Guest Sniffer Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 If any of them are even close to starting next season we'll be no further forward. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scoreboard82 Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 While technically we can afford it, I agree its far too much to be paying. I think £80,000 would be acceptable IMO and would help the overall saving we're trying to make on wages. Emre gone - £60,000 Duff gone - £50,000 Smith gone - £45,000 Carr gone - £40,000 Owen wage cut - £40,000 Babayaro gone- £35,000 Cacapa gone - £30,000 Ameobi gone - £25,000 Rozehnal - £25,000 £350,000 per week, or £18 million per year saved (obviously the wages are guestimates..). Emre never played, Duff is useless, Smith worse then useless, Ameobi not even a fringe player, Carr useless, Baba played even less then Emre, Cacapa only backup and Rozehnal will hardly be missed having been on loan for the last 5 months. So we're really not losing anything there.. Yet it would drop our current wage bill from £64 million per year to roughly around £46 million. Acceptable to who? The club or Owen? I'm sure it would be acceptable to the club, but I very much doubt it would be acceptable to Owen. You not going to replace those 8 players then? Or are you just going to use YTS lads? PS You forgot Given off your list of useless players/crocks. Bit harsh on Given IMO. He's stayed here for years and done a great job for the most part, when he could've signed for most other clubs and won things. Harpers a good keeper, but in them 2 we've got a 1st class pairing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
afar Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 I think what is pretty clear is that both side are a ways away from each other. My feeling is that, the club has offered a figure of around 80k a week, as other people have suggested. That would still make him the top earner at the club and rightly so. But putting yourself in Owen's shoes, he'll have a hard time accepting that. Not just from a monetary point of view but also pride. My feeling is that Owen will in the end reject it and chose to wait till the summer of 09 to see what offers come in there. He'll probably then leave for a contract of 80k+plus inflation some place else. The club obviously won't want this to happen, so they'll try to sell him but they'll have a hard time finding a buyer who'll offer Owen an acceptable salary. We could even sell him and still pay a portion of his wages. TBH it's not a good situation, the simplest solution is to offer him the same terms as he's currently on. I'm pretty confident he would accept. But I don't think that would sit well with the club's financial folks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
magpie418 Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 PS You forgot Given off your list of useless players/crocks. ? there should be a bronze statue of Given holding up the tyne bridge! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rebel_yell12 Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Why does every writing INCREASE Owen's wages? A year ago, he was supposedly on 110k per week. The year before that, it was supposedly 100k per week. When he signed, the rumours were 90k per week. Now it's 120k per week? It's like people have to make things more dramatic, or make him seem like a greedy c**t or something, find some reason to slag him off or insist that he's past it/not worth it...everyone inflates his rumoured wages a little bit, and now three years on, he's magically gotten a 20-30k per week raise! Michael Owen is NOT on 120k per week. If he were, he'd have been listed higher on the league's "highest paid players" table (only Terry & Lampard are on that much, to my knowledge, with a few more players on 110 and 115k) -- he's 14th in wages, which puts him amongst those on 100-1005k per week, if I remember that list right. I trust the Times' sanctioned numbers more than I do those of the papers like the Mirror, or random internet rumours. His Actim rating, when averaged over his matches played, puts him in the top 20 players in the league, iirc, so it's not as if he's "not worth the wages" when he's fit. And he's been fit of late, showing his worth. Retroactively punishing him for two massive injuries seems very harsh, imo. Offer Owen the same wages he's on, without his "get out" and decreasing transfer value clauses. Any raise in pay should be covered by performance and appearance-based incentives, not in weekly guaranteed wages. If he signs, it shows he's willing to stay at Newcastle without any "buy out" options (even for Liverpool) and it also shows that the club respects and values his position and his contribution. Win-win. Owen's wages are not a concern. It's much more worrying what is being wasted on the likes of Smith, Duff, and even Barton (played well but his off-the-field issues are...problematic at best). There's what? 160k per week in those three players? We could pay four or five solid, more productive, players for that. If Owen is Keegan's "most important signing," and we've discussed on this board before the price of replacing Owen if he goes, it seems well worth it to me to keep him at his established wages. At this point, I just hope Owen signs quickly. So the press, and everyone else, can shut up about it. Although you know by November the papers will somehow have him in the shopwindow again, even if he signs a long-term contract. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Why does every writing INCREASE Owen's wages? A year ago, he was supposedly on 110k per week. The year before that, it was supposedly 100k per week. When he signed, the rumours were 90k per week. Now it's 120k per week? It's like people have to make things more dramatic, or make him seem like a greedy c**t or something, find some reason to slag him off or insist that he's past it/not worth it...everyone inflates his rumoured wages a little bit, and now three years on, he's magically gotten a 20-30k per week raise! Michael Owen is NOT on 120k per week. If he were, he'd have been listed higher on the league's "highest paid players" table (only Terry & Lampard are on that much, to my knowledge, with a few more players on 110 and 115k) -- he's 14th in wages, which puts him amongst those on 100-1005k per week, if I remember that list right. I trust the Times' sanctioned numbers more than I do those of the papers like the Mirror, or random internet rumours. His Actim rating, when averaged over his matches played, puts him in the top 20 players in the league, iirc, so it's not as if he's "not worth the wages" when he's fit. And he's been fit of late, showing his worth. Retroactively punishing him for two massive injuries seems very harsh, imo. Offer Owen the same wages he's on, without his "get out" and decreasing transfer value clauses. Any raise in pay should be covered by performance and appearance-based incentives, not in weekly guaranteed wages. If he signs, it shows he's willing to stay at Newcastle without any "buy out" options (even for Liverpool) and it also shows that the club respects and values his position and his contribution. Win-win. Owen's wages are not a concern. It's much more worrying what is being wasted on the likes of Smith, Duff, and even Barton (played well but his off-the-field issues are...problematic at best). There's what? 160k per week in those three players? We could pay four or five solid, more productive, players for that. If Owen is Keegan's "most important signing," and we've discussed on this board before the price of replacing Owen if he goes, it seems well worth it to me to keep him at his established wages. At this point, I just hope Owen signs quickly. So the press, and everyone else, can shut up about it. Although you know by November the papers will somehow have him in the shopwindow again, even if he signs a long-term contract. While we don't know for sure what he is on it is not beyond the realms of possibility that he has a % yearly wage increase clause in his current contract. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bealios Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 From reading through all of the posts I think most people's view is that he's currently paid £100 - £110K per week. If you think about it, at the time, thats the sort of figure you could imagine Fat Fred offering when he factored in merchandising/shirt sales etc. I think any higher figure mentioned is only what people are speculating now as the number wanted by Owen's advisors i.e. a small (% wise) increase on the current salary. I stand by my ealier post and think signing Owen should be a priority, even if it costs 120K a week - but I would like to think that we could get to that figure by offering a lower basic, but with appearance/goal/european qualification related increases - even if they take the potential amount payable higher than £120K - if that happens it means we finish 6th so at the moment I imagine we would be happy with that and couldn't give a toss if our qualfication for Europe meant me had to shell out a bit more in wages - get all of the fuckers on it if you ask me! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shearer_united Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Michael Owen is definitely is no longer worth his 120k/week wage. The real and only incentive i see for him to stay in Newcastle is money and therefore i think its better if he had left - Someone else to replace him is definitely a priority in the summer. says the man with a picture of smith as his avatar owen has proved himself as a player whenever he's been fit, but therein lies the main problem. i agree wages of a 120 are outrageous, but we'll struggle to get anyone in who has even half his talent Its obvious that judging from your thick skull you have no idea that Michael Owen is made of glass. I want Michael Owen out due to many reasons, including the fact that he is bigger than the club. And by the way, since you judge people here by their avatars, you seem to be more ignorant than a mackem himself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Michael Owen is definitely is no longer worth his 120k/week wage. The real and only incentive i see for him to stay in Newcastle is money and therefore i think its better if he had left - Someone else to replace him is definitely a priority in the summer. says the man with a picture of smith as his avatar owen has proved himself as a player whenever he's been fit, but therein lies the main problem. i agree wages of a 120 are outrageous, but we'll struggle to get anyone in who has even half his talent Its obvious that judging from your thick skull you have no idea that Michael Owen is made of glass. I want Michael Owen out due to many reasons, including the fact that he is bigger than the club. And by the way, since you judge people here by their avatars, you seem to be more ignorant than a mackem himself. Has he missed a game this calendar year out of interest? You say he's "made of glass", yet since he signed, he missed 18 months due to two serious injuries which was just bad luck, and only a couple of months through niggles which all strikers get in 3 years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 And wanting rid of a player because he's too big for us is just the most ridiculously pathetic thing I've read on this forum. What I'd give for 10 more of those... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shearer_united Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 And wanting rid of a player because he's too big for us is just the most ridiculously pathetic thing I've read on this forum. What I'd give for 10 more of those... most ridiculously pathetic or True !? Open your eyes.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
manorpark Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 Michael Owen is definitely is no longer worth his 120k/week wage. The real and only incentive i see for him to stay in Newcastle is money and therefore i think its better if he had left - Someone else to replace him is definitely a priority in the summer. says the man with a picture of smith as his avatar owen has proved himself as a player whenever he's been fit, but therein lies the main problem. i agree wages of a 120 are outrageous, but we'll struggle to get anyone in who has even half his talent Its obvious that judging from your thick skull you have no idea that Michael Owen is made of glass. I want Michael Owen out due to many reasons, including the fact that he is bigger than the club. /quote] How awful it must be to actually think and believe that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Optimistic Nut Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 And wanting rid of a player because he's too big for us is just the most ridiculously pathetic thing I've read on this forum. What I'd give for 10 more of those... most ridiculously pathetic or True !? Open your eyes.. And wanting rid of a player because he's too big for us is just the most ridiculously pathetic thing I've read on this forum. What I'd give for 10 more of those... most ridiculously pathetic or True !? Open your eyes.. So what, you want players who aren't good enough for us? Or you'd sooner get rid of Owen who you claim is too big for us, with someone not as good? Give over man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr Venkman Posted June 4, 2008 Share Posted June 4, 2008 And wanting rid of a player because he's too big for us is just the most ridiculously pathetic thing I've read on this forum. What I'd give for 10 more of those... most ridiculously pathetic or True !? Open your eyes.. jesus titty fucking christ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest michaelfoster Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Emre gone - £60,000 Duff gone - £50,000 Smith gone - £45,000 Carr gone - £40,000 Owen wage cut - £40,000 Babayaro gone- £35,000 Cacapa gone - £30,000 Ameobi gone - £25,000 Rozehnal - £25,000 Id be very suprised if some of those players are on anything near those wages, Ameobi will probably only be 15-20k rather than 25k, Smith will be on more than £45k, probably nearer 55-60k, Carr & Babayaro were probably only on 30k. Martins will probably be on around 50k, and Viduka will be given weekly Greggs vouchers to the value of £20 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest VegasToon Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Personally I would like to see Owen given $80000 a week base and bonuses based on performance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sniffer Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Why would you just single out Owen? What about geremi, smith, viduka,n'zogbia, duff.....in fact all of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimbo Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Why would you just single out Owen? What about geremi, smith, viduka,n'zogbia, duff.....in fact all of them. Since when was N'Zogbia on high wages? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Sniffer Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 bonuses paid on performance.......get it now? N'zogbia hasn't earned his wages in two years like a lot of them. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimbo Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 bonuses paid on performance.......get it now? N'zogbia hasn't earned his wages in two years like a lot of them. No, because messing about with N'Zogbias contract will make very very little difference to the ultimate aim of cutting down the wage bill. The likes of Owen though... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest rebel_yell12 Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 bonuses paid on performance.......get it now? N'zogbia hasn't earned his wages in two years like a lot of them. No, because messing about with N'Zogbias contract will make very very little difference to the ultimate aim of cutting down the wage bill. The likes of Owen though... F***ing hell. The "ultimate aim of cutting down the wage bill" isn't the issue here. The issue is that the policy you advocate would be punishing the best player at the club for something that is hardly his fault, and completely out of his control at any rate (the wages of the dross around him). I've no problem with Owen and Martins being on good wages, or the keepers (who've earned it, over the years, especially of late) or any other player who consistently performs well for the club. What message does it send if ONLY Owen's wages take a hit? Then it's not a club problem, it's a problem with Michael Owen. Nice message to send. Play well, be captain and leading scorer, say all the right things, have the manager's support, an incredible record in the league and international play but...the club doesn't respect you, or want to keep you. You aren't worth being overpaid, but all those players around you, they are worth it. It's just you we're cutting pay of. If your boss came to you and said, "look, we need to assure the stability of the company, everyone's taking a bit of a hit"...that's one thing. If he says, "money's tight, you're the best we've got and the best paid, so we're cutting just your wages, and giving that money to the lads around you" how would YOU react? I'd quit on the spot. No f***ing way. Why this insistence on cutting existing players wages? And why the BEST player and club captain? Did no one take proper business courses at college or university? A business can't do that, it's horrific PR and even worse for keeping employees! For f***s sake, the only realistic and viable way to cut the wage bill is to sell the high-paid dross and buy less-remunerated but better-quality players. Punishing current players for the policies of the old regime isn't viable. I've stated my reasoning before, but in brief it's simple: cutting Owen's wages advertises financial problems within the club, indicates a willingness to punish the wrong players, disrespects the club captain, disregards Keegan's emphasis on the importance of that signing, ignores Owen's widespread popularity which can help sign new, young players and shows a lack of ambition as the club clearly wouldn't care to keep their best player. If you think this is a good way to move the club forward...well, there's no longer a point in having any discussion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
madras Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 bonuses paid on performance.......get it now? N'zogbia hasn't earned his wages in two years like a lot of them. nice thought but if a player has a choice of low basic and high based on performance or some club just offers the high basic in order to tempt him....where will he go ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimbo Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Well whether he is the "best" player at the club is very debatable, he's the most high profile but not the best IMO. And nobody is being punished here. It sounds like the club want to use a wage cap, if Owen is the only player earning over that wage cap then naturally he will be offered lower wages. The message that it sends out i hope would be that we're not mugs anymore and are an efficiently run club. I think you massively overrate the importance of Owen to be honest, if he decides to leave over the wage issue then so be it, he's not irreplaceable like some people seem to think. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offshore Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Unless you can offer something no-one else can, ie champs league games or a team already challenging for the title etc, then you have to at an absolute minimum pay the going rate, and for an England international still with many years in front of him (in theory anyway) then thats what we'll have to do or he'll go elsewhere. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted June 5, 2008 Share Posted June 5, 2008 Unless you can offer something no-one else can, ie champs league games or a team already challenging for the title etc, then you have to at an absolute minimum pay the going rate, and for an England international still with many years in front of him (in theory anyway) then thats what we'll have to do or he'll go elsewhere. He's an England international with a chequered fitness record, that's why other clubs have been reluctant to take him off our hands previously. I still think they'll think long and hard before offering more than we are. Link to post 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