Jimmy & Joe To Sign New Contracts

[I'm no cynic but...]

Overall cost in signing a player is his transfer fee plus his wage deal. Divide this overall cost by the number of weeks that his contract runs for and we can then assess whether or not that his signature will be worth it. There are mixed views as to whether Milner has been worth it, but to get worked up over the loss of a possible transfer fee shouldn't enter it. What matters now is that Milner puts in his full effort in his remaining months and if he does so, and we win more trophies in that time, we can seriously say his contract was satisfactorily fulfilled, but if he instead drops into a permasulk and we miss out, we can claim he is better gone and forgotten. One thing for sure is that he is unlikely ever to attain either a wage deal or a trophy count as he has had the opportunity to do at our beloved club.

 

[Harvo 125]

Come off it mate, let's be honest, he knows he's incapable of being on a par of the calibre of player we are moving towards.

More a realist if you ask me.

I don't know how else you'd describe someone who gives up playing as many minutes and as many games as Milner does at a club like City to go somewhere he knows he'll always finish behind us but will play 10 more games a season. Total lack of ambition. There have been plenty of moments in the last 18 months where you've been calling for his inclusion ahead of Nasri's as have tons of people who watch City. He's good enough to play a huge part in our squad even if he doesn't have the technical qualities of other players.

The Guardian article put up a few pages back said that he started 12 league games last season. I don't know if that's right or not or how many games he's started each season since he signed and tbh I can't be arsed looking it up because I know that it's a fraction of the games that some of his perhaps more illustrious teammates have started. That's the issue for Milner - he's said it - playing time and therefore, though unsaid, his perceived standing within the team. He's been a bit part player at City - a stand in, a filler in of holes when others are injured or out of form, a perennial sub - albeit an at times vital, mostly consistent, rarely injured, incredibly versatile, pretty damn decent and uncomplaining bit part player. Ok, so his game time has increased this season to date, but I can't believe anyone is so naive as to think this has been in an effort to placate Milner and is just more filling in of holes due to the injury issues we've had across the midfield and up front this season. Milner will never be one of the first names on the team sheet at City. He knows it. We know it. If he wants to be he has to move on, and a Bosman now is his best chance of securing a club that will be competing for, though probably not winning, trophies. If he signs a new contract at City and stays another year or 2, with let's face it probably ever diminishing playing time, he'll then end up somewhere like West Brom or QPR. Move somewhere like Liverpool now and he's got a good chance of playing 40-50 games a season, be one of the main men and be in a team that will at least theoretically be challenging for silverware for the next 3-5 years. I honestly believe international considerations come into it too. I don't think being a bit part player for us has helped his England career at all and it sure as hell won't help it into the future.

So whilst it's hard to take - potentially losing such an asset for zip - I can't fault Milner for wanting to move on for the reason he has stated, if that is the case, and wholly agree with those who appreciate the fact that he will have fulfilled the terms of his contract to the letter and wish him well.

The above is the truth & nothing but the truth.

James Milner by the end of May will have completed & honoured his contract unlike 95% of other footballers who angle for more money or there agent takes the piss, he IMO has the right to play it how he is & deserves to be playing regular for a top 6 team and he wont get that at City or Chelsea so he will do the next best thing & sign for Liverpool or even Arsenal...

I for 1 will certainly acknowledge his efforts and will definitely miss his commitment when on the field but City will fill the hole with another damn good player.

 

[EricBrooksGhost]

Re: Jimmy & Joe To Sign New Contracts

In the post-Bosman era no club should pay money for a player in the expectation of subsequently selling that player for a fee. It may happen but the bean counters would be well advised not to take it for granted.

The bean counters don't, hence amortisation. As for Jimmy its the modus operandi not his desires that are the issue.

 

[blueinsa]

I see both sides here if im honest.

For me though he should sign his deal, make sure we get a fee for the lad.

 

[Peter Doherty]

I can't buy into the "he's just looking out for himself nothing wrong with that" narrative. Sorry lads. I can't see past what's best for City and I can't bring myself to be so cynical as to applaud any player who pulls a fast one on the club to get a pay day somewhere else.

Spot on.

 

[The Future's Blue]

I can't buy into the "he's just looking out for himself nothing wrong with that" narrative. Sorry lads. I can't see past what's best for City and I can't bring myself to be so cynical as to applaud any player who pulls a fast one on the club to get a pay day somewhere else.

Spot on.

Here's a question, what happens if we sign him on another long term contract in the hope that we get a few million for him, we then buy a couple of players who keep Milner out of the side and he decides not to move on because he won't get the same money elsewhere?

 

[The Light Was Yellow Sir]

I can't buy into the "he's just looking out for himself nothing wrong with that" narrative. Sorry lads. I can't see past what's best for City and I can't bring myself to be so cynical as to applaud any player who pulls a fast one on the club to get a pay day somewhere else.

Spot on.

Here's a question, what happens if we sign him on another long term contract in the hope that we get a few million for him, we then buy a couple of players who keep Milner out of the side and he decides not to move on because he won't get the same money elsewhere?

Nail on head. If he did that he would be getting absolutely slaughtered instead of just slaughtered. City have allowed this to happen. Should have been sold last summer if he didn't want to sign a new contract. He wasn't, he's here and at least he won't go missing or sulking if and when he is called upon.

 

[Tim of the Oak]

I think Jimmy has done well for us over the last two years. The Milner of Munich performance was a great highlight.

However, Jimmy looked completely out of his depth against the Arse on Sunday and hasn't grasped his chances to become a first team regular.

If Jimmy goes then good luck to him but spare me the "honouring his contract" bullshit!

 

[Prestwich_Blue]

I can't buy into the "he's just looking out for himself nothing wrong with that" narrative. Sorry lads. I can't see past what's best for City and I can't bring myself to be so cynical as to applaud any player who pulls a fast one on the club to get a pay day somewhere else.

Spot on.

i think it depends on the exact circumstances.

If we asked him to help us out and sign a new contract 12 months ago so we can get a fee and report a profit when we sell him (which we agreed to do) and he's refused, then I'd agree that he's pulled a fast one. If he's strung us along by asking for something he knows we won't offer and giving the impression he might accept something in-between then he's behaved badly.

On the other hand, if Milner has said "I'm not staying unless I'm guaranteed x games a season" and we won't commit to that or would only agree to a lower figure, then he's laid his cards on the table and we know where we stand. Then I'd argue he's behaved properly.

 

[Ray78]

I see both sides here if im honest.

For me though he should sign his deal, make sure we get a fee for the lad.

Bang on the money.