daily wail shit and Sterling contract negotiations

[aRdja]

 

Another 2 today...

 

Surely only 1?

[sir roger]

BBC Sport gossip column saying that Arsenal are going to offer £8m & Walcott in January.

[Trucker Paddy]

BBC Sport gossip column saying that Arsenal are going to offer £8m & Walcott in January.

 

It comes from that rag

[Ne Moe Imya]

BBC Sport gossip column saying that Arsenal are going to offer £8m & Walcott in January.

 

We should offer them Jordan Henderson and £8m for Cazorla if they do.

[Reacher]

Just give him the 50k he's better than Cole, Henderson and Sahin now. Nevermind when he's had a season or two to develop.

[RobbieOR]

Giving a 17 year old so much money would be braindead. For one he could get a massive injury and we would be lumbered with somebody on a huge contract who is fucking useless to us.

 

Second of all, you dont want to make it all go to his head and have him thinking he's the dogs bollocks. It's happened to loads of the players in the past. £15k/£20k is enough for him at the moment. If he moves onto the next level in the next year or so then yeah give him another pay rise.

 

Just because we're being reckless with others doesnt mean we need to be reckless with Sterling.

[corro]

Just give him the 50k he's better than Cole, Henderson and Sahin now. Nevermind when he's had a season or two to develop.

Yeah may as well. Fuck it. What a fucking car crash of a football club. Forever fucking about.

[Lee909]

Giving a 17 year old so much money would be braindead. For one he could get a massive injury and we would be lumbered with somebody on a huge contract who is fucking useless to us.

 

Second of all, you dont want to make it all go to his head and have him thinking he's the dogs bollocks. It's happened to loads of the players in the past. £15k/£20k is enough for him at the moment. If he moves onto the next level in the next year or so then yeah give him another pay rise.

 

Just because we're being reckless with others doesnt mean we need to be reckless with Sterling.

 

I agree with this but i think he will get a big more.

I think he will get around £30k myself.The club probably want him on 15/20k so his agents starts at 50k and they agree on 25/30k with a 10/15% rise each year.Something like £25/30/40/50k over 4 years or so.

[RobbieOR]

Yeah and I'd have no problems with it.

 

It's just the 'he should be on x amount because Joe Cole is getting shit loads' argument that makes no sense to me.

[Strontium]

Giving a 17 year old so much money would be braindead. For one he could get a massive injury and we would be lumbered with somebody on a huge contract who is fucking useless to us.

 

 

Er, isn't this an argument against giving ANYONE a huge contract?

 

Anyway, we're not talking huge. £30,000 a week, or 0.5 Hendoes, as I like to refer to it.

[RobbieOR]

Er, isn't this an argument against giving ANYONE a huge contract?

 

Anyway, we're not talking huge. £30,000 a week, or 0.5 Hendoes, as I like to refer to it.

 

Young players usually stagnate when they get big injuries. More so than established players.

 

Anyway, people are saying he should be getting £50k, not £30k, which is a massive difference.

[Guest San Don]

Giving a 17 year old so much money would be braindead. For one he could get a massive injury and we would be lumbered with somebody on a huge contract who is fucking useless to us.

 

Second of all, you dont want to make it all go to his head and have him thinking he's the dogs bollocks. It's happened to loads of the players in the past. £15k/£20k is enough for him at the moment. If he moves onto the next level in the next year or so then yeah give him another pay rise.

 

Just because we're being reckless with others doesnt mean we need to be reckless with Sterling.

 

That may well be correct (I actually dont think it is) but its not in the real world. The real world is market forces pure and simple robbie. If we dont agree a suitable wage with him, another club will.

 

We all have our opinions on what Sterling is worth to the club and how much he should get. The fact of the matter is, if he was 24 or 25 and making the same contribution to the club, no one would bat an eyelid at him being given 35, 40 or 50k a week.

 

And that in a nutshell is all that should be in the equation here, his contribution to the club and how much that is worth per week.

 

Some people may not want to give him what he \ his agent is asking. That's up to them but they need to ask themselves the question are they prepared to let him go for effective peanuts in 18 months time?

 

Football is a risk business, it's the nature of the game. If you dont want to play it, fine. Dont agree a wage with him \ his agent. But people shouldnt turn round in 12 or 18 months time and ask why is he being allowed to leave for peanuts because we wouldnt pay him 35, 40 or 50k a week.

[RobbieOR]

That may well be correct (I actually dont think it is) but its not in the real world. The real world is market forces pure and simple robbie. If we dont agree a suitable wage with him, another club will.

 

We all have our opinions on what Sterling is worth to the club and how much he should get. The fact of the matter is, if he was 24 or 25 and making the same contribution to the club, no one would bat an eyelid at him being given 35, 40 or 50k a week.

 

And that in a nutshell is all that should be in the equation here, his contribution to the club and how much that is worth per week.

 

Some people may not want to give him what he \ his agent is asking. That's up to them but they need to ask themselves the question are they prepared to let him go for effective peanuts in 18 months time?

 

Football is a risk business, it's the nature of the game. If you dont want to play it, fine. Dont agree a wage with him \ his agent. But people shouldnt turn round in 12 or 18 months time and ask why is he being allowed to leave for peanuts because we wouldnt pay him 35, 40 or 50k a week.

 

But he shouldnt be giving a massive contribution to the club. He's 17. If we had more options he wouldnt be playing and I'd imagine after January he wont be playing as much games. Just because he is one of the first names on the team sheet doesnt mean we should shell out £50k on the lad.

 

It doesnt make any sense to give him what his agent wants. If they're asking for £50k and wont budge they can go fuck themselves. He isnt worth that at this moment in time.

[Reacher]

Yeah may as well. Fuck it. What a fucking car crash of a football club. Forever fucking about.

 

A massively naïve comment, you don't think Chelsea or Citeh would pay him 50K a week? You need to look at the wages being thrown about. 50k is pennies in comparison.

[gingerhulk]

But he shouldnt be giving a massive contribution to the club. He's 17. If we had more options he wouldnt be playing and I'd imagine after January he wont be playing as much games. Just because he is one of the first names on the team sheet doesnt mean we should shell out £50k on the lad.

 

It doesnt make any sense to give him what his agent wants. If they're asking for £50k and wont budge they can go fuck themselves. He isnt worth that at this moment in time.

 

We can't afford to do that though.

 

He has been one of our best players this season and we can't afford to loose such a talent.

 

Maybe a few years ago we could have the "fuck off" attitude, as we may have been able to replace him with another quality wide player, but I don't see us being in that position now.

 

I'm not saying we should bend over for him, but we have to make sure we keep him at the club for as long as possible. He's a 17year old international and first team player, who has shown a huge amount of potential in a very short amount of time.

 

This situation could have been dealt with in the summer when he went on tour to the USA an Rodgers saw how good he was. His contact could have been done and this situation wouldn't of occurred.

 

But seeing as we love to fuck up on the contract and transfer part of the game, it's not a suprise that we are in a position were a 17 year has the upper hand in the contract negotiations.

[SlugTrail]

[/b]

 

We can't afford to do that though.

 

He has been one of our best players this season and we can't afford to loose such a talent.

 

Maybe a few years ago we could have the "fuck off" attitude, as we may have been able to replace him with another quality wide player, but I don't see us being in that position now.

 

I'm not saying we should bend over for him, but we have to make sure we keep him at the club for as long as possible. He's a 17year old international and first team player, who has shown a huge amount of potential in a very short amount of time.

 

This situation could have been dealt with in the summer when he went on tour to the USA an Rodgers saw how good he was. His contact could have been done and this situation wouldn't of occurred.

 

But seeing as we love to fuck up on the contract and transfer part of the game, it's not a suprise that we are in a position were a 17 year has the upper hand in the contract negotiations.

 

 

Or we could put the boot on the other foot, his agent knew he couldn't sign a contract until he was 18, he was included on the US tour, maybe the agent has been sitting tight waiting to see how we'll he would do in the first team, which has given him better bargaining power!

[zigackly]

The answer is surely to offer him a wage which reflects his young age and inexperience, but add a really fucking good incentive package for playing and doing well in the first team.

[Nightcat]

But he shouldnt be giving a massive contribution to the club. He's 17. If we had more options he wouldnt be playing and I'd imagine after January he wont be playing as much games. Just because he is one of the first names on the team sheet doesnt mean we should shell out £50k on the lad.

 

It doesnt make any sense to give him what his agent wants. If they're asking for £50k and wont budge they can go fuck themselves. He isnt worth that at this moment in time.

 

But the whole Premier League as a show doesn't worth the hype and the deal of more than 5bn that they'll be cashing in from next season (only for 3 years of TV rights), but they will get them. Consequently, players will ask for a share. You can't pay someone who plays every week less of what you pay a benchwarmer with the excuse he is too young for your valuation. It doesn't make any sense.

 

If we had more options like Hazard and Mata, Sterling would be on the bench... yes, if though, we don't have any of those players and we won't be getting any player of that quality any time soon... we've been looking for a decent am/winger for over a decade. I'm confident we got one. Should we lose him because we disagree over 10k-15k?

[Tommy Lawrence]

Losing him would be criminal.

[magicrat]

The answer is surely to offer him a wage which reflects his young age and inexperience, but add a really fucking good incentive package for playing and doing well in the first team.

 

Exactly ; i would guess something along these lines will probably be worked out over the coming weeks

[the walsh]

cant afford to lose him i reckon 30 grand week and then up to 5o k if he keeps doing the businness we need to sort it otherwise the vulture,s will be sniffing around.

[Guest San Don]

But he shouldnt be giving a massive contribution to the club. He's 17. If we had more options he wouldnt be playing and I'd imagine after January he wont be playing as much games. Just because he is one of the first names on the team sheet doesnt mean we should shell out £50k on the lad.

 

It doesnt make any sense to give him what his agent wants. If they're asking for £50k and wont budge they can go fuck themselves. He isnt worth that at this moment in time.

 

Sorry robbie, you can't use that argument (shouldn't be making a huge contribution) he is, fact. We can't say give the kids a chance then when they take it say, sorry, you shouldn't be making such a massive impact.

 

As I said, market forces will determine his worth. So, if it's a question of paying him the 50k a week and letting him go to city, arsenal etc, you' d rather fuck him off? Sounds childish to me if anything.

[gingerhulk]

Or we could put the boot on the other foot, his agent knew he couldn't sign a contract until he was 18, he was included on the US tour, maybe the agent has been sitting tight waiting to see how we'll he would do in the first team, which has given him better bargaining power!

 

He could of signed a pre contract, so when he turns 18 that contracts starts.

 

I just think we have once again lost the bargaining power like you mentioned, all because we have left it very late to offer him a new deal.

 

Everyone at the club knew he had massive potential, you don't spend 600k on a 14/15year old (with the possibility of it rising to 5mill) without the idea of him becoming a a very good player in the future.

 

We all know FSG want a low wage budget, so it will be interesting to see how they are looking at this, would they be happy to pay a 18 year old 30k + per week?

[Bobby Hundreds]

Footballers greed makes me fucking puke, 17 i want more than 30 thousand pounds every week, i pray for the football bubble to burst.

[Section_31]

Footballers greed makes me fucking puke, 17 i want more than 30 thousand pounds every week, i pray for the football bubble to burst.

 

Agreed. Tragic really thet he's only 17 and I already don't like the lad. The idea of rooting for a player rather than just the team is alien to me now. Couldn't give a fuck about any of them really.