Toon tell Owen to accept £30k a-week pay slash... says the Mail

[Guest shearer_united]

I still think that it would be too much to offer for a player who has already peaked and lost a lot of his speed.

 

[Guest shearer_united]

Well, he will never be what he once was. I think that everyone should be aware of that.

 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Everything's been said really, firstly this is probably bollocks - I don't believe the Mail has the inside line on what everyone is paid or will be paid.

 

It seems a few years ago the fun figure was to say players were all on 60k, then 80k and now the magical 110. They haven't got a clue is my best guess, and they're operating on rumours and guesswork like we are... only difference is they have a paper to fill.

 

If any of it is true then I admire the club for trying to cut costs, but I would have thought this would be done over time by bringing in players on lesser wages rather than taking risks with our key goalscorer. But fair play to them if they've decided this is the long term strategy, everyone will have to come into line or move on, Owen included (although I would hate to see that happen).

[Dave]

From the Times, who I am slightly more inclined to believe than the Mail tbh:

 

In the case of Owen, player and club have reiterated their eagerness to reach a successful outcome and the striker's advisers have informed Newcastle of their ballpark requirements. More talks are scheduled to take place before the start of the new campaign.

 

I suppose that doesn't sound as good as 'TOON OFFER OWEN 50P & PACKET OF QUAVERS' though.

[Tooj]

From the Times, who I am slightly more inclined to believe than the Mail tbh:

 

In the case of Owen, player and club have reiterated their eagerness to reach a successful outcome and the striker's advisers have informed Newcastle of their ballpark requirements. More talks are scheduled to take place before the start of the new campaign.

 

I suppose that doesn't sound as good as 'TOON OFFER OWEN 50P & PACKET OF QUAVERS' though.

 

I thought Owen has done a bit of work for Walkers in the past? Makes no sense to offer him Quavers.

[Dave]

Walkers make Quavers, numbnuts.

[sicsfingeredmong]

Why are we messing with our main player like this? Owen is crucial to us, will Ashley and co feel better about themselves if he says no, fucks off and we have 110k a week off the wage bill? Its madness giving him ultimatiums when we should be trying our best to keep him.

 

The daily spreadsheets will ultimately look better though, and ultimately Ashley & Co. are spreadsheet guys.

 

Football reality, and how the contract market operates. For top-line players entering contract negotiations in their late 20's, approaching the eve of their twighlight years in other words, this contract deal - ie. lets say 3 to 4 years - will most likely be their last 'big earner'. After this one, after the next deal expires, it's very much about lower contract lengths & lower wage packages as the next batch of top-liners emerge in the same 'wage earning' bracket as they step into the void created as the likes of Owen & Bergkamp.

 

Owen has every right to tell the club to f*** off, while and Ashley & Co have no idea as to how the market operates with relation to paying the going rate and keeping your key players on board.

 

On the other hand The Glaziers come from a football background, admittedly a different code, and previously they turned around a cellar franchise in the form of Tampa Bay. Looking at it from a slightly left of centre view they backed their football front-office/a new head coach by keeping their established top players on board - ie. Derek Brooks is one name, and a dominant defensive unit - when they could've allowed them to be picked off in the free agency market in the name of financially restructuring the club/franchise. In other words they payed the aforementioned 'going rate'. And they've done likewise at United.

 

Utter crap, the Glazers took over the Bucs and played by the rules of their particular game, i.e. the salary cap, they couldn't replace Brooks for a similar or lower salary so they paid him the required amount needed to make him stay. As for Owen, whilst he is good, he's not worth £110,000 pw anymore - the likes of Ronaldo, etc are on £100kpw or more and MO just isn't in that class anymore.

 

Also, none of our 'rivals' are paying anywhere near that amount for their top players, Spurs, Everton, Villa - we would like to be competing with that trio next season, but why are we paying almost twice as much as their top earners?

 

United strike a healthy relationship with Sporting Lisbon as a source for unearthing their next generation of potential first teamers. The likes of Arsenal & Chelsea have similar agreements/co-existences in Belgium and the like, leagues which are more often than not the first port of call for African talent trying to find a for themselves in Europe. Mikel is an example. We on the other hand travel, in a bid to keep as much of Ashley's cash in his pocket as possible, travel down a cost-effective route just across the Scottish border as reported by Nial & Biffa - a prodigious talent pool.... my arse. The club's talk of emulating the model & example established at Arsenal is PR rubbish.

 

This is just error-laden, I don't know where I should start - the comment about Jon Obi Mikel for one...the only agreement Chelsea had in place to sign Mikel was the one Kenyon brought with him from OT. There was no prior relationship with Lyn

 

Once again though, you're comparing the club to the top trio of elite teams in the country, who have far greater spending power and are already established within Europe, which makes it easier when coming to sign players. While I'd love to see us challenging in that top 4 bracket, I'd rather see us progress in an timely and sustainable manner, as opposed to splashing out a couple of million in the hope of 'doing a Chelsea'.

 

Pure Spread Sheeters, like Ashley, have no place in football.

 

Just a flame, why bother?

 

With regards to the Bucs and the Glazier's impact in Tampa, and the point about Brooks and the salary cap. They could have just have just let him and some of their other key defensive stars go - and they only let Sapp go when he was past his best - as opposed to not filling up their salary cap as per the Bidwells for many a year in Pheonix, while opting for the draft option as opposed to keeping the team's best players, *filling the cap, and chasing silverware. That's called having 'ambition'.

 

*and there are owners in the United States who regularly stay well below the cap and the Glaziers could have done likeweise. Just counted their pennys, and the miserly Bidwells are the notable example and are the reason as to why the Cardinals went nowhere fast, akin to McKeag imo.

 

Club owners in the US can use the salary cap game for two separate benefits: 1. fill the cap/keep your impact playing veterans - ie. the 5-10 year stars on board - and challenge over a 3 to 4 period unitl it reaches the point where they have to break up some areas of the team when they can no longer squeeze all of them in

 

or 2. travel down the Pheonix Route for many a year: consistently leave a sizeable & unfilled vacaum in their cap, and count their pennies year after year as the team flounders in the lower echelon of the competition. And i didn't mention have the team play in a shitty stadium, as other teams made such advances off the field long before them.

[sicsfingeredmong]

Why are we messing with our main player like this? Owen is crucial to us, will Ashley and co feel better about themselves if he says no, fucks off and we have 110k a week off the wage bill? Its madness giving him ultimatiums when we should be trying our best to keep him.

 

The daily spreadsheets will ultimately look better though, and ultimately Ashley & Co. are spreadsheet guys.

 

Football reality, and how the contract market operates. For top-line players entering contract negotiations in their late 20's, approaching the eve of their twighlight years in other words, this contract deal - ie. lets say 3 to 4 years - will most likely be their last 'big earner'. After this one, after the next deal expires, it's very much about lower contract lengths & lower wage packages as the next batch of top-liners emerge in the same 'wage earning' bracket as they step into the void created as the likes of Owen & Bergkamp.

 

Owen has every right to tell the club to f*** off, while and Ashley & Co have no idea as to how the market operates with relation to paying the going rate and keeping your key players on board.

 

On the other hand The Glaziers come from a football background, admittedly a different code, and previously they turned around a cellar franchise in the form of Tampa Bay. Looking at it from a slightly left of centre view they backed their football front-office/a new head coach by keeping their established top players on board - ie. Derek Brooks is one name, and a dominant defensive unit - when they could've allowed them to be picked off in the free agency market in the name of financially restructuring the club/franchise. In other words they payed the aforementioned 'going rate'. And they've done likewise at United.

 

Utter crap, the Glazers took over the Bucs and played by the rules of their particular game, i.e. the salary cap, they couldn't replace Brooks for a similar or lower salary so they paid him the required amount needed to make him stay. As for Owen, whilst he is good, he's not worth £110,000 pw anymore - the likes of Ronaldo, etc are on £100kpw or more and MO just isn't in that class anymore.

 

Also, none of our 'rivals' are paying anywhere near that amount for their top players, Spurs, Everton, Villa - we would like to be competing with that trio next season, but why are we paying almost twice as much as their top earners?

 

United strike a healthy relationship with Sporting Lisbon as a source for unearthing their next generation of potential first teamers. The likes of Arsenal & Chelsea have similar agreements/co-existences in Belgium and the like, leagues which are more often than not the first port of call for African talent trying to find a for themselves in Europe. Mikel is an example. We on the other hand travel, in a bid to keep as much of Ashley's cash in his pocket as possible, travel down a cost-effective route just across the Scottish border as reported by Nial & Biffa - a prodigious talent pool.... my arse. The club's talk of emulating the model & example established at Arsenal is PR rubbish.

 

This is just error-laden, I don't know where I should start - the comment about Jon Obi Mikel for one...the only agreement Chelsea had in place to sign Mikel was the one Kenyon brought with him from OT. There was no prior relationship with Lyn

 

Once again though, you're comparing the club to the top trio of elite teams in the country, who have far greater spending power and are already established within Europe, which makes it easier when coming to sign players. While I'd love to see us challenging in that top 4 bracket, I'd rather see us progress in an timely and sustainable manner, as opposed to splashing out a couple of million in the hope of 'doing a Chelsea'.

Pure Spread Sheeters, like Ashley, have no place in football.

 

Just a flame, why bother?

 

The Arsenals and the Chelsea's have still got their feelers in the talent pools which matter most, and these 'relationships' i speak with regards to Chelsea stem from Arnesson's influence, knowledge & dealings in some these lesser leagues, this is the angle i speak of and yes it takes money to both implement it & compete................... we on the otherhand are dipping our antennae to where, North of the Border. Viterre, having being a scout/talent spotter in the lower leagues would be well versed - ie. looking at low talent probability & but cost effective talent pools were the club implements a scattershot approach - when operating within the constraints of an extremely tight budget

 

And Viterre's credentials have been massively overstated as well. The words 'Real & Madrid' have been bellowed when his resume has been presented, as a means of giving credibility to another Mort/Ashley masterstroke, long before the success of such moves can be gauged with any sort of accuracy. The same Real Madrid who have a proven pedigree when it comes to snapping up some of the top Spanish & South American youngsters going around, before & after Viterre's 6 month or so stint in Madrid.

 

 

[Greg]

Why are we messing with our main player like this? Owen is crucial to us, will Ashley and co feel better about themselves if he says no, fucks off and we have 110k a week off the wage bill? Its madness giving him ultimatiums when we should be trying our best to keep him.

 

The daily spreadsheets will ultimately look better though, and ultimately Ashley & Co. are spreadsheet guys.

 

Football reality, and how the contract market operates. For top-line players entering contract negotiations in their late 20's, approaching the eve of their twighlight years in other words, this contract deal - ie. lets say 3 to 4 years - will most likely be their last 'big earner'. After this one, after the next deal expires, it's very much about lower contract lengths & lower wage packages as the next batch of top-liners emerge in the same 'wage earning' bracket as they step into the void created as the likes of Owen & Bergkamp.

 

Owen has every right to tell the club to f*** off, while and Ashley & Co have no idea as to how the market operates with relation to paying the going rate and keeping your key players on board.

 

On the other hand The Glaziers come from a football background, admittedly a different code, and previously they turned around a cellar franchise in the form of Tampa Bay. Looking at it from a slightly left of centre view they backed their football front-office/a new head coach by keeping their established top players on board - ie. Derek Brooks is one name, and a dominant defensive unit - when they could've allowed them to be picked off in the free agency market in the name of financially restructuring the club/franchise. In other words they payed the aforementioned 'going rate'. And they've done likewise at United.

 

Utter crap, the Glazers took over the Bucs and played by the rules of their particular game, i.e. the salary cap, they couldn't replace Brooks for a similar or lower salary so they paid him the required amount needed to make him stay. As for Owen, whilst he is good, he's not worth £110,000 pw anymore - the likes of Ronaldo, etc are on £100kpw or more and MO just isn't in that class anymore.

 

Also, none of our 'rivals' are paying anywhere near that amount for their top players, Spurs, Everton, Villa - we would like to be competing with that trio next season, but why are we paying almost twice as much as their top earners?

 

United strike a healthy relationship with Sporting Lisbon as a source for unearthing their next generation of potential first teamers. The likes of Arsenal & Chelsea have similar agreements/co-existences in Belgium and the like, leagues which are more often than not the first port of call for African talent trying to find a for themselves in Europe. Mikel is an example. We on the other hand travel, in a bid to keep as much of Ashley's cash in his pocket as possible, travel down a cost-effective route just across the Scottish border as reported by Nial & Biffa - a prodigious talent pool.... my arse. The club's talk of emulating the model & example established at Arsenal is PR rubbish.

 

This is just error-laden, I don't know where I should start - the comment about Jon Obi Mikel for one...the only agreement Chelsea had in place to sign Mikel was the one Kenyon brought with him from OT. There was no prior relationship with Lyn

 

Once again though, you're comparing the club to the top trio of elite teams in the country, who have far greater spending power and are already established within Europe, which makes it easier when coming to sign players. While I'd love to see us challenging in that top 4 bracket, I'd rather see us progress in an timely and sustainable manner, as opposed to splashing out a couple of million in the hope of 'doing a Chelsea'.

Pure Spread Sheeters, like Ashley, have no place in football.

 

Just a flame, why bother?

 

The Arsenals and the Chelsea's have still got their feelers in the talent pools which matter most, and with regards to Chelsea that is attributed to Arnesson's influence & knowledge of some these lesser leagues, the talent pool angle i speak of and yes it takes money to compete................... we on the otherhand are dipping our antennae to where, North of the Border. Viterre, having being a scout/talent spotter in the lower leagues would be well versed - ie. looking at low talent probability & but cost effective talent pools were the club implements a scattershot approach - when operating within the constraints of an extremely tight budget

 

And Viterre's credentials have been massively overstated as well. The word 'Real Madrid' have been bellowed when his resume has been presented. Is this the same Real Madrid who have a proven pedigree when it comes to snapping up some of the top Spanish & South American youngsters going around, before & after Viterre's 6 month or so stint in Madrid?

 

 

 

His name is Jeff Vetere.

[Nicky]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premier_league/newcastle/article4401681.ece

 

Michael Owen has told Newcastle United that he is eager to remain at the club beyond the end of his present contract, but the England forward will not accept a pay cut as the price for his loyalty.

 

The 28-year-old striker is relishing life under Kevin Keegan, but unless a new deal is agreed before next summer, Owen will be entitled to leave St James' Park on a free transfer.

 

Owen earns in the region of £120,000 a week at Newcastle, whose owners are attempting to exercise wage restraint. Negotiations are continuing and remain positive in tone, but at an age when he should be reaching his peak - in spite of his recent history of injuries - Owen expects his present terms to be extended. Keegan, the Newcastle manager, has spoken repeatedly of the importance of securing his captain's future.

 

The forward has been suffering from mumps this summer, but he scored seven goals in his final nine club games last season and is hoping to pick up where he left off.

 

“The end of the season was great,” Owen said. “When I get into a rhythm and I'm playing regularly it's fine, but since I've been here it's been stop-start, with a lot of injuries. It's probably been the first time in my career it's been like that.

 

“I had a few problems earlier on with hamstring problems, but it's been major things since I've been at Newcastle - six operations and none prior - so it was nice to finally get into a nice rhythm and score a few goals. That'll continue as long as I get on the pitch.

 

“Towards the end of last season we beat Sunderland 2-0 and went seven games unbeaten and there was a real feel-good factor about the squad. We were buzzing. It was a cracking run. Hopefully we can begin the new season in the same way as we ended the last one.

 

“We have quite a small squad, but a close-knit one and one with a lot of quality. It's a lovely honour to lead the team out.”

 

 

Times are usually reliable as far as I remember.  Can't blame him for not wanting a paycut,  either.

[Cajun]

Greedy fucker.

[SteveMc]

I'm sure we'll reach a compromise

[James]

 

Times are usually reliable as far as I remember.

 

 

As far as Murdoch-owned, wage exagerrating newspapers that produce no quotes that relate to the context of the rest of their articles go, the Times is right up there.

[Tooj]

Doesn't Owen have a column in The Times? Or he used to anyways.

[James]

Doesn't Owen have a column in The Times? Or he used to anyways.

 

He quitted.

[Ronaldo]

once it again it seems our club is being run by monkeys

[Cajun]

Pardon?

[Ronaldo]

dont touch the watch

[Cajun]

Ok 

[midds]

More shite-slinging from the rags. Whatever next?

 

Used to annoy me but not any more. They know the square root of fuck all.

[Shak]

dont touch the watch

 

[Ronaldo]

More s****-slinging from the rags. Whatever next?

 

Used to annoy me but not any more. They know the square root of f*** all.

 

The Times isn't a rag though in fairness

[Greg]

 

Times are usually reliable as far as I remember.

 

 

 

 

As far as Murdoch-owned, wage exagerrating newspapers that produce no quotes that relate to the context of the rest of their articles go, the Times is right up there.

 

Quotes are from his Newcastle World interview as well!

[Mick]

once it again it seems our club is being run down by monkeys

 

Fixed

[James]

More s****-slinging from the rags. Whatever next?

 

Used to annoy me but not any more. They know the square root of f*** all.

 

The Times isn't a rag though in fairness

 

Correct, it makes perfectly good bog roll, as do all Rupert Murdoch owned companies.