Jump to content
  • Sign up for free and receive a month's subscription

    You are viewing this page as a guest. That means you are either a member who has not logged in, or you have not yet registered with us. Signing up for an account only takes a minute and it means you will no longer see this annoying box! It will also allow you to get involved with our friendly(ish!) community and take part in the discussions on our forums. And because we're feeling generous, if you sign up for a free account we will give you a month's free trial access to our subscriber only content with no obligation to commit. Register an account and then send a private message to @dave u and he'll hook you up with a subscription.

Mohamed Salah


WhiskeyJar
 Share

Recommended Posts

We only need to do two things. We need to sign Salah to a new 4-year contract and we need to extend Klopp's contract. That'll assure our dominance for another half-decade. If Klopp wants to take a year off to re-charge his batteries, we should let him, but that should be in the contract. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, m0e said:

Same for Suarez and Torres, surely?

 

I'm not quite sure about what your point is. It's not your money, and what money the club have will be spent anyway, Mo or no Mo.

There hasn't been one player that has played the wages card since Klopp arrived. This should be like Gini all over again, adults discussing value and agreeing or disagreeing. It has a whiff of Ashley Cole I nearly crashed tye car about it. What we're talking about here is a player looking for £350,000, £400,000, £500,000 or whatever, are we really expected to slam the club for not paying a player that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, No2 said:

There hasn't been one player that has played the wages card since Klopp arrived. This should be like Gini all over again, adults discussing value and agreeing or disagreeing. It has a whiff of Ashley Cole I nearly crashed tye car about it. What we're talking about here is a player looking for £350,000, £400,000, £500,000 or whatever, are we really expected to slam the club for not paying a player that?

No, you can slam the club for whatever you want to slam them about 

 

Or never slam them at all.

 

It doesn't answer any of the points I've made.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All this "but footballers earn enough already" has been a line since Jimmy hill got the maximum wage abolished 60 years ago. Salah has his market value and it's not unreasonable for him to expect to get it. It's also not unreasonable to want to understand the clubs ambitions (or business plan) for the period of that deal.  Nobody seems to give 2 fucks about the billions made by the people who own the club over the last 10 years, but yet they wince at the idea of a footballer getting some of that cash out of a club owned by these billionaires. It's proposterous. All premier League players earn too much if you want to measure them against the majority of people. But they're not the majority of people. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

All this "but footballers earn enough already" has been a line since Jimmy hill got the maximum wage abolished 60 years ago. Salah has his market value and it's not unreasonable for him to expect to get it. It's also not unreasonable to want to understand the clubs ambitions (or business plan) for the period of that deal.  Nobody seems to give 2 fucks about the billions made by the people who own the club over the last 10 years, but yet they wince at the idea of a footballer getting some of that cash out of a club owned by these billionaires. It's proposterous. All premier League players earn too much if you want to measure them against the majority of people. But they're not the majority of people. 

Where the Jimmy Hill argument falls down is this is the first time in the history of the sport where there has been 2 market values, the real one and the oil one. I think it's fair to measure him against our own players, a whole bunch of which were happy to resign. Give him 10%, 15% or 20% more than the top earner, he's worth that and of course that will still be preposterous money but if he wants Messi money then he will have to go play for Newcastle or PSG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, No2 said:

Where the Jimmy Hill argument falls down is this is the first time in the history of the sport where there has been 2 market values, the real one and the oil one. I think it's fair to measure him against our own players, a whole bunch of which were happy to resign. Give him 10%, 15% or 20% more than the top earner, he's worth that and of course that will still be preposterous money but if he wants Messi money then he will have to go play for Newcastle or PSG.

Firstly we don't have one player that compares to Salah, he is our best player. Secondly can we measure his value against say the money Manchester United pay some of their players? Their turnover is roughly the same as ours. It's not all oil money. And there have always been clubs that can pay more than someone else, from a king funded Madrid to jack walkers Blackburn. Man United wouldn't blink twice at paying Salah 500k per week. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They bought Salah for less than £40m. Let's say he wants £300,000 a week. That's £62,000,000 over four years. There isn't a player in the world that can give us what Salah gives us, but let's take three players we're linked with Dembele, Raphinha and Mbappe.

 

Dembele is on £210,000 a week at Barcelona, so he'll want parity with that. So a four-year contract for Dembele would be £43,680,000 + £20,000,000 signing on fee = £63,680,000

 

Raphinha is on about £58,000 at Leeds, so he'd want at least £100,000 a week to join us. Leed's wouldn't sell him for less than £60,000,000. So his price would be £80,800,000 including wages.

 

Mbappe is on £413,000 a week. There's talk that Madrid are prepared to pay £50,000,000 signing on fee. So a four-year contract for Mbappe would be £85,904,000 + £50,000,000 = £135,904,000.

 

Let's now take a cheap wildcard.

 

Jarrod Bowen. He's on £60,000 a week and probably wants at least £100,000 here. He'd cost £45,000,000 (a modest estimate). Wages £20,800,000 + £45,000,000 = £65,800,000.

 

It's all hypothetical but which would you choose here?

 

Salah: £62,000,000

Dembele: £63,680,000

Raphinha: £80,800,000

Mbappe: £135,904,000

Bowen: £65,800,000

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

Firstly we don't have one player that compares to Salah, he is our best player. Secondly can we measure his value against say the money Manchester United pay some of their players? Their turnover is roughly the same as ours. It's not all oil money. And there have always been clubs that can pay more than someone else, from a king funded Madrid to jack walkers Blackburn. Man United wouldn't blink twice at paying Salah 500k per week. 

Was it not you that said Utd are fucked financially? (Apologies if it wasn't). Following their lead on anything is a dangerous game, they have just kept throwing their chips on the table, hence why they are where they are.

 

I'd happily use Lewandowski, Suarez or Lukaku as barometers for pay but not Neymar, Messi or De Bruyne. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Boss said:

They bought Salah for less than £40m. Let's say he wants £300,000 a week. That's £62,000,000 over four years. There isn't a player in the world that can give us what Salah gives us, but let's take three players we're linked with Dembele, Raphinha and Mbappe.

 

Dembele is on £210,000 a week at Barcelona, so he'll want parity with that. So a four-year contract for Dembele would be £43,680,000 + £20,000,000 signing on fee = £63,680,000

 

Raphinha is on about £58,000 at Leeds, so he'd want at least £100,000 a week to join us. Leed's wouldn't sell him for less than £60,000,000. So his price would be £80,800,000 including wages.

 

Mbappe is on £413,000 a week. There's talk that Madrid are prepared to pay £50,000,000 signing on fee. So a four-year contract for Mbappe would be £85,904,000 + £50,000,000 = £135,904,000.

 

Let's now take a cheap wildcard.

 

Jarrod Bowen. He's on £60,000 a week and probably wants at least £100,000 here. He'd cost £45,000,000 (a modest estimate). Wages £20,800,000 + £45,000,000 = £65,800,000.

 

It's all hypothetical but which would you choose here?

 

Salah: £62,000,000

Dembele: £63,680,000

Raphinha: £80,800,000

Mbappe: £135,904,000

Bowen: £65,800,000

 

 

 

 

All good points. The decisive factor for FSG is the depreciation of the asset. Salah is at his peak, meaning little to no resale.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Barrington Womble said:

Firstly we don't have one player that compares to Salah, he is our best player. Secondly can we measure his value against say the money Manchester United pay some of their players? Their turnover is roughly the same as ours. It's not all oil money. And there have always been clubs that can pay more than someone else, from a king funded Madrid to jack walkers Blackburn. Man United wouldn't blink twice at paying Salah 500k per week. 

All good points made, Barry.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, VladimirIlyich said:

Yes it would. He could extend his current deal and still be a very wealthy man. Fuck agents and fuck modern football's obscene wealth.

No man - there is no chance he wants to play two more years at his current rate. Without a doubt his preferences would be - sign a new contract here or get sold and sign one elsewhere in the summer.

If his contract gets run out it will be because FSG made that decision, not him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

He isnt nearly on 300 grand a week. He's on 200 grand a week with Virgil's deal giving him 220 grand a week.

Go back in the thread mate - there is a listing of his wages/bonus structure and his off the field earnings.

Either way it is moot. If the wage demands were a flat 300k a week it would be done in a heartbeat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheHowieLama said:

Go back in the thread mate - there is a listing of his wages/bonus structure and his off the field earnings.

OK, Im talking of his wedge from the club. Mo was the highest paid player on 200 grand a week until Virgil's new deal leap frogged him.

 

If people are taking wages as stated from sites like Transfer Market and the rest, they're way out and unofficial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, dockers_strike said:

OK, Im talking of his wedge from the club. Mo was the highest paid player on 200 grand a week until Virgil's new deal leap frogged him.

 

If people are taking wages as stated from sites like Transfer Market and the rest, they're way out and unofficial.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/christinasettimi/2021/09/21/the-worlds-highest-paid-soccer-players-2021--uniteds-cristiano-ronaldo-reclaims-top-spot-from-psgs--lionel-messi/?sh=63957e483b7b

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...