Toonpack 9463 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 It's the only thing clubs can do to at elast give them any measure of control over players leaving. Pay top whack or fuck off (or way over the top whack in Carroll's case). is this a spectaclar u-turn in the making here ? U turn on what ???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) ALL Contracts are offered to protect investment in a player, otherwise Bosmans would be the norm. Two of our best players signing new contracts is only a positive, we've secured their places in our team, and if offers do come in they'll have to be better than before contracts were signed. The fact we're being told all the Carroll money has now been spent on these contracts is clearly bollocks though. Krul's still on less than Smith, and Colo's salary doesn't seem to have changed markedly (if the reported amounts are right). Edited March 5, 2012 by Happy Face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I believe the wage structure is set as a % of turnover, if the income goes higher, so can (and will) the wages. It's not a ceiling based on a cap at any particular weekly wage level. please tell us when Spurs have sold their best players to pay the wages of other players, as you constantly harp on about them and tell us how we are doing things like they are now ? Then make a post or two about football, if you can. All the time, they record profits on player trading every fucking year. Loon so they sell their best players to pay the contracts of others, and this is how they are in the Champions League and their turnover has overtaken ours in the last 4 years ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 ALL Contracts are offered to protect investment in a player, otherwise Bosmans would be the norm. Two of our best players signing new contracts is only a positive, we've secured their places in our team, and if offers do come in they'll have to be better than before contracts were signed. The fact we're being told all the Carroll money has now been spent on these contracts is clearly bollocks though. Krul's still on less than Smith, and Colo's salary doesn't seem to have changed markedly (if the reported amounts are right). this is just, so so so obvious, it's unbelievable that anybody can defend it at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toonpack 9463 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 please tell us when Spurs have sold their best players to pay the wages of other players, as you constantly harp on about them and tell us how we are doing things like they are now ? Then make a post or two about football, if you can. All the time, they record profits on player trading every fucking year. Loon so they sell their best players to pay the contracts of others, and this is how they are in the Champions League and their turnover has overtaken ours in the last 4 years ? Yes, they have a history of selling players for inflated fee's and building, onwards and upwards. See Carrick, Berbatov for expensive examples.(same as all the succesful clubs do). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ewerk 30656 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I'm not interested in discussing it but how sad is it that two of our best players sign new long term deals and all Leazes can do is complain that they're going to be sold. Why bother following the club if there's nothing about it you can enjoy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Gloom 21963 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 ALL Contracts are offered to protect investment in a player, otherwise Bosmans would be the norm. Two of our best players signing new contracts is only a positive, we've secured their places in our team, and if offers do come in they'll have to be better than before contracts were signed. The fact we're being told all the Carroll money has now been spent on these contracts is clearly bollocks though. Krul's still on less than Smith, and Colo's salary doesn't seem to have changed markedly (if the reported amounts are right). is that what we're being told though? was there an official line from the club saying the money used to extend those two deals was the carroll cash? as far as i can see it's just speculation from the mirror. i'm not saying they will reinvest all the 35m like - i don't expect them to - but there have at least been more encouraging signs of ambition since the carroll sale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) ALL Contracts are offered to protect investment in a player, otherwise Bosmans would be the norm. Two of our best players signing new contracts is only a positive, we've secured their places in our team, and if offers do come in they'll have to be better than before contracts were signed. The fact we're being told all the Carroll money has now been spent on these contracts is clearly bollocks though. Krul's still on less than Smith, and Colo's salary doesn't seem to have changed markedly (if the reported amounts are right). is that what we're being told though? was there an official line from the club saying the money used to extend those two deals was the carroll cash? as far as i can see it's just speculation from the mirror. i'm not saying they will reinvest all the 35m like - i don't expect them to - but there have at least been more encouraging signs of ambition since the carroll sale. Whether it's the reporters spin or the clubs, it's what's being suggested. I wasn't apportioning any blame to anyone for it. It's not just bollocks because of the reasons above, but also because we've actually spent £23m on transfers since selling Carroll. How much longer are we going to go on spending this finite amount of money? Edited March 5, 2012 by Happy Face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 All the time, they record profits on player trading every fucking year. Loon so they sell their best players to pay the contracts of others, and this is how they are in the Champions League and their turnover has overtaken ours in the last 4 years ? Yes, they have a history of selling players for inflated fee's and building, onwards and upwards. See Carrick, Berbatov for expensive examples.(same as all the succesful clubs do). what a load of crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I'm not interested in discussing it but how sad is it that two of our best players sign new long term deals and all Leazes can do is complain that they're going to be sold. Why bother following the club if there's nothing about it you can enjoy. and how long have you "supported" the club ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 ALL Contracts are offered to protect investment in a player, otherwise Bosmans would be the norm. Two of our best players signing new contracts is only a positive, we've secured their places in our team, and if offers do come in they'll have to be better than before contracts were signed. The fact we're being told all the Carroll money has now been spent on these contracts is clearly bollocks though. Krul's still on less than Smith, and Colo's salary doesn't seem to have changed markedly (if the reported amounts are right). Who said that these contracts are being funded by the Carroll transfer? The fact that someone has added up the cost of the contract over its lifetime is a reflection of the desire to communicate the reality of these sort of deals for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 (edited) ALL Contracts are offered to protect investment in a player, otherwise Bosmans would be the norm. Two of our best players signing new contracts is only a positive, we've secured their places in our team, and if offers do come in they'll have to be better than before contracts were signed. The fact we're being told all the Carroll money has now been spent on these contracts is clearly bollocks though. Krul's still on less than Smith, and Colo's salary doesn't seem to have changed markedly (if the reported amounts are right). Who said that these contracts are being funded by the Carroll transfer? The fact that someone has added up the cost of the contract over its lifetime is a reflection of the desire to communicate the reality of these sort of deals for me. The article under discussion said it. See my last post. I made it clearer as i knew a few posters would be put out if i suggested it was the club pushing this line. Edited March 5, 2012 by Happy Face Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawD 99 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Hang on LM, you're losing me here. Do you think Colo and Krul should have been given new contracts? Or are you saying damned if they do damned if they dont? do you seriously think that NUFC should be selling their best players to meet so called "operational costs" ? Do you seriously not understand this ? Eh? wtf you on about man? we're talking about Colo and Krul here arnt we? If they sell these two to meet costs then of course I dont think they should. but they havent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawD 99 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 ALL Contracts are offered to protect investment in a player, otherwise Bosmans would be the norm. Two of our best players signing new contracts is only a positive, we've secured their places in our team, and if offers do come in they'll have to be better than before contracts were signed. The fact we're being told all the Carroll money has now been spent on these contracts is clearly bollocks though. Krul's still on less than Smith, and Colo's salary doesn't seem to have changed markedly (if the reported amounts are right). Who said that these contracts are being funded by the Carroll transfer? The fact that someone has added up the cost of the contract over its lifetime is a reflection of the desire to communicate the reality of these sort of deals for me. The article under discussion said it. See my last post. I made it clearer as i knew a few posters would be put out if i suggested it was the club pushing this line. Aye it did but from memory it was said originally that the money would stay in the club. But also from memory a first they said it would be reinvested in players but they changed that to stay in the club and then spend some on the training ground. Couldnt give a fuck personally where the money comes from, just happy they signed. I know you can say it was only done to increase their sell on value, but fuck me what a negative cunt you have to be if that is your view of very action a club takes. As said, that is the reason for every clubs player contract, else they would walk as and when. I'm staggered that anyone could see Colo signing a new deal as anything but good news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 7083 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Every club we've sold our so called best players to is below us in the league. New contracts for our current top players. £10m spent on one of Europe's hot strikers. 6th in the league. The despair of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 Not sure why that posts been directed at me tbh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trophyshy 7083 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 It wasn't mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 It wasn't mate. JawD's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 The article under discussion said it. See my last post. I made it clearer as i knew a few posters would be put out if i suggested it was the club pushing this line. Theres lots of journalists who are more than capable of pushing whatever troll-like line they want. Not everything that addresses issues from a perspective other than the peeved fan is Ashley propaganda. Bit of a digression but I was having a drink with a Sheff Wed fan 3 weeks ago, he says 'isnt it about time you lot layed off Ashley'. (My reply for the record was 'he fucked off Kegan, appointed Joe Kinnear and relegated the 14th biggest club financially in the world, might take a bit more than 6th place in February for people to get past that'). The point being, the perspectives of others, including journalists, doesnt always start from the same emotional place as for the majority. It could well be the club put that out there, for me they dont need to as i see us as maximum 13.2m up off Caroll anyway, not including increased operational spend. I can see why they might want people to add it up though when some muppets are still talking about 35m being missing, it doesnt exactly suggest a financially literate fan base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JawD 99 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 It's near impossible to account for the £35M to the penny unless you suggest no other funds have been put into the "pot" since that time. I think the "pot" includes wages as well as fee's etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Every club we've sold our so called best players to is below us in the league. New contracts for our current top players. £10m spent on one of Europe's hot strikers. 6th in the league. The despair of it. I've made my views of the long term results on the clubs setup and strategy, I'm 100% sure that time will prove me correct , I've explained this for a long time now and I'm not explaining it again. Have you read the link to the article, its about the sale of Carroll, not Krul and Colo [although why anybody thinks these contracts means they will see them out is beyond me at the moment]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monroe Transfer 0 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 How many times have you said "I'm not explaining it again" only to explain it again an hour or so later? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted March 5, 2012 Author Share Posted March 5, 2012 Looking at those Mackems holding aloft Sports Direct plastic bags yesterday, I felt a kinship with the fat man I haven't felt in 4 years. It may just have been how fucking stupid they are, or it may have been that he's got us back looking down on them from a better league position, as well as the inherently loftier moral position, but my pity for them gave me a moment of clarity where I remembered, things could have been worse, I could have been born a mackem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 14012 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 Apparently they had some kind of banner too. The support was weird yesterday, we were both quiet given the circumstances. I seem to remember other derbys being louder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeazesMag 0 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 It's near impossible to account for the £35M to the penny unless you suggest no other funds have been put into the "pot" since that time. I think the "pot" includes wages as well as fee's etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now