• The forum upgrades are now largely complete.
    Please read this thread for more details.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

All NUFC and Sportswashing here (threads will be merged)

Status
Not open for further replies.

4 or 5 nil today, Haway city

Rip the bastards limb from limb.

Quite apt considering who their owners are
ErichZann said:
Dzeko and Trippier would be very good signings imo, hope they don't sign them both.
Click to expand...
Trippier is 31, they’re giving him nigh on 100k a week and Dzeko is getting on a bit too, another player who would want north of £100k a week. You’d be looking to replace both in 2-3 years.

Very short termism and lazy recruitment in my view.
 
Last edited:
Bears Beets said:
4 or 5 nil today, Haway city

Rip the bastards limb from limb.

Quite apt considering who their owners are

Trippier is 31, they’re giving him nigh on 100k a week and Dzeko is getting on a bit too, another player who would want north of £100k a week. You’d be looking to replace both in 2-3 years.

Very short termism and lazy recruitment in my view.
Click to expand...
Did you say that when BSA got players in to save us in 2016 ?
They'll just be looking to stay up even if the players they sign are only good for two seasons.
 
Bears Beets said:
4 or 5 nil today, Haway city

Rip the bastards limb from limb.

Quite apt considering who their owners are

Trippier is 31, they’re giving him nigh on 100k a week and Dzeko is getting on a bit too, another player who would want north of £100k a week. You’d be looking to replace both in 2-3 years.

Very short termism and lazy recruitment in my view.
Click to expand...

Agreed

It’s basically a more expensive version of the SAFC transfer policy that took us swiftly from top flight to third tier
 
Bears Beets said:
Did BSA give 31/35 year olds £100k a week contracts?
Click to expand...
They need to stay up so could 'afford' to hoy a few £5m a year contracts around on the basis they stay up. It will still be hard to attract all the players they'd like but some will come. If they stay up then it's £10's of millions saved in revenue even though they have hoyed money at players. Next season other players will want a sniff of the money though the 'north' premium may not be as high given they've stayed up. If they go down then it will be another year to get back up and even if they did come straight back up then it would be harder to attract players again. They'll also have a different squad that will be like the last time they came up and not something they can start fresh from if they do stay up.

Also any players joining now will clearly be doing it for the money given they don't know if they're going to stay up and could be playing in the Championship next season. Also in the back of the players minds will be the fact that if they join January and still go down then they will be labelled money grabbing mercenary failures so who would want them at other clubs?

Like I said earlier about the Lingard example, is it really worth that extra £2m over 4 years on top of his multi millions he's got already (his last 4 year basic contract being at least £15m ignoring bonus, sponsorship and all the the other frilly bits they get). There's also the fact he'd have to uproot to a different area with a lot less 'attractions' and multi millionaires to socialise with and all to run the risk of being labelled a money grabbing mercenary failure? He would see any of that as an issue as possibly going to West Ham who are already in Europe, sniffing about European places and in London isn't something way more attractive?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top