This logic only applies to everyone else except City, PSG and Chelsea. We will get quoted insane fees because everyone knows we have the cash no matter what.The transfer fee revolt will happen, clubs will only pay reasonable amounts.
The only logical reason for a player to accept a new contract from a club they don't plan on staying at long term, is if their wages go up astronmically and they still want to be there for atleast another year or two (Sancho).
This is why the Kane situation is kind of nuts, the fee is way too high, and Kane's contract is too long for City to have him run down.
But that's the point, of course if a player puts themself in the situation Kane has that's the only way, for someone to HAVE to pay that mega fee.This logic only applies to everyone else except City, PSG and Chelsea. We will get quoted insane fees because everyone knows we have the cash no matter what.
Fact is, if we want top striker we will have to pay the premium there is no other way.
UEFA can do plenty to stop it and will, wage cap rules will prevent this being the norm. We likely won't ever see a true wage cap but we're going to see an increase in the x%of revenue as wages cap and other similar rules being brought in to ensure power stays predominately with the clubs and not the players, and rightly so too. transfer fees (in theory, depending on the owners, hello glazers) means most of the money stays in the game, huge signing on fees goes out of the game into 2 pockets.Fully agree.
The big winners are the players (+agents) who let their contracts run down. You have to think in line with total cost. £100k a weak is £5.2m a year over a 5 year deal that is £26m. That is nothing in comparison to a big transfer fee in the current market.
So players signing up for a 5 year deal on £100k a weak are taking chump change. A top player should be thinking that a £100m fee + wages is what top clubs are willing to pay for a top player. So if i'm an agent and I have a client like Mbappe - I'm saying run that bad boy down and ask for £150m over 5 years minimum, and that goes 100% to the player (+agent). Why would you not do that as a top player. Clubs + UEFA can do F all to stop it.
Fans wont like it but they will have to adjust because there is only going to be more of it.
According to ESPN gossip, Liverpool are currently head of the queue should he leave PSG. I wonder if that is because of his own personal choice or what Liverpool are prepared to offer him and PSG financially?
Stanley knives and rats?I just don’t understand this. Why would he turn down us then think Liverpool was a good place to live?
Why don’t players see City as the pinnacle of their options? Three of the last four titles, ten years in a row in the CL and something like 10 of the last 14 available domestic trophies, plus Pep as manager!
Why the fuck would any player not be begging us to sign them?
What do scousers and rags have that we don’t?
Nothing but the largest signing-on fees that world football has ever known. ;)
liverpool ain't paying his wages,hes going to madrid he wanted to extend only if there's clause that he can go to madridAccording to ESPN gossip, Liverpool are currently head of the queue should he leave PSG. I wonder if that is because of his own personal choice or what Liverpool are prepared to offer him and PSG financially?
Almost compete fantasy, but I saw the UK press on this rumour more than once in the last year.liverpool ain't paying his wages,hes going to madrid he wanted to extend only if there's clause that he can go to madrid