Cajun Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Would we save money? Can't be arsed to work out the maths but is £1m + £80k a week and no sell on clause more than £6m + £30k a week plus can sell in a couple of years, potentially for more than we paid. ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Would we save money? Can't be arsed to work out the maths but is £1m + £80k a week and no sell on clause more than £6m + £30k a week plus can sell in a couple of years, potentially for more than we paid. ? That's probably why we've supposedly shit ourselves. The main issue is even considering him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I honestly can't see why Ashley would sanction it, it's against his entiire philosophy To save money? Only in the short term We signed Kuqi and Campbell as older players to avoid having to pay for players, why not Bridge? They were free and I bet their wages were no where near 80,000. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 @MsiDouglas Mark Douglas Also, can confirm former SAFC boss Ricky Sbragia HAS been interviewed for a role at NUFC. Full details tomorrow He didn't get it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I honestly can't see why Ashley would sanction it, it's against his entiire philosophy To save money? Only in the short term We signed Kuqi and Campbell as older players to avoid having to pay for players, why not Bridge? They were free and I bet their wages were no where near 80,000. If we get Bridge we won't be paying that either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 If we are. I still think/hope It's just journalism at its laziest. Fwiw worth, I did the rough maths and Bridge for one year with a £1m loan fee and full wages would cost £2m less than the reported figures for Pieters. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ginola Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Kuqi was signed outside the transfer window, didn't really have the option to pay for someone else then. We could've not bothered with Kuqi at all though which would've saved us more money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I honestly can't see why Ashley would sanction it, it's against his entiire philosophy To save money? Only in the short term We signed Kuqi and Campbell as older players to avoid having to pay for players, why not Bridge? They were free and I bet their wages were no where near 80,000. If we get Bridge we won't be paying that either. Unless City are willing to pay some of it I don't see why he'd take a cut. I guess we'll see, but in my opinion I honestly think this is a none starter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Kuqi was probably on about £3k a week too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 I honestly can't see why Ashley would sanction it, it's against his entiire philosophy To save money? Only in the short term We signed Kuqi and Campbell as older players to avoid having to pay for players, why not Bridge? They were free and I bet their wages were no where near 80,000. If we get Bridge we won't be paying that either. Unless City are willing to pay some of it I don't see why he'd take a cut. I guess we'll see, but in my opinion I honestly think this is a none starter. Non-starter or otherwise, it's a fucking joke that we're resorting to asking after him. And yes, I believe the two local journalists who are reporting this for different newspapers. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 If they reported interest in someone good would they just be on the payroll? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 If they reported interest in someone good would they just be club puppets? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 If they reported interest in someone good would they just be club puppets? As far as I can recall I've never accused any journalist of being a club puppet. Works both ways this you know. Negative story: must be false. Despite every fucking thing that's happened. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cajun Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Bridge on loan as a stop gap, sign a freebie next summer. Could all make twisted sense. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Bridge on loan as a 'stop gap', promise to sign someone next summer. Could all make twisted sense. Fixed that up for you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 FWIW I think we'll sign Pieters. Hopefully we'll avoid a fate worse than Leeds by getting him on low wages. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Bridge on loan as a stop gap, sign a freebie next summer. Could all make twisted sense. That's my fear. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skeletor Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 Bridge on loan as a stop gap, sign a freebie next summer. Could all make twisted sense. That's my fear. Just when we think we're getting rid of the last of the cloggers next summer (Smith, Lovenkrands) we'd have to get another one in to frustrate every one for good measure. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomas Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 We're not fucking signing Bridge, get over yourselves ladies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted August 16, 2011 Share Posted August 16, 2011 http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/3755963/Manchester-City-tell-Newcastle-to-pay-2million-to-loan-Wayne-Bridge.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter NEWCASTLE have been told to stump up around £2million to take Wayne Bridge on loan from Manchester City. Bridge, signed for £12million from Chelsea in 2009, is not in boss Roberto Mancini's first-team plans but the City chief still wants a fee for any short-term deal. Toon boss Alan Pardew - desperate to sign a left-back - would also have to pay half of Bridge's £90,000-a-week wages. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryan_Taylor Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Not happening then. Obviously its the Sun so its probably wrong. But its still reassuring Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sifu Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 £2 million fee for a loan and on top of that, £45k a week. Nee chance that will happen. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxfree Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 £3,5m saved. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Snrub Posted August 17, 2011 Share Posted August 17, 2011 Bridge isn't even worth £2m for a permanent transfer. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts