**Summer Transfer Thread: News, Rumours and Speculation**

dannyjo22 said:
Weird, not a lot you can do when a player wants to go. Take the money now or wait 12 months and get less, much less.

He's on half what city are offering, he wants a piece of the money. I can't see this being the end of it.
Click to expand...

I guess it's just a case of holding out for the best possible price. By rejecting the transfer request you're making it clear to City that it's going to cost a lot more than what they're offering to make the deal happen.
Slogan said:
It's a shame what little loyalty there is in the game nowadays. You could understand if it was one of the top four clubs and he was itching to move - but Man City...

With all respect to them, they're going to have a tough time breaking into the top four. Particularly with the likes of Villa and Everton knocking around to pounce on any slip up made by Arsenal, United, Liverpool or Chelsea.
Click to expand...

I'm certainly not saying that I expect City to break into the top 4 this season, although I do think they've got an outside chance, but if anybody is going to split the top 4 on a consistent basis over the next few years, it's going to be City not Everton or Villa.
 
Gilly said:
In fairness I think City will overtake Everton and Villa with comparitive ease once Hughes has gone. At that point sights will be set on Arsenal/Liverpool.
Click to expand...

With the sheer money that City will throw at it, I agree with you.

But continuing to be impressive with Everton and then being picked up by a bigger club would probably be in and around the same time it will take Hughes to be replaced (I'd say a season or so).

I suppose that isn't even an option when the megabucks are being thrown around though.

Baz, my mention of Villa or Everton is based on the stability of what they've been doing in recent years. Whilst City will no doubt have better quality of players, gelling that into a successful team may not be translated. Infact, it could be a bit of a joke if handled wrongly.
 
Slogan said:
It's a shame what little loyalty there is in the game nowadays. You could understand if it was one of the top four clubs and he was itching to move - but Man City...
Click to expand...

I do understand why fans want club loyalty etc but if you think about it from personal terms it doesn't make much sense.

I know if a smaller company who will be growing, offered my more then double my wages to work for them, i know what i'd do
 
y2viks said:
I know if a smaller company who will be growing, offered my more then double my wages to work for them, i know what i'd do
Click to expand...

I understand where you are coming from but I don't think football is as cut and dried as day-to-day type work. For one, you have limited if any interaction with the people who pay your wages in a normal job, in football you share every high and low with them (at least on the pitch).

I couldn't blame anyone on here from wanting to double their wages and have a better quality of life, but these footballers already lead a life of luxury. They earn more in one week than most people earn in a year. There comes a stage for me at least, where putting money ahead of everything just becomes silly.

How much money do you need when you already have everything you could want for? (Bear in mind that houses and cars are likely paid off already).

I have to say I'd be strongly in favour of a wage cap, I have been for a good few years now. Especially before footballers completely lose touch with the people they play infront of.
 
Money may not be the issue but Man City are up and coming with an exciting team, Everton have peaked and wont break into the top 4, why not try to improve your career by getting a chance to play Champions League football in a couple of years time maybe. With City he has the chance, with Everton he will never get better than he does now, so as not to stagnate with his hopes of real football glory then he hes to move.
 
A footballer has a short career. It doesnt matter how much they earn, the prospect of doubling it will always appeal.

If you are on £100k a week i doubt very much anyone being offered £200k a week would say "no, ive got enough thanks".
 
Slogan said:
I understand where you are coming from but I don't think football is as cut and dried as day-to-day type work. For one, you have limited if any interaction with the people who pay your wages in a normal job, in football you share every high and low with them (at least on the pitch).

I couldn't blame anyone on here from wanting to double their wages and have a better quality of life, but these footballers already lead a life of luxury. They earn more in one week than most people earn in a year. There comes a stage for me at least, where putting money ahead of everything just becomes silly.

How much money do you need when you already have everything you could want for? (Bear in mind that houses and cars are likely paid off already).

I have to say I'd be strongly in favour of a wage cap, I have been for a good few years now. Especially before footballers completely lose touch with the people they play infront of.
Click to expand...

With regards to how much money do they need, I personally think you're right but in the long run it's a different story

Lets say Lescotts on £50k a week now - at the end of a 5 year contract he would have earned £13 million.

If Man City offer him £100k, then he will have earned £26 million

I just think it's a no brainer unless you're going from being a top four first teamer to a lower team. I'm presuming they'd have win bonus and bonuses for winning trophies
 
Slogan said:
Baz, my mention of Villa or Everton is based on the stability of what they've been doing in recent years. Whilst City will no doubt have better quality of players, gelling that into a successful team may not be translated. Infact, it could be a bit of a joke if handled wrongly.
Click to expand...

Villa and Everton have been doing incredibly well but it's going to take a long time or a lot of money (barring Arsenal completely falling apart) before either could establish themselves as a regular member of the top 4. You only have to look at last season where both Everton and Villa had excellent seasons yet they still finished 9 & 10 points behind Arsenal, who had a poor season by their standards.

As I said above, I'm not saying that I expect City to walk straight into the top 4 and like you say, it could go all wrong but with the amount of money they have, if 1 side is going to split the top 4 up consistently then they're the only side I can see possibly doing it.
 
y2viks said:
With regards to how much money do they need, I personally think you're right but in the long run it's a different story

Lets say Lescotts on £50k a week now - at the end of a 5 year contract he would have earned £13 million.

If Man City offer him £100k, then he will have earned £26 million

I just think it's a no brainer unless you're going from being a top four first teamer to a lower team. I'm presuming they'd have win bonus and bonuses for winning trophies
Click to expand...

You would also have to keep in mind that in theory at least these guys should be paying 40% (and shortly 50%) in tax on these figures.
 
placeholder said:
You would also have to keep in mind that in theory at least these guys should be paying 40% (and shortly 50%) in tax on these figures.
Click to expand...

definitely, but i was just trying to show that while 50k -> 100k might not seem the biggest increase in the world to Joe Public (purely because it's a load of cash), that at the end of the 5 years it shows how much of a difference it can make
 
Gilly said:
In fairness I think City will overtake Everton and Villa with comparitive ease once Hughes has gone. At that point sights will be set on Arsenal/Liverpool.
Click to expand...

I agree with this, my main problem with City is Hughes, I just dont think he has it in him to manage a side to the top of the table.
 
y2viks said:
definitely, but i was just trying to show that while 50k -> 100k might not seem the biggest increase in the world to Joe Public (purely because it's a load of cash), that at the end of the 5 years it shows how much of a difference it can make
Click to expand...

Oh yeah absolutely! I was just meaning that in terms of cash in pocket it becomes 25k and 50k respectively. Not that im saying they shouldnt pay tax, it just becomes a consideration when comparing what footballers earn round the world.

At the end of th day it comes down to supply and demand. A wage cap would be totally unworkable so if the buying club feel they can justify it then best of luck to them.
 
I'm all for a wage cap, let these players play for the clubs they want to play for rather than money. It will never happen regardless of how much sense it made for the whole of european football to have a wage cap.

City will be in the top 4 soon enough. Once they have a quality manager to draw in the last few players they will need they will become a force.

Everton will finish 8th to 10th this year. The usual top 4, Villa, Man City, Spurs should all finish above us. Pienaar has also rejected a new deal.
 
dannyjo22 said:
I'm all for a wage cap, let these players play for the clubs they want to play for rather than money. It will never happen regardless of how much sense it made for the whole of european football to have a wage cap.

City will be in the top 4 soon enough. Once they have a quality manager to draw in the last few players they will need they will become a force.

Everton will finish 8th to 10th this year. The usual top 4, Villa, Man City, Spurs should all finish above us. Pienaar has also rejected a new deal.
Click to expand...

If you give players a wage cap they will simply be paid in other ways. They will suddenly become part-owners in Roman A's Cleaning Emporium and get paid through that as well as their wages for being a Chelsea player for example, or there will be share dividends built into their contract. Their flash houses and cars will be included, relocating expenses will be bumped up etc etc. There is always a way round it.

Look at MPs, they get paid a comparetively "small" salary comapred to many top city execs but look at how they manipulated their expenses claims so that in reality they made a lot more money.
 
I seen City play Rangers last week and apart from Robinho they were fairly lacklustre. I know pre season doesn't count for too much but I just can't see them doing that well this season to be honest.
 
If Man City replace Dunne they may have a chance of kicking on into the top 4.

Oh, and get rid of Hughes as well naturally.
 
I personally think people are being too hard on Hughes

I think Man City have a good chance of making the top four (esp IF Fabregas is tempted back to Barca) its more a case of whether the money spent on players justify the position - ie too close to positions 5 and 6 at the end of the season, to be anything other than luck of the draw

How ever much MH has spent in the last few seasons, its still quite a step below Man Utd and Chelsea and before selling Alonso Liverpool as well
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom