No ... 100M is cheap for him.Grealish is a great player but 100m is absurd, Villa getting the better deal there.
Surely means the end for Sterling?
No ... 100M is cheap for him.Grealish is a great player but 100m is absurd, Villa getting the better deal there.
Surely means the end for Sterling?
Grealish is a great player but 100m is absurd, Villa getting the better deal there.
Surely means the end for Sterling?
She’d take him to the cleaners, otherwise.Why the fuck would it need to be amicable? Kinda lost me on that last 1 Aqua
This must be from the Milano office:
More evidence ffp is dead
we’ve been calling Saul!
Apparently Schalke can't afford Kabak's wages and are considering terminating his contract.
& We/Klopp don't even want him on a free.
Maybe he wants to join us permanently?You have to wonder if there is some issue with him. I mean, it was only a few weeks ago that Leicester had apparently agreed a deal. As I recall there were a few other clubs mentioned (Palace, possibly?). Unless maybe they became aware that he would probably end up as a free agent and decided to wait it out.
When a player's on high wages and his club wants rid there's usually a deal to be done where the selling club pays a proportion of the wage for the remainder of his unexpired contract with them, or else they pay him a lump sum to do one.Maybe the level of wages is the problem - someone gave him excessive contract terms which he's perhaps trying to maintain, and no-one wants to be bound by them?
Maybe he wants to join us permanently?
I thought he did pretty well overall, a few shaky moments but expected from a 20 year old...he's 1 of the reasons we were able to push on and get 3rd.
When a player's on high wages and his club wants rid there's usually a deal to be done where the selling club pays a proportion of the wage for the remainder of his unexpired contract with them, or else they pay him a lump sum to do one.
That's often why you see these kinds of players signing short-term contracts with their new club - the new club doesn't want to commit to paying the higher wages over an extended contract, but will pay him what they think he's worth for a few years with the selling club making up the difference. If the player does well at his new club then they can obviously talk about extending the deal / matching the terms over a longer period.
Don't believe any of this bollocks you sometimes read about a player "accepting a pay cut" to move to a new club. His old club will almost certainly be making up the difference.
Leeds was before my time in football but it wouldn't surprise me in the least, although they ended up going into administration and that may have allowed them to get rid of some of their outstanding wage liabilities at that time. I was actually working for a major accountancy firm when Leeds went bust and I remember the insolvency guys saying they had spoken to their colleagues in Leeds and they had been told from on high not to go after the Leeds job as football insolvencies were so toxic, reputationally speaking.Wasn't that the case with Leeds all those years ago when they ended up skint and had to sell everyone?
I vaguely remember the stories that they were still paying wages years after players had left
You have to wonder if there is some issue with him. I mean, it was only a few weeks ago that Leicester had apparently agreed a deal. As I recall there were a few other clubs mentioned (Palace, possibly?). Unless maybe they became aware that he would probably end up as a free agent and decided to wait it out.
we’ve been calling Saul!
Man City potentially dropping 260 million on two players after 16 months of no attendance income is yet another one for the 'football is dead' file
I thought Edwards was supposed to be some kind of guru when it came to getting business done, why are we struggling to find buyers for Origi and Shaqiri?