I'd much rather pay more wages on highly likely potential, than a past which is unlikely to continue.
Sterling Contract Situation
- Thread starter tony
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Status
I honestly can't believe it's up for debate. Even if Sterling does not improve in the next year or two, we'd find it a lot easier to move him on than the likes of Joe Cole.
Thirty grand a week isn't too bad to tie him down to a long term contract but I can see why the club would be reluctant to over extend themselves as every kid getting a couple of starts in the first team will start demanding similar wages to Sterling/
I guess it is about getting the balance right and not setting too high of a precedent/
I guess it is about getting the balance right and not setting too high of a precedent/
If Arsenal want him, and he's valued at 15m, I'd happily take Walcott for a 3m profit. Straight swap, even.
Much quicker and miles more end product.
Sure, Sterling's got the potential (he'll never be as quick as Walcott, but has a much bigger skill set), but it's always a massive risk with teenagers as to how they'll develop. I'd take 80k per week for 23 year old Walcott ahead of 50k per week Sterling any day of the week.
Much quicker and miles more end product.
Sure, Sterling's got the potential (he'll never be as quick as Walcott, but has a much bigger skill set), but it's always a massive risk with teenagers as to how they'll develop. I'd take 80k per week for 23 year old Walcott ahead of 50k per week Sterling any day of the week.
Fek me if the club did a deal like that I would just give up all hope in their ability to do ANYHTNING right.
Walcott +3m for Sterling? 😱
His England cap doesn't help our bargaining position
I agree, but I don't think that is as simple as paying him a huge wage because he has played more games than Cole/Downing etc as some seem to suggest.
What we pay him has implications for other wage negotiations with youth prospects in the future.
As we seem to be pining a lot of our hopes on the academy becoming an assembly line of first team players, a bit of prudence in our contract offers would in my opinion be wise.
Agreed, but we seem to have shown that in this case.
Fully understand that, but he is a de facto first team regular not a youth prospect anymore and therefore his situation could not be compared to say that of Morgan or Coady as far as wages are concerned. Someone correct me but we could lose him and have a fee set by arbitration panel which is always on the low side as far as valuations are concerned. Madness if that happens
Agreed mate, I'm guessing it has cost us an extra 15k that we waited so long before offering/agreeing a new contract.
I don't agree actually. I don't think we were ever going to get away with much (if any) less than we've now settled for. Heaven knows the club has been plagued by poor negotiating skills from Parry's time onwards, but on this occasion it seems to me that we've done reasonably well.
Has that been agreed or is it just speculation?
Speculation just like the 50k
regards
regards
No one has said that at all, you're being ridiculous, it has pointed out that Kenny had a not to dissimilar season to this one in the league, the one that you're writing off after 4 months with a manager who's had less time in the job and about a quarter of the money. Kenny won a trophy, nearly got another one and it wouldn't have been unreasonable to give him time. But it didn't happen because our league finish was poor in relation to the money spent. Rodgers deserves the chance to get it right AND undo the problems that arose from not spending well when we had the backing to do so. You're hypocrisy over the amount of patience you've been willing to show with both managers, all things considered, is bewildering.
And the crossed out "forced to play young players" line is wearing thin. Why don't you just post a thread letting us all know that you hate Rodgers and are not willing to give him any time or slack at all. Instead of sifting through every interview he does to take a quote completely out of context and bash him with it, while you're sat there praying for the day he gets booted, so you can lay into the next poor bastard who isn't Kenny Dalgish.
That way we don't have to cut through the thinly veiled, ultra-transparent hatred every time you post about him. You're better than this Macca, the snidey little jibes in every post about him and the obvious bitterness over Kenny is doing you a disservice.
Like when Kenny played Flannagan and Robinson? No? A willingness to use young players when other managers might have shuffled around senior fringe players is the difference, exactly the same as with those two when Kenny was in charge. It's having the balls to do it. It's not like we didn't have more senior players available, Cole, Downing, Henderson and Gerrard could all have filled the side berths. He didn't have to throw Suso into the mix against Chelsea, there were other more experienced players on the bench.
Like I said, what he does right is either lucky or is forced upon him.
Like I said, what he does right is either lucky or is forced upon him.
Exaggeration again. He was considering sending Sterling out on loan until he started putting in measured performances that made him think again. You make it sound like he was shipping the lot out and then suddenly counted the squad and realised he'd got his sums wrong.
And if I "want to claim to know different"? You're making up whatever fits your agenda, I'm not the one claiming insider knowledge but refusing to substantiate it.
It comforts you to keep claiming that I dislike Rodgers because I didn't want Dalglish sacked. It's untrue, but it's like some kid putting his fingers in his ears and making a 'nah nah nah nah' noise. And again, it shows your uneasiness that you are so wound up about the simple fact that Rodgers did not intend to play so many kids - that isn't even a criticism, but you seize on it as one. That's telling. As for 'insider knowledge,' if I'm told something in private that alarms me, I honour the promise not to divulge sources, not tell you. All you have is a big bag of vague hope and desperation dressed up as rational judgement. And that bothers you so much you need to caricature and dismiss anyone who thinks differently. You think Rodgers is good for the club? Great, good for you. I don't.
I wasn't asking you to divulge your sources Macca, you said it 'continues' to hit the papers, which is clearly wrong, Fabio even asked you which ones, which you chose to not respond to. So you have this agenda against him and have a convenient story that you don't want to expose your sources on. You make a comment about it filtering through to the press continuously (and reel off a list of players who have apparently been victims of this exercise), yet when pressed about it you opt to not even respond. I've never questioned what you've said before nor had reason to doubt you, but when you've got a clear issue about the man and you are all too eager to express it at every opportunity, it smacks as being a bit convenient, spreading word about something that serves your viewpoint but refusing to back it up. It's like a smear campaign.
Anyway, back to the question, do I think Rodgers is good for the club? I'm indifferent at the minute, he's not been here long enough, he's young, in his first big job, has shown some promise and some naivety. The jury is out but he gets my support and patience in the meantime because he deserves as much as the last guy and getting on his back at every turn and going all hysterical at every obstacle serves no purpose only than to add more unnecessary pressure.
Anyway, back to the question, do I think Rodgers is good for the club? I'm indifferent at the minute, he's not been here long enough, he's young, in his first big job, has shown some promise and some naivety. The jury is out but he gets my support and patience in the meantime because he deserves as much as the last guy and getting on his back at every turn and going all hysterical at every obstacle serves no purpose only than to add more unnecessary pressure.
It was 'seized' upon as a criticism because you've said it several times. You posted about him playing them, then chose a snide crossed-out remark about him "being forced to play them". Not a criticism? At the very least it was belittling his reasoning for using youngsters and making a point of not giving any credit. Like I said, what good he has done is played down in one way or another as being fortuitous, or par the course. Don't pretend you weren't having a dig when it's that obvious.
No, it was at most a criticism of the desperate attempts by his over-eager supporters to claim some kind of rational, premeditated managerial nous for anything that has a positive. Some things are not planned but still have positives. Great. But don't include those things as 'proof' of a good manager, just like early substitutions are ignored when they don't work and are hailed as acts of genius when they do. It does nothing but damage the case these people want to make. But I'm not actually pursuing you with self-righteous indignation because I dislike your incoherent acts of loyalty. I'm not sure why you're so intolerant, unless it's borne of insecurity, but I'm ignoring it from this point on.
I really don't know how this idea that he was forced to play hte youngsters can be sustained. For a while we were starting Sterling, Wisdom, and Suso in league matches, all ahead of more experienced alternatives, and then there's things like playing Sinclair in the league cup. Of course the weakness of the squad plays a part, but really, a bit of credit where its due.
Over eager? Who's using it as proof he's a good manager? No one's even said as much. I've criticised the Cole comment, I've criticised his decisions against Villa and our play being too open in other games, particularly WBA and Arsenal. I've criticised the fact he's trying to overcome egos yet he has a fucking massive canvas of himself on his living room wall.
I've given credit to the fact that's played more than a few young lads and taken others on away trips to European games for the experience. I've praised 'some' of his tactical decisions, notably against Everton and Chelsea 'in game'.
Over eager support against over eager hatred. I know which one is more befitting of a fan without an agenda.
Read through your posts again about me overpraising and ignoring the flaws. I'll provide links to the above criticisms and moments of praise if you like, just to give it some credibility and a fair more amount of perspective than you're managing.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
