Kévin Gameiro

[Zero]

I don't think 50k is that low, man...

[taxfree]

I don't think 50k is that low, man...

 

It's not crazy money, but it's still a lot. We've trebled his money if I recall correctly. Not that he isn't worth it.

[Guest neesy111]

It's that whole 50k isn't that much that got this club onto paying Barton, Smith etc ridiculous wages and severely strangled the club financially.

[Guest magpie99]

The point is that outside France, Cabaye is a relatively unknown quality, much like Tiote was last year. If we can keep on unearthing such gems, we might just find ourselves competing in europe against the best.

 

However, history has shown that once players have shown potential, bigger clubs with bigger offers come wandering in and before long, they are gone. No end of lengthy contracts will stop ambitious or money hungry players moving along and this is the reason why we will continue to be also rans under the present owner because he doesnt seem to want to fund the quality of players we need to compete with the best, nor pay the salaries accordingly, righly or wrongly, whichever way you look at it.

[Guest magpie99]

It's that whole 50k isn't that much that got this club onto paying Barton, Smith etc ridiculous wages and severely strangled the club financially.

Neesy

 

It was a lot more than just paying high salaries to players.

[Guest neesy111]

It's that whole 50k isn't that much that got this club onto paying Barton, Smith etc ridiculous wages and severely strangled the club financially.

Neesy

 

It was a lot more than just paying high salaries to players.

 

Not when your wage bill is 80% of your turnover.  That is when high salaries are your biggest issue.

[Guest magpie99]

Yes, but the history of spending ridiculous amounts of money on duds, especially by Souness and Shepherd really spurred our debt on. I mean, we spent how much on Owen, Luque, Boumsong and Babayaro and how much did we get back when they left?

 

I am pretty sure I read a couple of years ago that Ashley said we would be still paying off transfer fees from the Shepherd era this season.

[Colos Short and Curlies]

 

 

Yes, but the history of spending ridiculous amounts of money on duds, especially by Souness and Shepherd really spurred our debt on. I mean, we spent how much on Owen, Luque, Boumsong and Babayaro and how much did we get back when they left?

 

I am pretty sure I read a couple of years ago that Ashley said we would be still paying off transfer fees from the Shepherd era this season.

The point is that outside France, Cabaye is a relatively unknown quality, much like Tiote was last year. If we can keep on unearthing such gems, we might just find ourselves competing in europe against the best.

 

However, history has shown that once players have shown potential, bigger clubs with bigger offers come wandering in and before long, they are gone. No end of lengthy contracts will stop ambitious or money hungry players moving along and this is the reason why we will continue to be also rans under the present owner because he doesnt seem to want to fund the quality of players we need to compete with the best, nor pay the salaries accordingly, righly or wrongly, whichever way you look at it.

 

Look at these two statements - (1) we used to throw money at players in order to get them to the club - outcome was a continuing decline in the level of performance on the field

 

(2) Unless we start throwing money at players we won't get anywhere.

 

My point is that throwing money at 'top quality' players in order to get them to sign will not lead to success and in many ways leads to a problem where you have a group of players content to put in the minimum effort to get by knwing that they are set for life.

 

What we should be doing is targetting young hungry players who may well see us as a stepping stone, but who have an incentive to perform well in order to get that big move. Get enough of these (and lets be honest £50k a week should be enough to achieve this) and the club will move forward, challenge for Europe and hopefully get us into a position where we can get a higher quality of player without needing to pay vast sums of money to get them here

[Skirge]

I think we are wasting time on these two, both Gamerio & Gervinho are taking to long to choose what they are going to do.

[mattypnufc]

Bored now.

[Guest sicko2ndbest]

Tbh the board can't win here

 

If we weren't in for these players we would be asking why! These players are sort after due to being very good players. if nobody else was in for them it would set alarm bells off.

 

I like the idea of aiming high. Remember if you aim for the stars you may end up landing in the moon. And that's not a bad scenario

[Guest WashyGeordie]

I think we are wasting time on these two, both Gamerio & Gervinho are taking to long to choose what they are going to do.

 

It's only been a week or summit and for all we know they may well have signed on the dotted line (or not but you never know what's happening)

[Guest Brazilianbob]

The reason no one has signed on the dotted line yet is the transfer window doesn't open until tomorrow the 9th June.  I expect we will see some developments on signings tomorrow or friday.

[SUPERTOON]

SSN said it opened today? Not that it makes much difference like.

[AyeDubbleYoo]

 

 

Yes, but the history of spending ridiculous amounts of money on duds, especially by Souness and Shepherd really spurred our debt on. I mean, we spent how much on Owen, Luque, Boumsong and Babayaro and how much did we get back when they left?

 

I am pretty sure I read a couple of years ago that Ashley said we would be still paying off transfer fees from the Shepherd era this season.

The point is that outside France, Cabaye is a relatively unknown quality, much like Tiote was last year. If we can keep on unearthing such gems, we might just find ourselves competing in europe against the best.

 

However, history has shown that once players have shown potential, bigger clubs with bigger offers come wandering in and before long, they are gone. No end of lengthy contracts will stop ambitious or money hungry players moving along and this is the reason why we will continue to be also rans under the present owner because he doesnt seem to want to fund the quality of players we need to compete with the best, nor pay the salaries accordingly, righly or wrongly, whichever way you look at it.

 

Look at these two statements - (1) we used to throw money at players in order to get them to the club - outcome was a continuing decline in the level of performance on the field

 

(2) Unless we start throwing money at players we won't get anywhere.

 

My point is that throwing money at 'top quality' players in order to get them to sign will not lead to success and in many ways leads to a problem where you have a group of players content to put in the minimum effort to get by knwing that they are set for life.

 

What we should be doing is targetting young hungry players who may well see us as a stepping stone, but who have an incentive to perform well in order to get that big move. Get enough of these (and lets be honest £50k a week should be enough to achieve this) and the club will move forward, challenge for Europe and hopefully get us into a position where we can get a higher quality of player without needing to pay vast sums of money to get them here

 

Totally correct. There's no shame in sometimes having to sell a player to a much more successful club, but if you keep progressing you can eventually turn yourself into one of those clubs.

[SUPERTOON]

I thought it was the 9th for France, but I'm not 100% sure.

 

Probably i think SSN meant England tbh.

[relámpago blanco]

I thought it was the 9th for France, but I'm not 100% sure.

 

Probably i think SSN meant England tbh.

You can sign a player at any point as far as I know they just cant be registered as a player.

[Ash]

Some people seem to be forgetting he's currently away on international duty, he's not likely to sign for anyone whilst he's playing for France.

[Ketsbaia]

Hasn't football got to the point now where 50k isn't atrociously high anymore? When we got Smith, Barton, Viduka, Geremi, Enrique etc 50k was a lot of money, but the market has kept exploding (as the Lescott, Milner, Carroll and Henderson transfers show). Transfer fees and wages have gotten ridiculous. Now, with massive TV deals, 50k wages are the new 30k.

[Zero]

It's because some clubs are paying 200k wages.  The income of the industry hasn't go that far.  Manchester United didn't spend a lot on transfer fees in order to balance that up, while Liverpool are doing a Leeds.

 

We cannot follow that far at this moment, not until we are back to Europe.

[Baggio]

Hasn't football got to the point now where 50k isn't atrociously high anymore? When we got Smith, Barton, Viduka, Geremi, Enrique etc 50k was a lot of money, but the market has kept exploding (as the Lescott, Milner, Carroll and Henderson transfers show). Transfer fees and wages have gotten ridiculous. Now, with massive TV deals, 50k wages are the new 30k.

 

I'm not sure I agree with this, outside of the now big 4 and Liverpool I don't think you will find many clubs with plenty of players earning this much, maybe 3 or 4 but that's it.

[Toonpack]

Average wages were (May2010 in a Telegraph article):

 

Liverpool £48.6K pw

Man U    £55.8K pw

Arsenal  £50.3K pw

[Dave]

Average wages were (May2010 in a Telegraph article):

 

Liverpool £48.6K pw

Man U    £55.8K pw

Arsenal  £50.3K pw

 

Does that include all playing staff or just first teamers?

[Toonpack]

Average wages were (May2010 in a Telegraph article):

 

Liverpool £48.6K pw

Man U    £55.8K pw

Arsenal  £50.3K pw

 

Does that include all playing staff or just first teamers?

 

First team pay

 

But it might surprise some people to learn that compared to the richest divisions in other globally popular sports – basketball, baseball, cricket, American football and ice hockey – England's finest come some way down the pecking order.

 

In fact, only two Premier League teams appear in the top 30 teams in world sport, ranked by average first-team pay. Chelsea are at No 4 and Manchester United No 14, according to a report to be published this week that compares wages in the world's major sports leagues on a like-for-like basis for the first time.

 

Baseball's New York Yankees top the list, with their players earning £89,897 per week each in 2009, and they are followed at No 2 and No 3 by the duopolists of Spanish football, Real Madrid and Barcelona. Real's players had average first-team pay of £81,444 per week (£4.2 million a year) in the period under review, while Barca's earned £78,231 per week (£4.1 million) and Chelsea's £68,946 per week (£3.6 million).

 

Manchester United's comparable figures are £55,818 per week, or £2.9 million a year, while just outside the top 30 are Arsenal, at No 31 (with average pay of £50,289 per week; £2.6 million year) and Liverpool at No 33 (£48,662 per week, £2.5 million year).

 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

Hasn't football got to the point now where 50k isn't atrociously high anymore? When we got Smith, Barton, Viduka, Geremi, Enrique etc 50k was a lot of money, but the market has kept exploding (as the Lescott, Milner, Carroll and Henderson transfers show). Transfer fees and wages have gotten ridiculous. Now, with massive TV deals, 50k wages are the new 30k.

 

I'm not sure I agree with this, outside of the now big 4 and Liverpool I don't think you will find many clubs with plenty of players earning this much, maybe 3 or 4 but that's it.

 

I think the majority of football clubs will be rationalising and reducing their wage bills in the next few years. Obviously for the lucky few there are still massive pay days to be had at the top, top clubs.