Ripple effect: Everton could face Ndiaye dilemma after record Rogers deal

Good opportunity for us to price him at £80-90M. We can get 2 quality players in for that money.

Ndiaye is good but he tends to go missing in games. Also he himself hasn't ruled out leaving Everton.

If we get a good deal, we should take it. However, our targets should be lined up for a quick replacement.

Certainly a good argument to cash in based on the silly fees now being paid. I think most people thought it good to sell at £60 million if it brings in two good players, but up it to £80 million, plus selling Dwight, Patterson, and Iroebugnam for a combined £40 million, that leaves us a good amount to bring in a quality, starting XI-ready right back, left back and striker — if somehow we got the recruitment right.

If he's going I want it as soon as possible so we can reinvest on two top full backs.

Yes, we may get lucky here.

Get some proper money in, cos it looks like the player's head has already been turned

Adding fuel to the fire, that, Harry!
A stupidly large bid for any player will be considered by most clubs. Bottom line is we would have a huge hole to fill without him.
Jack Grealish is an unknown right now, Tyrique George is a developing player, and sadly so is Tyler Dibling.

Our current strikers need lots of service and attempts to get a meagre goal tally. And of course we still need fullbacks. My heart says keep him.

Why do we need 2 full backs? I thought Anzou was a revelation at Dundee and ready to take over the mantle of Leighton Baines.

Are we all saying he is not good enough, with Mykolenko as back-up?

80k at least woudnt bother

Alas, Dundee are no indicator of how he would cope in the Premier League, Phil.

He looks more like a winger or wingback to me so would suit a 3 at the back system more.

Wonderful player to watch, but everyone has their price. I wouldn't let him go unless we have replacements lined up.

I would point out his goals and assists aren't what I would expect for the money some people are saying we should be asking.

Glad we hadn't took any offers before these mad fees started changing hands.

I love him, but let's be smart, he's not going to finish that contract, cash in now while his stocks high and the market is bonkers.

I'd love the club to keep investing in these young players, obviously we need experience to complement them, but I'd rather watch a few young players have a go and fail, than watch some mercenaries going through the motions.

He scored 6 goals last season, two of which were penalties, so not a striker.

We need more goals, but is he the man?

With better players around him and a more attack minded manager, I thi k you would see Ndiaye's assists and goal output increase significantly.

Whilst I would prefer to see him stay and have more quality added around him, I think he has already decided he wants to leave.

The big concern would be who do we get to replace him. Given our inactivity in the transfer window so far, would the club look to hoard the cash, or buy a cheap replacement?

Can someone explain how on earth Chelsea can spend that sort of money this summer when they have no European football? I thought they might have to tighten the purse strings and have a bit of a clear out. Obviously I was wrong.

Or is it that after the limp slap on the wrist they got for all their previous indiscretions, they've decided they can just carry on doing what the hell they want.

Jamie #13, Chelsea have annual revenue of close to £500m even without European football. Under SCR regs they can spend around £400m. They've already spent about half that.

Their three co-owners collectively are worth $30 billion or so, and corporate partner Clearlake Capital has about $90 billion under management.

And they don't care about balance sheets.

Mike 14

If I understand the new regs, using the numbers you outline, that £400m has to cover all football related expenses. That includes all the current squad including the management team, along with net player amortisation as far as I understand it.

Chelsea have just been fined by Uefa for exceeding their rule of 70% football/squad costs(versus the EPL rule of 85%). Very roughly that gives them about £65m wiggle room now they're not in Europe, everything else being equal (it won't be entirely so, they've got big earner Sterling off their books this year).

That £65m isn't a transfer budget, it would include the players wages plus amortisation. So for example it would buy you roughly 3 £50m players on 5 year contract paying £10m salary for each. I believe this is how it works.

I'd be really interested in someone closer to the real numbers doing an analysis for Everton, so we can see what firepower we may or may not have. Of course owners may not wish to push to the highest limit, either to give a chance of some dividend income or just being cautious and leaving a contingency.

Mark #16, I raised the point about whether amortisation is considered in the PSR expenses calculation on another thread.

Am I right then that if we buy a £50 million player on a 5 year contract then only £10 million of that goes onto the PSR expenses calculation?

Even if we've paid the full amount up front?

He is brilliant but his end product makes one realize why a bigger club never signed him… his final pass or shot is usually lacking to be honest. But on the other hand he’s looking up for a 1-2 and sees Barry or Beto, so I can understand his own frustrations. He probably would be better if we had a ball playing center forward. If we can get big money for him then I have no qualms, Dewsbury Hall is gear and having a fit Jarrad Branthwaite gives me a fucking semi on… I CANT WAIT FOR WEEK ONE! UTFT!

Mark #16, I believe you are both correct and incorrect. SCR doesn't cover "all football related expenses." It applies only to transfer fees (amortised as you described), player and lead manager salaries, and agents' fees.

SCR does not apply to the management team, backroom coaching and training/medical staff, any administrative costs or stadium upkeep. (Odd that stadium revenue counts towards SCR but stadium costs don't count against it.)

Chelsea's UEFA fine is a complete joke -- €3m, of which €2m million is suspended, leaving a €1m actual fine. Boehly spends more than that restocking the bar on his yacht. Chelsea doesn't care about getting caught, or about fines.

TFG won't release numbers in the middle of a fiscal year, so any analysis would be "ballpark" at best, and I'm sure you're right that they won't spend up to their SCR limit in this window. They'll want to leave what you accurately describe as a contingency, in case we have a Spurs-like siege of injuries and need signings in January. We only lost two starters for extended periods last season, and as of May 1 we were third-luckiest club in the league with only 12 injuries and 98 total games lost (Spurs had 27 for 363).

That sort of good fortune tends to balance out. Brutally.