Sterlings contract

[Dave D]

That's something I can't argue with. If you don't think he's good enough to earn that wage then fair enough. It's more to do with the age thing that I am disagreeing with. People don't want him paid that because he's too young and no other players his age are.

 

I think it's all well and good making this moral stand and possibly letting him go because of it, but if in two/three years time he's ripping the back out of defences and is one the best players in the prem and we haven't replaced him and are still a middle table team I will be livid. It's just worth the risk of paying him in my opinion.

 

He might not be worth it now but in the long run it's more than likely he will be. That's opinion as well obviously but if you can't look past the lack of goals and assists and see how good he has been for a player of his age and the sheer size of his potential then you aren't watching the same game as me. He isn't just another youth player. He's the future of the club.

 

Fair comments, but let him START tearing up defences first before we reward him for it.

[xerxes]

Outside factors like market value, should remain as that, outside. It should have no bearing on the contract offered by the club.

 

Transfer values and wages are all determined by outside factors. How far would we have got offering £2m for Suarez?

 

It is absolutely right that every club should have a wage structure determined by what it can afford, but that is something quite different.

[xerxes]

Fair comments, but let him START tearing up defences first before we reward him for it.

 

It's been a good debate, and what happens will be determined by how good the judgement of Ayre and Rodgers is.

 

Great promise can fade, modest talent can prosper. Exceptional talent can be evident early on.

 

Ayre and Rodgers to decide.

[Magic Sponge]

 

Transfer values and wages are all determined by outside factors. How far would we have got offering £2m for Suarez?

 

It is absolutely right that every club should have a wage structure determined by what it can afford' date=' but that is something quite different.[/quote']

 

Ok then brains, if the club can afford to pay Sterling 100 grand a week, what's stopping them from doing it?

 

That's fuck all to do with outside factors.

[No2]

Man Utd paid £17m for Phil Jones after just over half a season playing for Blackburn, from what I can gather they pay him 50k per week and I can only assume we would have done the same. When he signed he was only a year and a half older than Sterling is now.

 

Disregarding how good or shit you think Jones is, two of the most experienced managers in football where willing to throw a shed load of cash at him, that is how the market at works. Ferguson has brought the most promising young players for 20 years now and paid them what they where worth, he allowed Rooney make an absolute cock out of him over his last contract but he still bit his tongue and got him signed up because it benefited his club. One issue that concerns me is how Rodgers handled the Sigurdsonn transfer, he felt he should earn the same as Swansea were offering him, if he brings that mindset into the negotiations with Sterling then he will be playing ball elsewhere next year. Considering it's generally accepted that attackers are worth way more than defenders, so if we pay Sterling what Jones earns then we can't exactly say we've been robbed, we will just have paid him market value.

 

As for going forward I don't think it will have any lasting effect if we do our job properly in January and again in the summer transfer window. Because Downing and Cole are so shit Sterling's path into the starting XI has been relatively straight forward. The young lads following him like Ibe and Sinclair now have Sterling, Suarez and Suso in front of them as well as hopefully another couple of quality attackers, if they manage to oust them from the staring XI then they will be justified in asking for 50k too, where is the problem with that?

[The Guest]

Fair comments, but let him START tearing up defences first before we reward him for it.

 

I think everyone would agree with that. The problem is what if that's too late and he's already gone.

 

It comes down to whether you think he's going to be that player or not. If you think he is then it really is a no brainer. We can't afford to risk losing him for peanuts when the prices for players are astronomical.

[xerxes]

Ok then brains, if the club can afford to pay Sterling 100 grand a week, what's stopping them from doing it?

 

The belief, probably correct, that no-one else would pay 100k a week, so such an award would be unnecessary.

 

I hope that helps.

[RoyHodgeGone]

Ultimately you wonder what other clubs are prepared to pay him. If Chelsea or City will give 50k to sit in the reserves, there's not much we can do. From his position he's now a first team regular and probably feels he should be paid as such even if it's based on a dozen or so games. I'd offer him 30k with the option to increase if he keeps playing in the first team. He's still be the lowest paid player on the first team sheet I'd imagine.

[Code]

Sterling has scored 1 goal and got 1 assist in 22 games this season, he is not even close to be worth £50K.

[WhiskeyJar]

Sterling has scored 1 goal and got 1 assist in 22 games this season, he is not even close to be worth £50K.

 

So you are saying that based on his stats a truly promising 17 year old should not get 50, 40 or 30k?

[Bobby Hundreds]

Either way the little shit is gonna be minted. God damn it I knew I should of practiced more.

[ElishaScottBC]

don't worry brendan's got this!

[The Guest]

Sterling has scored 1 goal and got 1 assist in 22 games this season, he is not even close to be worth £50K.

 

You are such a tiresome cunt and you do appear to come across braindead quite a lot.

 

The argument goes a lot further than that shite you posted above and has done in this thread. But surprise surprise you pop up with some pointless stat which adds nothing to the discussion. I don't think anybody believes his performances have made him a 50K player a week right now.

 

The only people that are arguing for giving him it are putting the point forward they believe he will be in the future. The cost of signing a player to the standard people believe Sterling will become will be a lot more than 50K a week. Therefore the risk of paying him it now is worth it.

 

This is obviously too complicated for a thick cunt such as yourself to comprehend though so do everyone a favour and fuck off.

[Magic Sponge]

 

You are such a tiresome cunt and you do appear to come across braindead quite a lot.

 

The argument goes a lot further than that shite you posted above and has done in this thread. But surprise surprise you pop up with some pointless stat which adds nothing to the discussion. I don't think anybody believes his performances have made him a 50K player a week right now.

 

The only people that are arguing for giving him it are putting the point forward they believe he will be in the future. The cost of signing a player to the standard people believe Sterling will become will be a lot more than 50K a week. Therefore the risk of paying him it now is worth it.

 

This is obviously too complicated for a thick cunt such as yourself to comprehend though so do everyone a favour and fuck off.

 

I don't see a lot wrong with what code said.

 

Chill the fuck out, tit head.

[rubberduckstyle]

At 50k a week, over 4 years, is a shade over £10 million. With England caps and appearances for us which will include European experience, unless he hits the crack pipe big time by the time that contract is up we will make our money back on him as some club in the league will take him off us for £10-12m.

 

I think it is a ridiculous amount of money for a player of his age but with budget restrictions, no Champions League and a young manager who I feel will struggle to attract big names to the club with said budget restrictions and no CL football to offer I can't see how we will lose on this one.

 

FSG are always banging on about developing the best young talent, did they think this talent would play for £300 a week? Either or, this may be a nothing story and he will sign on his 18th.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

Nobody is expecting him to play for £300 per week. There's some wiggle room between £300 and £50,000.

[xerxes]

In practise, on the 8th, we can offer, and he can sign, a new contract, expertly pitched and claused by Ian Ayre.

 

If Sterling accepts it, job done, panic over. If he doesn’t he could be put in the reserves until his contract expires in the summer 2014, at which point he will get nowhere near 50k- take that!

 

Or, Ayre doesn’t think he is one for the future, we cash in our chips, and roll the dice again with a very tidy profit, and a pay structure in tact- music to FSG’s ears.

 

My own view is he is a very good player who is worth keeping at market rates- but i accept there are options.

[Torvald Utne]

£50k? Bye Bye.

[xerxes]

£50k? Bye Bye.

 

And that may be the problem.

[Torvald Utne]

And that may be the problem.

 

A much smaller problem than paying an 18 year old with a handful of games behind him £50k.

[Jairzinho]

Nobody is expecting him to play for £300 per week. There's some wiggle room between £300 and £50,000.

 

£300 p/w seems fine for a 17 year old.

[MLB]

A much smaller problem than paying an 18 year old with a handful of games behind him £50k.

 

 

I agree. His wages need to be performance and development based. If someone wants to pay him 50k per week they can have him. He is by no means irreplaceable.

[RedRazor]

Whatever it is, it's not Dimoxinil.

 

Haha - absolute class.

[RedRazor]

I agree. His wages need to be performance and development based. If someone wants to pay him 50k per week they can have him. He is by no means irreplaceable.

 

The days of players accepting contracts where a significant part of their income is based on appearances and results are long gone. Sure a Michael Owen at the end of his career might accept something along those lines but generally players do not.

 

I find myself in agreement with Xerxes. We are in a market that we have minimal influence over. There are people out there who can, financially, blow us out of the water on any deal. We have to offer a contract that we can afford and hopefully that will reflect what he is worth. If the going rate for a 17 year old learning his trade is £50K per week then that is what we have to pay. Personally I do think that is a very high wage for someone as unproven as Sterling.

 

No-one on here knows any of the numbers being discussed. It may be £5k per week, or £50k per week or any number in between. Like any of us here would do Sterling is looking after himself. Maybe he wants to stay at the club, maybe he doesn't or maybe he is not fussed either way.

 

The key to it will be how he has briiefed his advisors. If he has told them to get the best financial deal possible from anyone then that is what they will be doing. If he has told them to negotiate the best deal with LFC that is what they will do. But they may use other clubs to encourage the club to their way of thinking. If his advisors are any good they will know what is a realistic outcome.

[Moss is Boss]

Either way the little shit is gonna be minted. God damn it I knew I should of practiced more.

 

At what getting girls preggers ?

 

[YOUTUBE]_dhjmSp30jc[/YOUTUBE]

 

Sterling in 15 years when we finally go to mars.