You're mental.
FSG owe us more ...
- Thread starter LeTallecWiz
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
You're mental.
Mings? Talk of buying for buying’s sake ...
Hahaha. Milan would give us 35 quid and ask us to pay half his wages. 35 million? What the hell
In installments over the next 400 years.
I'm pretty sure the majority of fans don't understand the impact this pandemic will have on both transfer fees & contracts/wages.
You only have to read these boards to get a flavour of that.
The clubs don't, either. But if any owner thinks the definitive way to survive is to basically cut spending to near zero, then they're crazy. If clubs want to get through this crisis in a genuinely healthy state for the long term, then how they fare next season in the league won't be irrelevant. And if it isn't irrelevant, then it's crucial that they look to wait and see how to maximise, safely, as much as possible their chances of succeeding in actual competitions. And that will involve some real imagination, prudence and, yes, calculated risks. But rolling up in a ball hedgehog-style until it all blows over is not the super-responsible strategy some hacks seem to be so desperate to suggest.
I think it was @Beamrider that said the other day we may have a headline signing of £100m but couldn’t afford £50m for Werner. We could afford £20m/season for 5 years but not £50m over one.
Could we get creative with contracts for new players? Offer someone £125k/week for season 1, £150k season 2 and end up at £250k for season 4. One way not to piss off our current top earners as they’ll be on improved terms or moved on come season 4.
I'd be amazed if contracts weren't being written with caveats in. So 'year 2 wage 200k per week if tv rights at x amount or higher' etc etc.
Exactly the entire landscape has changed, for the foreseeable future we aren't going to see a rise in wages and transfers...I don't like the fact that the club tried to furlough the staff but it does at least indicate that financially it will be rocky for a while...
Anyways we got an excellent coach can't think of a better time than now to try and blood some of our talented youngsters
Long post (sorry).
My comment was about the transfer / agent fees as you say. In a typical, "normal times" transfer deal, you'll pay out about 40% of the costs in the first year, then 30% in years 2 and 3.
The Athletic article that 737Max posted said that the fee for Werner was £54m, + £10m agent fee. The fee was thought to be payable 2/3 up front and 1/3 in January (so all in the 2020-21 season / financial year). If that's right, that outlay of £64m, would equate to a "normal" transfer worth £160m (including agent fees and levies) so probably a headline transfer fee of £145m.
So even if we could afford Werner, by passing on the deal we could afford £145m worth of players, and might even stretch that further if we could negotiate a lower initial fee (either lower instalments or some fees contingent on appearances etc).
Of course, if a club could borrow money quite easily (e.g. from a sugar daddy owner) then they wouldn't be overly concerned and could do a deal like Werner now as, over the course of a five-year contract, it would still be cheaper than doing the bigger deal, and with no instalments to pay next year and the year after, they'd be able to spend more in those years. But a club restricted to using its own money in year 1 couldn't do that.
I checked over LFC's accounts and between 2011 and 2019 (last published year) and our net cashflow across that period is basically £nil, which says to me that FSG allow us to spend what we earn and no more (other than an initial loan they made when they first bought the club, our transfers have been out of our own profits, be they transfer profits or from normal operations). The only money they've taken out has been repayment of some of the money to build the Main Stand (which they obviously put in to begin with). So I suspect they see us as a self-sustaining operation and their profit will come as and when they sell.
The player wage issue is more difficult. I've seen contracts where the wages go up by increments of up to 20% per annum, but they tend to be for younger, highly-rated players and the rises are contingent on their performance / appearances etc - the player will usually be bullish about what he's going to achieve and be happy to accept this kind of approach.
A more acceptable approach for an established player might be big bonuses linked to goals / assists / clean sheets etc.
You don't tend to see signing on fees so much any more as if you agree to this, you have to pay it in every year of the contract, even if a player leaves the club - I did see one deal where this happened and a player signed on a five year deal was still getting signing on fees 2 years after he'd left the club.
Basically, we are signing Mbappe.
That I am 😉
Little tweaks.... More reliable than Lovren, has less in the way of brain farts in him than Lovren
The FA never used to allow any pay-rise or bonus clauses that didn’t relate to performance or behaviour on the pitch. Obviously as soon as a new TV deal kicks in, players and agents come out in force for new contracts.
Wasn't aware of that (obv).
I wonder whether we may see much shorter & lower salaried contracts, with a clause in that says if the TV deal is renewed the contract is then to be renegotiated. That's not then linking the TV deal to the pay directly & covers both parties.
I think in practice if this is what an agent or player insists on then clubs will find a way of doing it - e.g. they might provide an option to renegotiate when the new TV cycle kicks in, but with no obligation to conclude. It’s also worth bearing in mind that English clubs can and will pull the wool over the eyes of foreign players and agents by drafting a clause that looks like it does what the player wants but actually it doesn’t. Gordon Taylor said this was basically what happened with us and Suarez - he thought he had a deal with a release clause but it wasn’t an effective release clause (so Arsenal’s £40m + 1 offer didn’t force us to sell him).
Sooner or later in any negotiation, parties have to accept they can’t have their cake and eat it (that works both ways, obviously).
Ultimately, clubs know if a player isn’t happy then he’ll either strong arm them into giving him a new contract or force his way out of the club.
Tyrone Mings over Gomez... You need a lie down fella.
Good grief, yes. Mings isn't a bad player but he's nowhere near Gomez' class.
On the subject of Gomez, he looked better at LB last night than he ever has on the right. Still should play CB other than in exceptional circs though.
On the subject of Gomez, he looked better at LB last night than he ever has on the right. Still should play CB other than in exceptional circs though.
Yeah it was a pleasant surprise as I expect him to be a bit unsure of himself, he was excellent. Really is a very talented player, we are very lucky he and Trent could play the next 10 years for us.
I actually wasn't entirely surprised, though like you I wondered how he'd be feeling generally. His initial first team games for us on a pre-season tour Down Under were at LB (we basically didn't have one at the time) and he looked quite at home there. I'm also reminded of how well Carra played at LB after GH slotted him in there when we had injuries during the Treble season, and even how Magic looked more secure there than at RB when he occasionally got picked on the left. Perhaps it's because players not used to the job have to think more about what they're doing over on that side, which obv.has its benefits.
Lying down or standing up Gomez has to rely on his pace as he is caught out of postion offen,mings is not. Gomez uses his hands to grapple with attackers more than Mings so is more likely to give away freekicks/penalties...
Last edited:
Gomez is so classey that Maptip kept him out of the starting line up until he was injuried...
Not saying that he will not become a great defender, just at this stage Mings is a head of him in my books
I will mate. I just don't rate Gomez as high as some of you
How many penalties has Gomez given away throughout his entire LFC career?
Gomez can't be doing a bad job... he's been an important component in the first English top flight side to go the season unbeaten for 130+ years.
It that the best you can do...? I stated... "Gomez uses his hands to grapple with attacks more than Mings so is more likely to give away freekicks/penalties..."
How many times has Gomez used his hands and given away free kicks...??
My point is he uses his hand to often when I feel he does not need to, Just becase he gets away with it most time does not mean that he always will
- Status
