Sun: Owen offered £140,000 deal

[Guest SellSholaFor1M]

Would rather sell him, in fact i'd rather see him leave on a free next season.

 

Thanks for showing once more why this board has a reputation for utter, utter idiocy.

[Teasy]

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?

 

That'll probably be the same day that people start refusing to go to the cinema or buy films because the likes of Will Smith get £10 million per movie.  Or the same day people refuse to pay there TV license due to Jonathan Ross getting paid £115,000 per week.. oh hold on that's today, maybe not then

[Guest VegasToon]

If he does sign, we will never know the amount. 

[Nobody]

"It's the best contract the club has ever offered..."

So, say that they've actually got a club insider (which I don't believe for a second that they do), all they would know is that the new deal would be better than the old one, which could mean £115k for all we/they know.

[LooneyToonArmy]

well no doubt that Owen being at the club is a big selling point and attraction for when we`re trying to get players to come to the club..........140k is more than fkin excessive though....

[Guest Heneage]

Sorry but in theory who else would pay the bloke more thansay 80k a week?Why would wesay "ok mickey heres 140!"

[Guest rebel_yell12]

I think everyone on this board knows my opinions about Michael Owen but 140k per week?  That's obscene.  Of course, I don't believe the source at all.  But that's a ridiculous amount.  Rather see Owen paid 100k per week (extension of current deal) and another quality player brought in on 40k per week (isn't this about what Jonas is on? and Coloccini?).  Michael Owen doesn't need more money -- but I bet he'd appreciate having a quality CM to help provide service for more goals!

[Shearergol]

As long as the club can afford it, it doesn't bother me one bit.

 

I'm not sure it says anything in the article about not being able to sign other players if Owen is paid that amount of money. Love it how people on here go on about how much a player is paid, when in reality it makes very little difference to us.

 

I imagine if Martins was asking for £140k then people on here would be saying that it's not enough.

[Liam Liam Liam O]

NE5 will be pleased.

[oldtype]

As has been mentioned, I don't believe for a minute that Ashley would condone this if he didn't believe that the club could afford it. (cough, unlike the old board... cough)

 

It matters very little in reality how much a player is paid, as long as that cost is lower than the transfer fee+wages it would cost to replace him. This may not be the smartest move ever, but if you consider that, it's a better idea than letting him leave on a free.

[Filflop1]

The press have no clue yet again they show how stupid they are one week its where skint and owens having to take a pay cut the next its where going to pay him 140k,

 

Thye have nowt on our club now and I love it , all they can do is speculate and make Sh*t up 

[Nicky]

Think he's class, and would love him to stay. 140 is exagerated no doubt, but how much would replacing him cost (and could we?). Shows good ambition from Ashley if he stays, and equally good backing for Keegan.

 

We'll make a lot back in marketing too.

[Guest Thomo]

Iam delighted if true, might have have had injury problems in the past but when hes fit he scores goals, if he has an injury free season he will score 20 goals this season, you could not say that about an unproven player to replace him like Gomis etc in the Premiership. If we can get Saviola we will have one of the most potent forward lines in the Premiership in Owen, Viduka, martins & Saviola. Those four players will score 40-50 goals for you.

[Wallace]

I might be getting confused but I am sure that someone said on this forum a few weeks ago that they had heard that the new deal could potentially make Owen the best paid footballer in the country but it was heavily incentive laden and that we would have to be winning everything in sight for him to achieve the maximum salary.

 

However, one week we want him to take a massive paycut and the next to massively overpay him.  It just shows that the papers don't have a clue what is going on.

 

 

[Guest guinness_fiend]

I suspect that this is rubbish, but I would not be best pleased if it is true.

 

From a commercial point of view, the money would be well spent if Owen delivers week on week and actually makes a difference to the team, like Lampard does for Chelsea, Gerrard for Liverpool or Rooney for United.  It is likely just paper talk.

 

However, any salary payable to Owen should at the very least be contingent on him being fit, with uplifts for any trophies or European qualification.  A basic(!) wage of £3,640,000 pa, potentially rising to £7,280,000 pa subject to certain targets being met would make more sense (i.e. league position, top scorer, cup runs, or even marketing - i.e .how many Owen shirts sold).  He should not be allowed to "do a Dyer," and pick up his weekly pay cheque for sitting in the stands with friends, checking how his horses are performing on ye olde Blackberry.  I suspect that Ashley feels the same way and that any salary offer will indeed be incentive-laden.

 

With regard to the argument that his wages are par for the course for a player of his quality, he is not the player that he used to be and is not among the current elite in the Premiership.  There is no doubting that he is a talent, but his ability pales in comparison compared to, say, the majority of Arsenal's midfield and strike force, and should be remunerated on the basis that he is the messiah. 

 

In fact, I would go so far as to say that any club interested in Owen would be taking a risk, as it is far from guaranteed that he will deliver the goods, especially given that he is made out of glass and is more susceptible than most to illness/injury.

 

[NE5]

performance related pay is the way forward for footballers - IF they can get the agreement of the PFA etc

 

 

[Dave]

Couldn't give a shit what any of our players get paid as long as the resultant wage bill can be accomodated.

 

As for this particular story, just shows what absolute nonsense the papers talk after months of telling us the complete opposite.

 

The media are fucking bonkers.

[Dave]

performance related pay is the way forward for footballers - IF they can get the agreement of the PFA etc

 

 

 

Completely agree, but I just don't see it happening. The players are in far too strong a position now.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

So now we see the fruits of Ashleys grand plan to slash costs on club suits

[Cronky]

I might be getting confused but I am sure that someone said on this forum a few weeks ago that they had heard that the new deal could potentially make Owen the best paid footballer in the country but it was heavily incentive laden and that we would have to be winning everything in sight for him to achieve the maximum salary.

 

 

Yeah, if there's any truth in this at all, 140 grand has to be the ceiling rather than his basic wage. It would make sense for the Board to offer him an incentive-based deal if they're trying to trim the wage bill, but at the same time not embarrass Owen by asking him to take a pay cut.

 

I know there's the issue of having to pay a transfer fee to replace Owen, but you also have to look at the effect on team morale if one player is getting paid so much more than everyone else. If he's earned it on his performances, then okay, but Owen hasn't.

 

All this chasing after midget forwards like Saviola and Aimar is intriguing. I can't imagine playing Martins, Owen and Saviola in the same side.

[Guest sondre]

With Ade on 80k p/w, NO FUCKING WAY he's worth 140!!!! :angry:

[Guest kingkevsarmy]

Dont believe the sun for f*cks sake, the havent got anything right all summer! Regarding newcastle, the just write anything that sells papers. Why would we give him an extra £25,000 or whatever when no-one else will, does not make sense.

 

 

[Colos Short and Curlies]

I might be getting confused but I am sure that someone said on this forum a few weeks ago that they had heard that the new deal could potentially make Owen the best paid footballer in the country but it was heavily incentive laden and that we would have to be winning everything in sight for him to achieve the maximum salary.

 

However, one week we want him to take a massive paycut and the next to massively overpay him.  It just shows that the papers don't have a clue what is going on.

 

 

 

You are not confused, it was my good self

[Guest optimistic nit]

i think it is believeable tbh, although probably not true. its a bit funny how we've been going from having a go at ashley not getting owen signed, to complaining when we have a story saying he's offered him a new contract.

 

would probably rather sell him than give him that contract tbh. its a big risk giving owen a new contract over 100K when he hasnt proved his fitness yet.

 

performance related pay, with a wage cap, is the only way forward imo. all this money in football could be put to so much better use, than dissapearing into the depths of footballers pockets.

 

 

 

 

what is interesting about the article though, is that it may hint at a possible different slant from the press post manu. they could be going to a more positive slant, or (probably true) preparing to go back to the overpaid mercenaries slant of shepheards era.

[Elliottman]

didnt believe the Sun before i boycotted it, dont believe it now. Toon Insider eh???