Raheem Sterling - Done - See main forum

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sergio Picasso Aguero said:
To the people who have lined up to publicly assassinate Sterling, all you have done is compiled a massive list of people that he will want to prove wrong. If I was him I would be so motivated to make these fuckers eat humble pie. So a big thankyou to the likes of Souness, Carragher, Redknapp, Quinn because your over the top criticism of Raheem has done Pellegrini's team talk for him.
Click to expand...
I long for the day when we go to Klanfield and well and truly beat the bastards. 6-1 preferably.
 
Matty said:
I'm willing to cut FSG some slack when it comes to selling their best players. In both the Suarez and Sterling situations they had no real option but to sell, both players were clearly unhappy, and unwilling to stay, so they had to go really.
Click to expand...
What did City do when Tevez wanted to leave? Kept him and won the Premier League.
 
Bert Trautmann's Parachute said:
Can't disagree with any of that. Interesting that our model of ownership, which has put money into football, is frowned upon whereas the rags model, which sees money going to the banks in debt repayment, is thought to be good. Insane.
Click to expand...
Yep, when we pay handsomely in a transfer, that money circles the football drain a good few times... 50m to Liverpool, 40m to Villa, 30m to Swansea etc... lots of teams end up a slice of it. Selling clubs do particularly well as they get 'inflated' (improved) incoming transfer fees.

Even with higher wages, if we paid a player 100m a week (crazy example) we still only have a finite number of places in the squad. So other clubs arguing that THEIR players are demanding more money is moot. Those players could only get 100m with us, otherwise they have to settle for 30K a week at Villa regardless. And since they can't get a move to us, Villa can say no to their demands. The higher wages argument only works if a player can easily move clubs for more money, which cannot possibly be the case if only City and Chelsea are the high payers.
 
Drubas said:
Are you guys worried about Sterlings wage at all? If the reported £200.000/week is correct, that would put him £15k ahead of Aguero and £55k ahead of Silva.

Is there a risk that this will trigger new wage demands among the current players?
Click to expand...
Worried? In a word no.

We're used to the media bollox surrounding City. We're always referred to as 'Big spending Manchester City' when other club's who've spent more aren't.

We buy a player for £44m plus a maximum £5m in add-ons he's always quoted as 'The £100m player' as they include his maximum fee payable and his potential wage over the length of his contract.

Sterling's wage is likely to be closer to £120k per week plus a good bonus package, but the media will add up every possible bonus ie: Sterling plays every game, scores 10 goals per game, City win every game thus landing the Capital One Cup, FA Cup, Premier League and the UEFA Champions League so there you have it, Sterling's wage adds up to £200k per week (including every conceivable bonus possible).
 
BillyShears said:
I think Isco and Cazorla might have something to say about the idea that Pellegrini can't develop young players.

Funny seeing scousers still bending over backwards to try and find the negatives in this deal. Well the stupid ones anyway. The smart ones are turning their eyes to FSG and asking why they are selling their best players, and more importantly why their best players are so desperate to get the fuck out of dodge.
Click to expand...

Just look at the wages, and it's easy to understand why some players want to jump ship. With Gerrard, Balotelli and Johnson gone, our top three is £120k, £100k and £75k :)

City
United
Chelsea
Liverpool
 
Drubas said:
Are you guys worried about Sterlings wage at all? If the reported £200.000/week is correct, that would put him £15k ahead of Aguero and £55k ahead of Silva.

Is there a risk that this will trigger new wage demands among the current players?
Click to expand...

Not worried at all, mainly because I highly doubt Sterling will be on £200k a week! Liverpool offered him £100k a week, which he turned down, saying it wasn't about the money it was about winning things. Can't see us offering him twice as much. How much did the papers say we were paying Yay? £250k a week? Yet the link you've posted above says he's on £185k a week. So, if the papers say Sterling is on £200k a week then it's highly likely he'll be on a lot less than that! I suspect he'll be on something like £120k a week, and that a degree of that, as with all our more recent contracts, will be performance related. If City win things, then Sterling's wages will be higher. It's the type of contract signed by Yaya, Aguero, Kompany, Silva, Dzeko etc in recent seasons, so Sterling will be exactly the same.
 
Matty said:
Liverpool kept Suarez too, and convinced him to sign a new contract, and then got £79m for him after his fantastic season.
Click to expand...

£79m? I don't think so.
Matty said:
Not worried at all, mainly because I highly doubt Sterling will be on £200k a week! Liverpool offered him £100k a week, which he turned down, saying it wasn't about the money it was about winning things. Can't see us offering him twice as much. How much did the papers say we were paying Yay? £250k a week? Yet the link you've posted above says he's on £185k a week. So, if the papers say Sterling is on £200k a week then it's highly likely he'll be on a lot less than that! I suspect he'll be on something like £120k a week, and that a degree of that, as with all our more recent contracts, will be performance related. If City win things, then Sterling's wages will be higher. It's the type of contract signed by Yaya, Aguero, Kompany, Silva, Dzeko etc in recent seasons, so Sterling will be exactly the same.
Click to expand...

Exactly. We were in a fantastic negotiating position with Sterling regarding his contract. The only club who would take him out of an untenable situation at Liverpool. He had no power in those talks. I expect he's gotten a fair offer in line with other recent signings, not worried about 200 bollocks at all.
 
mansour's tow ropes said:
I thought the Negredo money went down on Bony?

As for the suggestion that Sterling has only had 1 good half season, its an absolute myth; I've just read he played more than all our midfielders last season, why was that the case if he was so bad? And he was just so average that they trusted him to play as the lone striker for much of the season.

Sterling has had his spells of poor form, as all young players (and flair players) do, but he is one of the (few) opposition players I have always hated going up against, in the same way Suarez was and Rooney is. Signings don't come much more exciting than this.
Click to expand...

add the fact they (liverpool) wouldn't even sell for 50 million in normal circumstances you'd agree that it was a good deal for us. the mere fact that we poached a rival team's go-to guy makes it a good enough deal for us regardless of the price because if everything was ok between the player and club, they wouldn't ever ever sell to us. and whats all the fuss about this transfer? not long ago manure wanted to sign harry kane for 45 million pounds and they would have if tottenham had not vehemently resisted the move. to the media it wasn't a big deal then but this one is a hell of a biggie! does hypocricy get any worse?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top