mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
Sunderland last season.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
Wayne Bridge rumours [Merged]
- Thread starter gripper stebson
- Start date
Sunderland last season.
How many loan moves have we done where we are only paying a fraction of the wages then?
Dick Knights Mumm
Take me Home Falmer Road
I am sure that was Mancini's view as well.
Bladders
Twats everywhere
I do agree to a degree but it's within the rules and while it is we should take advantage like every other club does.
James Bond's body double
Well-known member
I don't personally see the issue, If city are prepared to pay 80K a week for him and we pay the remainder where is the problem. If we were paying well over the odds I think we could be more inclined to worry.
He will be a great addition to the squad if he signs. I bet nobody would moan if it was Bobby coming back and QPR were doing the same.
Brimmermusic
New member
Who is the third defender? So far to my knowledge we've signed Bruno and now potentially Bridge?
Dick Knights Mumm
Take me Home Falmer Road
Surprisingly the Club did not let me know what the finances were on the other loans. This one we know about.
Look - I can see he has been a good player, and could be for us. Just paying a fraction of his salary makes me uncomfortable.
Did you see the left back that Burnley had last year ? He was the best player I saw in that position. He came from City - originally on loan, then they bought him in the transfer window. That is the type of player I would prefer.
Dick Knights Mumm
Take me Home Falmer Road
Was he ? Fair enough. Perhaps I am talking bollocks. It would not be the first time.
Sheebo
Well-known member
- Jul 13, 2003
- 29,319
Is that a joke? He's 31 and has been playing pro football in a lot higher quality 'battles' for about 12 yrs +
Moshe Gariani
Well-known member
- Mar 10, 2005
- 12,199
Absolute confidence here that this would be an amazing signing. The only issue is whether he "wants" to play and will commit to what is required of him regards training and performing. We would not be even contemplating this move without good evidence that all is well (i.e. we will not be "taking a punt" on him or "crossing our fingers"...).
The previous post about how Gus wants us to be able to play is also spot on. The back 5 are just as important as the other 6 in terms of being able to play an attack-minded game.
The previous post about how Gus wants us to be able to play is also spot on. The back 5 are just as important as the other 6 in terms of being able to play an attack-minded game.
I think the issue is that we are being "unfairly" subsidised.
But thinking it through, with the game in such a ridiculous situation where players earning £5m a year don't even get to feature in their club's first team squad, I can't see that there many alternatives.
El Sid
Well-known member
If this comes off it will be fantastic and clearly shows the ambition of the club.
Just Lampard and Forlan to go now.
Just Lampard and Forlan to go now.
James Bond's body double
Well-known member
See your point, but money in the game now is mental, if he wants to play for us and we don't push ourselves too much with wages then why not. If we had 2 or 3 of these players then I think it would become an issue, but one no lets get him if we can.
mejonaNO12 aka riskit
Well-known member
I'd happily take our scenario of getting a proven premiership footballer in for the season in a less important position (left back is important, but not quite as important as the central spots) and then spend the saved transfer fee, signing on fee and commited 3 years of wages on the midfielder or striker that we are targetting.
I'm adament Gus would have looked at permanent Left-backs, hence Mattock. But, my god, what a 'second' option this is to have.
If everyone else in the division was getting in £90k a week players and we wern't, we'd be kicking off the mother of all huffs about our lack of ambition of use of the transfer market.
The moment we actually DO it, it's immoral.
Sheebo
Well-known member
- Jul 13, 2003
- 29,319
It happens everywhere though. Whether you like it or not we may as well try to get deals like this as i'm sure 100s of football clubs have similar sort of deals like this in place. It doesn't bother me personally who's paying what in terms of wages (i trust we'll get the best deal possible). I think you're thinking too much into this TBH - let's just enjoy the (hopefully) class ex international signing...
I think the underlying point your making is one we all agree with - footballers are paid too much. They should've done a wage cap years ago. And a transfer cap.
Is that a joke? He's 31 and has been playing pro football in a lot higher quality 'battles' for about 12 yrs +
But he didn't have people getting in his face about John Terry f***ing his missus then did he?
Obviously needs to learn how to be a professional again.
No. The argument is that it has ALWAYS been immoral, that's why some of us are uncomfortable now that we're likely to be beneficiaries.
beardy gull
Well-known member
Quite.
Sheebo
Well-known member
- Jul 13, 2003
- 29,319
Fair point but he was on loan at Sunderland last yr and would've got it there. I think more fans abusing than players will be the problem. However I'm sure there's more to the wedding 'incident' than the tabloids report - could've been nothing or could've been off his head smashed so got angry!
I'm not arguing that we shouldn't be trying to get these deals, just pointing out that it makes me feel uncomfortable. The rules are there, it's just that this one is a crap and unfair rule IMO.
Don't like caps. I'd just rather see a fairer distribution of income across the professional game, and wages/transfer fees limited to percentage of turnover, with a maximum ceiling also included. i.e. something like "50% of turnover, or £50m - whichever is lower"