David Icke - Son of God Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 According to the Beano http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/article1575085.ece MICHAEL OWEN was last night offered £21million to stay at Newcastle. Owner Mike Ashley has handed the England striker the biggest deal in Toon history — a three-year contract worth a whopping £140,000 a week. It would make Owen not only one of the Premier League’s highest-paid stars but also one the world’s richest. The ex-Liverpool and Real Madrid ace, 28, whose current £100,000-a-week deal expires in the summer, could leave on a free unless Newcastle tie him down now. A Toon insider said: “It’s the best contract the club has ever offered and shows the owner is prepared to spend big when it comes to keeping the best players. “It’s also a massive vote of confidence in Kevin Keegan, who has always wanted Owen to stay.” The offer comes after Newcastle battled to a gutsy 1-1 draw against Manchester Untied at Old Trafford on Sunday. Ashley is also set to offer James Milner a new deal — after rejecting Aston Villa’s latest bid of £8m. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 I don't believe that for a moment, but if you really were prepared to offer Owen that much, it would be - quite frankly - fucking absurd. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Would rather sell him, in fact i'd rather see him leave on a free next season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest michaelfoster Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 hmm he's not worth 140k per week, he hasnt done enough to justify a 30k+ wage rise Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shearer_united Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 3 things: (1) I Don't trust the source. (2) He is definitely not worth that much. (3) The club would be a big joke if they offer him that much. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gggg Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 So we've gone from offering him 30k less to 30k more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Well, at least it makes a change from the tight-fisted-Ashley-to-ruthlessly-slash-wage-bill stories. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
olliemort Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Bollocks irc Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wullie Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 The rags are fucking bipolar, man. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 If it was true, it would have to be Keegan's call. No faith in the man then? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElDiablo Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Last line. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Football is borderline immoral, is it not, when players can earn so much money (and, god knows, I'm pretty immoral myself). Lampard with his 5 year 150k a week deal, for example. Will there ever come a day when enough people say "He's earning how fucking much?" and refuse to fork out for their season ticket or Sky subscription. Or both? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrette Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 It's the Sun, so I won't pay any attention to it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Mongo Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 If there's any truth in it at all, it's probably only 140,000 when including a maximum number of bonuses for goals and assists, winning the treble, and teaching James Milner how to shoot on target. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robster Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 These stories just go from the sublime to the ridiculous Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Hmmmm ... this better not be the Wow! signing We could pay two very good players salaries with that money. Our recruitment team could easily find a player that would replace Owen if we cut him loose. I have faith in them. Owen just doesn't deserve this money. Brummie I agree with what you say about footballers salaries as it really is out of control. However, in Lampards case he has at least been very productive for Chelsea. Offering Owen such a deal is definitely insane though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 These stories just go from the sublime to the ridiculous Which was the sublime version? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Icke - Son of God Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 It may seem like a fucking huge amount but......actually. No buts. It is a fucking huge amount but there may be some logic behind it if there is any truth in it at all. Owen is by far and away the most marketable face we have. Having struck a deal with McMahon to be promoted in the Far East having a player like Owen on board is worth it's weight in gold. Yes, we have other good players but it's arguable he's the only player that people in that region who don't follow the club will recognise straight off the bat. If the club did successfully break that particular area in the world i'd imagine he'd make up for the extra 30-40k a week, if not more, in shirt sales alone. Of course, it's all bollocks from The Sun. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sittingontheball Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Owen was already one of the world's richest footballers when he signed. Its not our largesse that has achieved or would achieve that. FWIW he's the same age as Robbie Keane and look how much Liverpool paid for him. Plus wages of course. I bet Owen has outscored Keane in 2008 as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Chubby Jason Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 If there's any truth in it at all, it's probably only 140,000 when including a maximum number of bonuses for goals and assists, winning the treble, and teaching James Milner how to shoot on target. I would be all for him signing a deal that was structured in a way that if he plays and gets a goal he would get a huge goal bonus, rather than paying him a stupid wage of 140 grand a week when he might not even be on the pitch that week. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brummie Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Brummie I agree with what you say about footballers salaries as it really is out of control. However, in Lampards case he has at least been very productive for Chelsea. Don't get me wrong, Lampard has certainly delivered the goods for Chelsea, but *one hundred and fifty thousand pounds* *a week*. We're so used to these figures we shrug it off. Let's get the cunts on the maximum wage again, and shoot Jimmy Hill. And Murdoch. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KaKa Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Brummie I agree with what you say about footballers salaries as it really is out of control. However, in Lampards case he has at least been very productive for Chelsea. Don't get me wrong, Lampard has certainly delivered the goods for Chelsea, but *one hundred and fifty thousand pounds* *a week*. We're so used to these figures we shrug it off. Let's get the c***s on the maximum wage again, and shoot Jimmy Hill. And Murdoch. Yeah, I know. Lampard's salary is so absurd as it is, but to actually pay someone who has been so absent a similar amount is infinitely more absurd, is my point. David Icke makes an interesting point regarding the far east but still ... craziness. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OzzieMandias Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Whatever the true figure, it has to be balanced against what it would cost to replace him with someone of similar standard. If we're going to have to pay £20 million for another top striker, plus his wages -- assuming we can even attract such a player -- then maybe it makes sense, outside of wage structure considerations, to pay this much to Owen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
juniatmoko Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Whatever the true figure, it has to be balanced against what it would cost to replace him with someone of similar standard. If we're going to have to pay £20 million for another top striker, plus his wages -- assuming we can even attract such a player -- then maybe it makes sense, outside of wage structure considerations, to pay this much to Owen. The real question is did owen much exist? so it can be put into "un-replaced" bracket? seems buy new one more logic than keeping him Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
toontownman Posted August 19, 2008 Share Posted August 19, 2008 The press are just too funny. 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