Sorry, no idea but think a lot of the loanees clubs cover the wages.
So Chelsea's real wages could be considerably higher, but much of it was off the books for that year.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Sorry, no idea but think a lot of the loanees clubs cover the wages.
Chelsea seem to treat most of their loanees as investments rather than players who one day will play for the first team. The only loanee I can think of who has made it into the first team during Mourinho's tenure is Courtois.So Chelsea's real wages could be considerably higher, but much of it was off the books for that year.
Chelsea seem to treat most of their loanees as investments rather than players who one day will play for the first team. The only loanee I can think of who has made it into the first team during Mourinho's tenure is Courtois.
So it depends what you mean about real wages, the salareis of the players currently winning the league or the total clubs assets. If you included the players on "loan" to Vitesse Arnhem in Chelsea's figures , should you also include the wages of the players in New York and Melbourne in City's figures, especially given what has happened with Lampard? They have almost as many younger players out on loan as Chelsea, 14 iirc, so a similar accounting would bump both clubs wages figures up.
United have Nani and Hernandez out on loan, think they are paying all of Nani's salary which is a bit odd along, with several youth players.
The whole loan system has some very lax rules and reporting requirements from what I can tell, especially considerig it seems to have been increasing used for the movement of players who aren't in the development stage any more - Barry, Cleverley, Nani, Hernandez, Falcao, Negredo, Lampard, Alderweirld, Moses, Song in the last few months alone.I think it's worth consideration, given the large number of players that Chelsea loans out. If all players are on the wage bill, it's worth comparing the fact that Chelsea (which seem to be smarter than most clubs) don't pay all their salaries. Few other clubs do much in the loan market; Lampard's case is interesting, given the new details and obfuscation over exactly whom he has contracted with to play his football.
I disagree. The Utd fans gave him loads of support early on and even up to the point he was sacked. Fergie's "you have to support your manager" was often recited. It was the players not the fans.This. Despite of what I said above, Moyes never had any chance MU because he wasn't a big name with any managerial honours on his resume. Going to the MU fan sites to see what their opinion was of the hire and most of the comments were negative because he wasn't Mourhino, Klopp or De Boer (which were the three managers I keep seeing come up in what the fans there wanted). As a result of the negative first opinion of the man, he never had a shot to start with.
Although to be fair, that fan base is made up of glory hunters and morons who wouldn't know a good manager to start with. For how much success whiskey nose brought to that club, if it was up to the fanbase he would of gotten the sack in 1989.
I would of been in favor of that though.