said is a joke. Absolute cods-wallop!

Whichever way you spin it, you have been shown up to have a poor grasp of things, even at your own club. Time and time again, others have been able to see (ahead of time) what you cannot. You seem to be suffering from persistent lack of perspective.

My point stands - the one year consideration (if it turns out to be true) likely factors in the recent experience with AVB (another rookie manager) and the compensation his failure involved. Even Abramovich isn't interested in perpetually paying off managers.

Ibime: Who cares what Roman wants?

Hehehe.
After spending over a billion on a club, surely everyone has to care what he wants.

debosky:
As for the 'year's contract' - that may simply be [/b]to counter the large compensation he's been paying over the years

I have not said this is indeed the reason, but [b]it is very plausible that it was a consideration in giving a one year deal.

My point stands - the one year consideration (if it turns out to be true) likely factors in the recent experience with AVB (another rookie manager) and the compensation his failure involved.

The emboldened is all I could get from your posts and justifiably so; as you don't have a freaking clue what goes on in the boardroom. So assumptions, conjectures, maybes, would be the natural line for you to follow. Where I just get amazed is when you come back and make bold assertion like these.

Even Abramovich isn't interested in perpetually paying off managers.

Abramovich wanted the CL above all

Ex-managers like Grant confirmed his inability to win it as the reason he was fired

I mean. I get all the trying to be witty with the whole argument thing but when you start to mention things like you were right in there when the notes were made or making assertions you can't find links to, it throws the trustworthiness of your all post outta the window.

There is no single one of those statements above that you can prove and that is evidenced by the part nature of your posts - unwillingness to draw full conclusions. I think you should stick to that and quit making yourself you look like the guy who sees things a mile away when you don't know.






As to this,

Are you simply unable to read? Who said he was trying to 'balance the books' on lower wages? Who mentioned how much he was being paid apart from you?

Well nobody did mention it apart from me. However when you give this as the reason he was offered a year.

debosky:
Because he cannot continue paying £20m+ on compensation each time he fires a coach with FFP kicking in. Did you fail to comprehend this when I said it D

It means you are claiming the issue of money plays a huge factor. (Yeah I know you came back to say "It's likely" - which only shows the erratic nature of your stance) And if money plays a huge factor as you claim, then we should discuss money.

RDM is a low profile manager. His range will be around £2.5m. So why can't he be offered 3 years? Alright, he's not experienced and that's too much. . . Okay 2 years? You are very silly Debo. You are claiming Chelsea are trying to reduce the risk in compensation when RDM's payoff will most likely not be more than £4m on a 2 year contract, (assuming he's fired mid-sesaon) or £6m on a 3 year contract (assuming he's fired mid-season)

Is this what Debo can't see from afar that I cannot see? Let's revisit your statement.

debosky:
Because he cannot continue paying £20m+ on compensation each time he fires a coach with FFP kicking in. Did you fail to comprehend this when I said it D

If this is your reason why you believe a year was offered, based on the analysis above, clearly you are wrong. £4m compensation on a two-year contract will not prevent Chelsea from complying with FFP, will not have Roman blinking, will not do shite. Neither will £6m compensation on a 3-year contract.

So why was he not offered a 2-year contract at the very least?

.

nateevs:
I mean. I get all the trying to be witty with the whole argument thing but when you start to mention things like you were right in there when the notes were made or making assertions you can't find links to, it throws the trustworthiness of your all post outta the window.

Do I have to be in the board room to know that an owner is not interested in perpetually paying off managers?

Abramovich does want the CL above all - it can be deduced from his actions. That is what I am saying if it wasn’t spoon fed to you in my previous post.

There is no single one of those statements above that you can prove and that is evidenced by the part nature of your posts - unwillingness to draw full conclusions. I think you should stick to that and quit making yourself you look like the guy who sees things a mile away when you don't know.

I predicted your beloved shape keeping was a failure waiting to happen, I predicted your beloved AVB would be fired before he managed a single game while you were saying the likes of myself would come back to eat humble pie.

You phoolishly believed because AVB was an EPL stenographer he would know enough to outsmart Wenger and Fergie. . . .well we know how that ended.

It means you are claiming the issue of money plays a huge factor. (Yeah I know you came back to say "It's likely" - which only shows the erratic nature of your stance) And if money plays a huge factor as you claim, then we should discuss money.

Money IS a factor, but not in the narrow sense you are trying to make. The principle is that the rational way to behave is to seek ways of reducing losses.

RDM is a low profile manager. His range will be around £2.5m. So why can't he be offered 3 years? Alright, he's not experienced and that's too much. . . Okay 2 years? You are very silly Debo. You are claiming Chelsea are trying to reduce the risk in compensation when RDM's payoff will most likely not be more than £4m on a 2 year contract, (assuming he's fired mid-sesaon) or £6m on a 3 year contract (assuming he's fired mid-season)

Yes I am claiming this would be a consideration in offering a short contract.

Is this what Debo can't see from afar that I cannot see? Let's revisit your statement.

If this is your reason why you believe a year was offered, based on the analysis above, clearly you are wrong. £4m compensation on a two-year contract will not prevent Chelsea from complying with FFP, will not have Roman blinking, will not do shite. Neither will £6m on a 3-year contract.

You can’t create some strawman analysis to knock down, your analysis is your own wahala.

Again you lack perspective - I haven’t argued about the specific amount he is paid, but the principle remains - whether it is £1m or £5m, reducing the risk exposure makes financial sense for Chelski and Chelski would do that if they could.

Your lack of perspective leads you down the narrow road of equating my statement to ‘paying compensation will lead to not meeting FFP requirements’.

Any reduction in expenditure is welcome - that is the principle here. Be it on compensation, wages, or other expenses.

But no, according to Nateevs, I have to ‘prove’ that Chelski is interested in reducing its losses. What a mor0n!

debosky:
Do I have to be in the board room to know that an owner is not interested in perpetually paying off managers?
Abramovich does want the CL above all - it can be deduced from his actions. That is what I am saying if it wasn’t spoon fed to you in my previous post.

Yet another speculation, fuelled by tabloid reading yobs like yourself, and regurgitated as the truth. There is no proof on earth with which you can clearly point to as a reason Abramovich sees CL as the holy grail. I am not arguing that he will not want it, however to claim that his actions prove it is BS. Like you said, it's deduction. Others can deduce any other thing. However, to try to claim supremacy of knowledge of Roman's actions over fellow beings, when all available is pure conjecture is not only self-edifying stupidity, it stupendously moronic. What's even worse? You think those who don't agree with you are idiots. Why don't you point out the action that clearly show that this is the case?

debosky:
You can’t create some strawman analysis to knock down, your analysis is your own wahala.
Again you lack perspective - I haven’t argued about the specific amount he is paid, but the principle remains - whether it is £1m or £5m, reducing the risk exposure makes financial sense for Chelski and Chelski would do that if they could.
Your lack of perspective leads you down the narrow road of equating my statement to ‘paying compensation will lead to not meeting FFP requirements’.
Any reduction in expenditure is welcome - that is the principle here. Be it on compensation, wages, or other expenses.
But no, according to Nateevs, I have to ‘prove’ that Chelski is interested in reducing its losses. What a mor0n!

[/quote]



Ah! So Debo is the new Chelsea risk analyst! Chelsea will like to reduce it losses, so it offers it's manager a year's contract. If you believe the Times and Guardian, Chelsea were going to tempt Guradiola with £10m a year. Now Guardiola is a tiki taka manager, AVB part 2. Never implements a plan B, never worked with players outside Barcelona, never worked in the EPL.

For some reason, our new Chelsea risk analyst (Debo) is postulating that in considering the length of the contract on offer for RDM, the £10m tiki taka, no plan, never worked in the PL, AVB part 2 is considered less of, and in his words, "financial exposure" than £2.5m RDM who's played in the league, managed in the league, knows the players, coached the players, won the FA Cup with them, won the CL with them , has a plan B, maybe even a C.

Who even thinks like this let alone voices it out?

Debo is making us believe he doesn't need to be in the boardroom to know that Chelsea want to reduce their risk exposure. And in doing so, they opted to give Guardiola a 4-year contract which will be less of a risk than £2.5m RDM. So because RDM is more of a risk, they offered him a year.


Can any sane fan on the forum allude to the fact that, aside money, Pep has a genuine chance of success over RDM in his first year? Let alone the guys who runs the club? Pep is more of a risk, financially and otherwise no matter how you look at it.

Any sane person will go for RDM over Pep. However they were going to hire him - at £10m for 4 years even though it defies reason. And who's synonymous with events that defy reason? Roman Abramovic. . . . . Clearly, money is not the issue. Risk assessment is not the issue, neither is risk exposure. Because Roman chooses the manager. They were never going to give RDM the job and Roman, who was and perhaps still is, willing to risk the possibility of a £40m payout to a £10m for RDM is testament to the fact that RDM needs to have done more than just win the CL and that clearly nullifies your assertion, which is the bone of contention, that Roman wants victory over style.

.

.

Correction - you are not a 'fellow being' with the likes of myself when it comes to footballing matters - that's like comparing unicellular organisms (you) to primates (me).

Anyone who believed that AVB would succeed in the EPL because he 'knows how Fergie and Wenger think and play', anyone who believes Torres was good because he was 'shape keeping' CANNOT be classed as a fellow being.

Your record in FPL further indicates your shocking lack of footie knowledge so step off the curb before you hurt yourself.

Just to typify your lack of intelligence, only a mor0n like nateevs would call Guardiola AVB part 2 - comparing someone who thinks blowing grammar and using powerpoint is what is needed to succeed in football to someone who reached the highest level as a player and coach? Nigga please.

I don't have to be a risk analyst to see that a club will seek to reduce risk if it can (amongst other considerations). This simple principle is what cannot be comprehended by nateevs, paragraphs of rubbish later.

super breaking news....

di matteo signs a 2-yr deal with chelsea!

Hahaha! You have backed into a corner and run out of ideas. Your posts are getting shorter by the day cos it's dried up in the tank. How could it not be? It's all based on postulation.

So the option is to get personal. I don't have to call you names and quote history to prove a point. I deal with every point as they come up. Going back in time does not make your point more plausible.


"I know what pants Roman wears, it's clear for all to see. He loves wearing white shirts, so it must be white". You Tabloid reading yob!

I don't have to be a risk analyst to see that a club will seek to reduce risk if it can (amongst other considerations). This simple principle is what cannot be comprehended by nateevs, paragraphs of rubbish later

Thanks for telling us something new. Mr Risk Analyst. Chelsea offer RDM a year's contract on a £2.5m wage because they don't want to expose themselves to risk. Yet they turn around and offer Pep £10m for 4 years which "suddenly slashes the risk exposure" . . . after all it's common sense, Chelsea have to "amongst other consideration", reduce risk. . . SMH.


Just tell us you are spent.

2 year deal for RDM.

I knew that 1yr deal was mere speculation.
If it ain't on chelseafc.com then it's fake.

I seriously hope he succeed.
I'm tired of seeing managers sacked.

@lalaboi,
I seriously hope Hulk proves me wrong when he arrives.

BlueDiva: 2 year deal for RDM.

I knew that 1yr deal was mere speculation.
If it ain't on chelseafc.com then it's fake.

I seriously hopes he succeed.
I'm tired of seeing managers sacked.

@lalaboi,
I seriously hope Hulk proves me wrong when he arrives.

Honestly. Everyone is. Let's just give one person a chance.
Who knows? RDM may just succeed even more.

^^^^
He should, with all the players coming in.

BlueDiva: ^^^^
He should, with all the players coming in.

I hope he doesn't go into the season totally relying on Torres. . For his own good.
I am a big fan of Torres and I hope he comes good but we can't hang around.
I think we are trying to sign a striker.

We are being linked Salomon Rondon of Malaga.

BlueDiva: ^^^^
He should, with all the players coming in.

bluediva, remember our discussion as per
the performances of nani and ronaldo at the
euros......who has contributed more after 2 games?

arsenal are like their coach. they leave all their problems to solve and suggest solutions to other clubs.
please arsenal, win one trophy even if it is for my sake.
the whole world is begging u guys to please win something.
one more thing, we are among the soccer elites in europe which u are not. please go and relax till u become an european champion.

I wonder what Dayokanu has to say about those Ronaldo's misses which were far easier than Torres'

medjai: I wonder what Dayokanu has to say about those Ronaldo's misses which were far easier than Torres'

yes, phat ibime would say ronaldo has scored 70 goals this season for
club and country so those misses don't count at all. that's the latest
escapism from the anti-torres camp.

I hope he doesn't go into the season totally relying on Torres. . For his own good.
I am a big fan of Torres and I hope he comes good but we can't hang around.
I think we are trying to sign a striker.

We are being linked Salomon Rondon of Malaga.

Someday you will personally call FT a dud, trust me.

bluediva, remember our discussion as per
the performances of nani and ronaldo at the
euros......who has contributed more after 2 games?

You have to feel for Ronaldo.
He is under immense pressure, i mean, the whole world is watching and expecting him to do wonders.

Imagine missing such a chance. What does that tell you.
Nani hasn't been so spectacular anyway.

at least nani is assisting goals
meanwhile this dutch defence is as open as a IndecentStar's coochie

Someday you will personally call FT a dud, trust me.

Nefer.

You have to feel for Ronaldo.
He is under immense pressure, i mean, the whole world is watching and expecting him to do wonders.

Those Ronaldo chances were unbelievable.
RVP sef.

Is RVP becoming the new Torres. Na so e dey start ooo.
The misses in the first game seems to be affecting his confidence.

My favourite team may be going out after-all.

Lord let Chelski buy Van der Wiel - people complaining about Bosingwa haven't seen rubbish RB defending yet.

nateevs: Hahaha! You have backed into a corner and run out of ideas. Your posts are getting shorter by the day cos it's dried up in the tank.

Hardly - I have stopped because you're past redemption. If you're too thick to get what I've tried to say thus far, there's no point wasting my time on a lost case like you.