No surprise there, wages a hurdle and we accept a loan deal.
Absolutely this. He's been a model professional for us. Never complains about anything, always puts in 100% when called upon, not even a hint of trouble in his personal life, rarely injured, and good enough to make PL Team of the Year two seasons ago. Best wishes for the rest of your career and life Nico, and thanks.Honestly, this is fine. He was never going to bring in a decent fee with the contract he's on so I'm happy to move him on where he wants to go in recognition for his service to the club. His foreign slot is more valuable than the fee we would've been holding out for anyway. Underrated player for us, never caused any trouble, etc.
This , i dont know why people do still not understand how we treat our oldies , they give us all their best years and in return we allow then to decide when and how to move on , i like him, gave 100% which used to be what fans liked the most , he always got stuck in , when did we become a fan base who bitch and moan everytime they move on in the way the club want to do itAbsolutely this. He's been a model professional for us. Never complains about anything, always puts in 100% when called upon, not even a hint of trouble in his personal life, rarely injured, and good enough to make PL Team of the Year two seasons ago. Best wishes for the rest of your career and life Nico, and thanks.
Whether he’s been a good servant for the club or not it doesn’t mean we should just be giving players away we’re not a charity, you can treat loyal players well without constantly losing out on a not unsubstantial amount of money. There’s an assumption he’s on astronomical wages too, most reports have him on around 120k a week, Lovren was around 110k a week according to the same reports, there’s barely any difference, at least not enough to have an impact on any fee we should be getting. There’s no way of looking at it where giving him away for free or anything less than £10 is a good thing
Its absolutely terrible business to loan players on high wages out. (Yes I realise we have no choice but this situation is self inflicted by giving him new deal when he was 30 in Jan 2018)
He has 2 years left on his deal, so he will be back next summer. Feels like Mancini/Hughes era.
City really need to stop giving long term deals to players in their late 20s unless they are world class.
This , i dont know why people do still not understand how we treat our oldies , they give us all their best years and in return we allow then to decide when and how to move on , i like him, gave 100% which used to be what fans liked the most , he always got stuck in , when did we become a fan base who bitch and moan everytime they move on in the way the club want to do it
I agree with the sentiments regarding Ota. As fans we don’t want the club to get ripped off which you can interpret it as such. Covid uncertainty and us clearly haggling over new signings wounds people up.
If we did get a few million like Barca got for Suarez or Liverpool for lovern we wld all be happier as it could then be used to pay the fees for new players without the tight perimeters we seem to be working with at present.
I personally don’t give a shit if we get money or not I’m sure the powers that be factor this in when they dish out the contracts
Its absolutely terrible business to loan players on high wages out. (Yes I realise we have no choice but this situation is self inflicted by giving him new deal when he was 30 in Jan 2018)
He has 2 years left on his deal, so he will be back next summer. Feels like Mancini/Hughes era.
City really need to stop giving long term deals to players in their late 20s unless they are world class.
I was right with you up until you said that he didn't need to spend a season to get up to speed, when that is actually a fair description of his accelerationYou do, of course, understand that keeping an existing player by awarding a contract extension is great business because there isn't a transfer fee to pay?
Think about it this way; if we'd bought a similar standard of squad player in to replace him for a snip at say £15million then that would be £5 million per annum on the books for 3 years on top of his wages.
Ergo, you'd know that Otamendi's salary was a very reasonable under the circumstances if you had the first inkling of what those circumstances were and had put a bit of consideration in before reaching your peculiar conclusion.
And Otamendi could have got himself a nice big fat signing on fee elsewhere, if he'd chosen to walk at that point, so we obviously had to pay a salary that mitigated that loss (still cheaper than bringing in a similar replacement and he didsn't need to spend a season getting up to speed so it was a no brainer).
Added to that, you must surely realise that the world hadn't been hit by covid and the dreadful financial impact at every level of the game when Otto got his last extension(?) so the current 'force majeur' financial situation couldn't have been a part of anyone's consideration could it?