If we can get him for the ~£7m he is actually worth with one year left on his contract, 85k a week probably makes sense. Having said that, once you start paying those kind of wages, everyone is going to be wanting them.
£85k is what he is rumoured to be asking asking for, not what he is currently earning.
It would also explain why Leicester pulled out of his transfer.
£85k is what he is rumoured to be asking asking for, not what he is currently earning.
It would also explain why Leicester pulled out of his transfer.
If we can get him for the ~£7m he is actually worth with one year left on his contract, 85k a week probably makes sense. Having said that, once you start paying those kind of wages, everyone is going to be wanting them.
If I were Dunk and any other really top player at the club, I'd be negotiating a new deal the moment the came through the door on £85k p/w. I heard on the Guardian Podcast this week that big money signings almost never bring guaranteed success (Neymar and Mbappe are great players but still no ECL win, Coutinho was a failure as was Dembele, Griezmann, Hazard + Joao Felix isn't exactly pulling up too many trees but the fee is more potential)
For Brighton, I would say Webster, Maupay and Trossard have been qualified successes, but Jahanbakhsh, Locadia and Izquierdo were pretty solid wastes of money. I guess the point is, spaffing money on a signing rarely pays dividends and the value is often in the unexpected diamonds carved from the rock
Not worth £85k a week.
We won't pay £85k a week.
We don't need him. We have plenty of strikers.
Time to look elsewhere if that's what he's demanding.
Not saying this £85K thing is true, but is it that unreasonable?
Firstly, that's his negotiation figure ( or his agents, on the big assumption that what has come out is true) meaning we'd get him for £75 to 80k.
Secondly, the footballing world knows we're over a barrel to a degree because of our travails in front of goal last season.
Thirdly, strikers just cost more. It's the single position which can affect league position the most (think Burnley without Wood, Soton without Ings and Newcastle without Wilson ... much more likely to go down and lose their cosy £100m+ per annum).
Fourth, his age means he has a great chance of holding or increasing his value. We might sign for £20m at 85k p/w, but in 2 years, if he does well, we could get £30m, for him and a have broken even financially (plus had his goals in the meantime). It could of course go the other way, like Haller, but every signing carries risk.
Fifth. Is £85k p/w that much of a leap for us now? Our top earners can't be a million miles off that.
Dembele is a quality player went for £20mI think its unresonable mainly because he really havent showed enough in Celtic to warrant that kind of money... 22 league goals in his best Celtic season doesnt say much. Where are previous SPL top scorers now? Liam Boyce (who?) who scored 23 a few years ago, is he tearing up the PL? Leigh Griffiths? Adam Rooney? Gary Hooper? Michael Higdon? Some of the top scorers in the last 10 years, doing **** all outside Scotland. Of course it would be unfair of me to only mention bad examples, so lets take some of the good ones from the last 15 years: no one. Absolutely no one.
Edouard would definitely be a "punt" signing and do you really want to pay £85k a month for 4 or 5 years for a player who could quite possibly turn out to be some (another) kind of unsellable glorified Jurgen Locadia?
Not horny for this guy and definitely not that keen on making him the best paid player in the club on the basis of scoring a reasonable number of goals in a League Two level league.
I think its unresonable mainly because he really havent showed enough in Celtic to warrant that kind of money... 22 league goals in his best Celtic season doesnt say much. Where are previous SPL top scorers now? Liam Boyce (who?) who scored 23 a few years ago, is he tearing up the PL? Leigh Griffiths? Adam Rooney? Gary Hooper? Michael Higdon? Some of the top scorers in the last 10 years, doing **** all outside Scotland. Of course it would be unfair of me to only mention bad examples, so lets take some of the good ones from the last 15 years: no one. Absolutely no one.
Edouard would definitely be a "punt" signing and do you really want to pay £85k a month for 4 or 5 years for a player who could quite possibly turn out to be some (another) kind of unsellable glorified Jurgen Locadia?
Not horny for this guy and definitely not that keen on making him the best paid player in the club on the basis of scoring a reasonable number of goals in a League Two level league.
How can you miss out Pascal one of the bargains of the PL, trouble is when you buy from crap leagues like Holland there are two or three decent level clubs and the rest are league one, which flaws the money ball system as players such as AJ have high scoring stats.
If we signed a player for £30m from la liga who scored 15 goals a season he would have a higher success rate in the PL.
Any striker we sign could bomb. It's a question of risk. The ones who were unlikely to bomb have been snapped up by Villa or Roma on wages we could never afford.
The recruitment team will take into account his age when looking at that goalscoring record, (which I don't think is as shabby as you're making out). And yes, they will take into account the quality of the league
I've no idea if he's the answer or not, but if we sign him i'll be excited, because it means the club are confident enough in him to splash to the cash. And i'm confident in the club to get more punts right than they get wrong.
If we go for him, I guess his agent will say 85k, TB will say 65k, and they'll spit on their hands and shake in a very pre covid way on about 75k ... and that to me sounds about right for a lower mid table PL striker in this market
Not saying this £85K thing is true, but is it that unreasonable?
Firstly, that's his negotiation figure ( or his agents, on the big assumption that what has come out is true) meaning we'd get him for £75 to 80k.
Secondly, the footballing world knows we're over a barrel to a degree because of our travails in front of goal last season.
Thirdly, strikers just cost more. It's the single position which can affect league position the most (think Burnley without Wood, Soton without Ings and Newcastle without Wilson ... much more likely to go down and lose their cosy £100m+ per annum).
Fourth, his age means he has a great chance of holding or increasing his value. We might sign for £20m at 85k p/w, but in 2 years, if he does well, we could get £30m, for him and a have broken even financially (plus had his goals in the meantime). It could of course go the other way, like Haller, but every signing carries risk.
Fifth. Is £85k p/w that much of a leap for us now? Our top earners can't be a million miles off that.
I've got a mate who's the Loch Ness Monster and he reckons he's shitehouse.
(Just for you, [MENTION=525]Cheeky Monkey[/MENTION] )
Glad your not in charge of recruitment?
TBH I’m glad the majority of NSC Isn’t in charge of recruitment we would either be bankrupt or utter shite some of the names thrown about form lower level championship to players well out of our league is quite remarkable.Glad your not in charge of recruitment?
Sorry lads
Recruiting strikers ain't cheap
What was Ings reported at, £125k p/w? Tammy over £100k
Lallana has been reported at 90k https://www.spotrac.com/epl/brighton-hove-albion/payroll/
If we're going to get a striker who is obviously better than Maupay (tbh I've never watched the Celtic fella play so no idea if he is not) we'll be paying up and around what we're reported to be paying Lallana