Point taken, I was a little hasty because I agreed with the general point regarding reactions on here to news items.
Sterling has rejected a second contract offer from Liverpool.
- Thread starter James
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
Point taken, I was a little hasty because I agreed with the general point regarding reactions on here to news items.
Well - I suppose the slippery slope is, hopefully, if we're paying top, top wages it's because we're paying it to top, top players who will help us win things.
Regular CL, increased EPL revenues,?increased commercial activity &, when it's ready, increased match day revenue will help us compete with the likes of City, Chelsea & Arsenal.
The key is probably to tie those wages to success & ensure that we're not tying up older or mediocre players to long term expensive contracts.
Gerrard leaving actually frees up some coin, in that respect, and I'd happily let Johnson & Toure leave, unless it's on a greatly reduced salary & short term contract.
Pay big wages for Sterling, because he has re-sale value.
where have the 250k Suarez was on gone? we have plenty of dosh on the wage bill to pay him what he deserves.
Do you think all the players we signed during the summer are playing for free ?
Anyway - there's about 20 players in the squad we could happily get rid of to make room for Sterlings salary if the wage bill was an issue.
Chelsea are 'on standby' allegedly.
sure, but overall we have probably cleansed the wage bill with high earners being discarded (cole, carroll, etc). Taking into account the fact that many of the new players are up and coming (not established with high wages) we should probably have ended up with a net reduction in our wage bill. I don't have the facts at hand, but that is my impression.
If you think he is a £25m to £30m player then his marker wages would be about £100k per week.
How do you explain / justify Rooneys wages then?
The way it goes with FFP is every year his cost to the club = wages + depreciation.
The wages are easy to calculate, they'll be about £5m a year.
The depreciation is calculated by taking his transfer fee which his original valuation on the balance sheet, then taking equal hits on that for each year of his contract, so that when it expires his valuation has reached £0.
Given how long ago and for how little we signed him for, then Sterling's book value must already have reached £0. Then we should only be thinking about how to ensure the best possible transfer fee for the future, which is his real-life value on our balance sheet and which will translate into pure profit for FFP. Pissing about over wages is insane.
Look at Balotelli. His wages will be similar to what Sterling now wants, £5m a year. But we also paid a £16m fee for him, so on a four year contract it means we are taking a further £4m hit every year. In other words we're paying £9m to have Balotelli each year which comes directly out of the FFP sum. Then we turn around and haggle about paying £4.5m - £5.5m on Sterling. Retarded. Just retarded.
The fact Sterling is a young player with a lower transfer fee should enable us to pay him at least as much if not more. If we've hit the limit in terms of FFP its because we are underpaying Sterling in order to overpay older players who do the same job. It may even be illegal and a case of age discrimination. So I'd be pissed off too if I was him.
The wages are easy to calculate, they'll be about £5m a year.
The depreciation is calculated by taking his transfer fee which his original valuation on the balance sheet, then taking equal hits on that for each year of his contract, so that when it expires his valuation has reached £0.
Given how long ago and for how little we signed him for, then Sterling's book value must already have reached £0. Then we should only be thinking about how to ensure the best possible transfer fee for the future, which is his real-life value on our balance sheet and which will translate into pure profit for FFP. Pissing about over wages is insane.
Look at Balotelli. His wages will be similar to what Sterling now wants, £5m a year. But we also paid a £16m fee for him, so on a four year contract it means we are taking a further £4m hit every year. In other words we're paying £9m to have Balotelli each year which comes directly out of the FFP sum. Then we turn around and haggle about paying £4.5m - £5.5m on Sterling. Retarded. Just retarded.
The fact Sterling is a young player with a lower transfer fee should enable us to pay him at least as much if not more. If we've hit the limit in terms of FFP its because we are underpaying Sterling in order to overpay older players who do the same job. It may even be illegal and a case of age discrimination. So I'd be pissed off too if I was him.
Did you see Henry Winter's article where he described Januzaj as a '£50million-rated Belgian startlet'? Is he on £200k a week?
At United, probably.
I don't he is overpaid.
He had us in a position where we probably couldn't have afforded to lose him at the time.
It isnt a hard rule, there any plenty of exceptions, but in general the selling club and the player get the same from a transfer.
I didn't but I don't think anyone would pay us £50m for Januzaj.
I see no problem in his representatives trying to get him the best deal possible. He could snap his ACL and be fucked. Short careers in the great scheme of life, in a multi billion pound industry.
It's called negotiation..
It's called negotiation..
It's never simple huh?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...o-give-Brendan-Rodgers-much-needed-boost.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...o-give-Brendan-Rodgers-much-needed-boost.html
Fucks sake.
I really hope this isn't a delaying tactic on behalf of his agent to try to get another deal lined up from Real or Chelsea. It wouldn't surprise me.
I really hope this isn't a delaying tactic on behalf of his agent to try to get another deal lined up from Real or Chelsea. It wouldn't surprise me.
I've no doubt the split is real, but the fact it's amicable makes me suspicious (as well as my natural cynicism) that perhaps it's planned on & they've timed it to try & drag more money out of a big client moving.
I'm probably just being overly cynical, it's my default position!
I'm probably just being overly cynical, it's my default position!
No point worrying about it. He'll probably fuck off somewhere in a few years anyway if he continues to progress. Unless we actually start winning things.
Realistically, we need to get Sterling in a position to allow us to cash in to the max in 2 years when he'll undoubtedly fuck off somewhere else. Ergo, give him what he wants on a 5yr contract ASAP.
We wanted a net reduction though, in line with FFP and to protect our own stability. It's not as clear cut as saying we paid Suarez 180k, ergo thats the benchmark and what we could reasonably pay Stering and co. How much will he then be expecting when he's 22/23? It is a slippery slope.
I've no issue with blokes holding out for the best deals for themselves. Gerrard did it, Roy Keane did it at United, Ferguson at United, Rooney, etc.
If you're that fucking good, then you deserve to be paid for it. He's bang within his rights to drag this on til he gets what he wants.
He's obviously clever enough to employ good agents anyway.
If you're that fucking good, then you deserve to be paid for it. He's bang within his rights to drag this on til he gets what he wants.
He's obviously clever enough to employ good agents anyway.
He has ALOT to prove yet. The Roy Keane's and Steven Gerrard's did it game after game, season after season before the big wages(in football terms) arrived. Not 15-20 great games when they'd just turned 20.
This is exactly correct….and neither Keane or Gerrard buggered off for a nice winter break in the sun either. He still has a lot to prove in my book, he's getting there and I'm glad he's with us but he's not there yet
Doesn't matter nowadays. He's within a whiff of being there, and a that's enough for agents to demand. Plus we're in a weak spot anyways.
- Status