Dannys contract

certainly hope he signs up soon but with regards the "No club paying £60k week" it was rumoured that Chelsea were interested amongst others and a fee of around £8m was RUMOURED however if he didnt sign and moved on a free then he could have been tapped up that this fee would be used as some form of salary inticement as happens in football (£60k per week = approx £9.5m on a three year contract or the scenario of dont sign for City and come to us on a free, of the £8m we would have had to pay them we will give you an instant £2m signing fee and a weekly of £35k per week !) its wrong but it happens and in this game that sort of thing could play heavy on a young mans mind, especially when being advised by a former pro who missed out on this kind of money and deal ?

personally I think he will sign but will want to see hat happens in Jan first, no one minds playing second fiddle and learning from the likes of Kaka, Robinho, Villa or even Owen to an extent but what can studge learn from Bellamy or the likes never mind play second best to them at a time when he should be looking to kick on again in his career not go backwards.
 
When you see some of the crap that is being paid 60k Danny would be worth it. He wants to stay and learn
 
I think he could well be top class.

If anyone could dig out a goals to mins played stat I think it'd make interesting reading.

However, if our double your money offer is 30k, hes on 15k already? At 19! What can you possible spend that on, let alone 30k, or 60k.

I guess this point is relevant to all players at the top though.
 
Mark Hughes wouldn't even think of paying him 60k; it's a team game so think of the harm this might do to team morale when the pay structure is kicked to pieces.
 
ultimateharold said:
However, if our double your money offer is 30k, hes on 15k already? At 19! What can you possible spend that on, let alone 30k, or 60k.

I guess this point is relevant to all players at the top though.
Click to expand...

I have known the odd player over the years and there argument against the amount of money earned often reverts back to the shortness of the career or the possibility at anytime of career ending injury. Im not saying its right but Paul Lake does highlight the issue to an extent, Lakey was without doubt capable of being one of the best at around the same time Gazza was commanding some serious money in football but with his injury the gravy train dried up pretty quickly ! A balance needs to be found ideally or better support for ex pro's from the ones creaming the really big buck's nowadays, I know the PFA do what they can but it is limited as far as ex players are concerned.
 
You make a fair point Nixon, But one injury free season and you've surpassed most.

The more I think of it, if they entertain me, I dont mind. Film stars get millions and most films are crap.

And if you have a missus who watches 'The Hills'......

Once you know what they're on you'll cry.
 
am sure he said he wanted to stay at city yesterday. Give him what he wants i say, the boy is going to be world class.
 
ultimateharold said:
You make a fair point Nixon, But one injury free season and you've surpassed most.

The more I think of it, if they entertain me, I dont mind. Film stars get millions and most films are crap.

And if you have a missus who watches 'The Hills'......

Once you know what they're on you'll cry.
Click to expand...

I know what you mean lol. I dont get why they cant all just agree a basic salary per division and after that allow teams to operate a bonus scheme that suits them ? i.e every prem player gets a £10k basic (random figures) but then City may offer a player a 20k goal bonus and varying end of season bonus's dependant on league position like £1m for Champs down to a renegotiation of contract for the bottom 3 ? its only theoretical but you get the gist, youd pay defenders and keepers for clean sheets, midfielders for assists etc. Of course it would only ever work with agreement from all clubs otherwise a squad would be virtually impossible to retain. I dont know the answer I suppose but I cant see football surviving at the current rates, very few have our money going forwards and if there is no one to play then we kill ourselves off anyway
 
Im not surprised to read that he wants 60k a week. I got told a while ago from a highly placed academy employee from another club that although he was a decent lad, his family represent him and that they are trouble. Sounds like its them that are asking for the money from this.
 
He'll be looked after by City. But there is a word of caution over giving young players big contracts - look at Richards and Johnson this season after signing big deals.
 
Sorry to be dumb, but I've read a few times he can leave on a free at the end of his contract.

I thought now that players who let their contract expire under the age of 24, who had come through the ranks at their club, were NOT entitled to a bosman & that the buying club would have to pay a compensation style fee to be agreed at a tribunral?

Anyone agree on this?
 
I hope he gets himself a decent agent because the kid knows where he wants to be but his dad seems to think the balls in his court
 
I'd be gutted if we lost Sturridge, but I've heard from a few sources that he's making unreasonable demands. Part of me thinks we should call his bluff; I'd be surprised if anyone else was willing to offer such an inexperienced player £30k a week. He has huge potential, and we have the money there but we have to be sensible. Does Daniel Sturridge (or for that matter Michael Johnson or Micah Richards) merit a higher weekly wage than Stephen Ireland?
 
They will all be at it, new owners with very deep pockets, new players on £5/6million a year, massive greed fest. This is the reason I didn't want to sign Robinho, bad for moral having a teamate earning 10 x what you are.
 
On one hand i say give him what he wants, we have lost promising players over the years and we don't want to lose this one. He has the 'potential' to be top class and to chalk up a superb goalscoring record in his career, we're the supposed "richest club in the world" so whats an extra 30k a week?

On the other, he is following in the footsteps on Richards and Johnson. All three played/have played very little when their contact renewel was up and in them few games they had/have performed really well. But once Richards got his cushy 5 year 50k p/w contract and Johnson got his cushy 5 year 35k p/w contract they have gone into cruise mode.

Richards was the supposed "best young defender in the world" and Johnson was the "new Colin Bell" when they were fighting for their futures at the club. Both have since recieved vastly inflated wages and have done fuck all and have been shit.

If i was at City or any other club in the do the business they can earn what they want, you will see then who is motivated by ambition and success and who is motivated by money and an extra 20k a week.

If Sturridge wanted 60k a week and we only offered 30k a week then it would cost us £7.8m over the 5 years to meet his demands. £7.8m is not really that much over 5 years for a player with potential like him who cost us very little in the first place.

I am unsure about this, want him to stay but don't want the likes of Weiss, Nimley and any other young academy graduate who will follow in their footsteps and look amazing until they get a cushy big contract.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

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

SIGN UP
Back
Top