• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.

Russell Martin has Ross Stewart as his main target **Transfer confirmed **

Turnip from the Tip said:
That’s fair comment, albeit it quite worrying.
Again though, it’s not really that risky because you can still choose to sell the player at any time. If we don’t go up but player does well, we’d get £20m-£30m easily. Any relegated team or maybe a lower premier league club would take a punt.

Or we do go up and are awash with TV money and choose to keep him or sell him. Nice position to be in.

We seem to have got ourselves into a shit position with our backs against the wall on transfer deadline day. Again.

There is the injury risk and possibility it he doesn’t come back of course. For me, Stewart has enough credit in the bank, any player can get injured and the risk is offset to a degree by the fact we know that he will deliver if he is fit (as opposed to a young foreign lad who may or may not adapt / fit in / turn out to be any good)
Click to expand...

It has a myriad of knock-on effects if we were to obliterate our structure, first and foremost we have to sort Clarke and co out, it practically raises everybody. Second of all, it kills wiggle room, loss of form or those types of issues and transfers are no longer likely because there is no jump in wage to be had, that's what killed us in the premiership years, we couldn't sell anyone because they were all being paid above their intrinsic value. That's before the financial impact is considered. Ross, Clarke and co will have a shed load of suitors on their current wage, less so on 40k a week.

We had our place in time to negotiate with Stewart, it was prior to last season kicking off, the second he started scoring goals his value wage wise shot through our structure. I imagine we had assumed we could sell when we failed to extend his contract but his injuries made that far more difficult. I think the club deserve a lot of shit for how its played out, just not for this moment in time, now it's a case of making the best of a bad situation.
 

Coeus said:
It has a myriad of knock-on effects if we were to obliterate our structure, first and foremost we have to sort Clarke and co out, it practically raises everybody. Second of all, it kills wiggle room, loss of form or those types of issues and transfers are no longer likely because there is no jump in wage to be had, that's what killed us in the premiership years, we couldn't sell anyone because they were all being paid above their intrinsic value. That's before the financial impact is considered. Ross, Clarke and co will have a shed load of suitors on their current wage, less so on 40k a week.

We had our place in time to negotiate with Stewart, it was prior to last season kicking off, the second he started scoring goals his value wage wise shot through our structure. I imagine we had assumed we could sell when we failed to extend his contract but his injuries made that far more difficult. I think the club deserve a lot of shit for how its played out, just not for this moment in time, now it's a case of making the best of a bad situation.
Click to expand...
Yep that’s a completely fair analysis of the situation. I do agree about the wage structure however every club faces this - whether it’s Liverpool with Mo Salah (ultimately they cut Mane loose to pay him his going rate) etc. Haaland will be on more than KDB because he puts the ball in the net. They are just examples at the top of the game but it’s relative for all clubs.

And by all accounts when we got promoted Stewart wasn’t asking for the earth.

It seems we have no intention of investing in a team to challenge for promotion this season. We obviously can’t afford to so yes it does now make sense from a financial view to sell him in this window. But from a sporting / entertainment / seeing a team win point of view, there’s nothing for the fans to like about this move at all. It’s deeply frustrating that because the club fucked up, we lose a really good player and effectively it’s a bit of a write off of a season following so much promise last year.
 
It's been pretty obvious for months that Stewart is going, so there's absolutely no excuse for not getting a suitable replacement. Thing is, even if we get a good PL prospect on loan, I'm not sure that would be sufficient united they can have an Amad-like impact given how little Mowbray seems to trust Hemir
 
Say Stewart doesn’t go in next 48 hours what next? He’s sat on crap money until at least Jan but then clubs will pay even less for him. New contract with a 15/20m release clause seems most sensible all round. Don’t even need to match crazy wages as thats what the release clause is there for
 
Guinness Guzzler said:
It's been pretty obvious for months that Stewart is going, so there's absolutely no excuse for not getting a suitable replacement. Thing is, even if we get a good PL prospect on loan, I'm not sure that would be sufficient united they can have an Amad-like impact given how little Mowbray seems to trust Hemir
Click to expand...
It seems like our interest in Cannon has been dependent on Stewart going and suspect that’s why he hasn’t gone to Preston on loan yet. I don’t think it’s a coincidence he’s been linked with a permanent move again as soon as Southampton have came in for Stewart.
 
MadMackem10 said:
Say Stewart doesn’t go in next 48 hours what next? He’s sat on crap money until at least Jan but then clubs will pay even less for him. New contract with a 15/20m release clause seems most sensible all round. Don’t even need to match crazy wages as thats what the release clause is there for
Click to expand...
The club clearly isn’t in a position to do that though. For whatever reason.
 
MadMackem10 said:
Say Stewart doesn’t go in next 48 hours what next? He’s sat on crap money until at least Jan but then clubs will pay even less for him. New contract with a 15/20m release clause seems most sensible all round. Don’t even need to match crazy wages as thats what the release clause is there for
Click to expand...
But he'd have to agree to the contract, and without top wages, why would he agree to that?
 
Shibby Safc said:
But he'd have to agree to the contract, and without top wages, why would he agree to that?
Click to expand...
Because it’ better than the crap wages he would be on for the next 6 months if not a year. Say he’s on 5k a week now and Southampton will give him 30k. We could easily offer him 15-20k
Fetch Fletch said:
The club clearly isn’t in a position to do that though. For whatever reason.
Click to expand...
But that’s what confuses me as Ballard and cirkins new deals will have been healthy pay rises
 
Last edited:
MadMackem10 said:
Because it’ better than the crap wages he would be on for the next 6 months if not a year. Say he’s on 5k a week now and Southampton will give him 30k. We could easily offer him 15-20k
Click to expand...
He's been holding off for over 12 months, and next summer can go for free where he can command even higher wages since there will be no transfer fee. Seems counter intuitive on his part to agree to an extension where it relies on a club paying 15m for him (as per your example)
 
MadMackem10 said:
Because it’ better than the crap wages he would be on for the next 6 months if not a year. Say he’s on 5k a week now and Southampton will give him 30k. We could easily offer him 15-20k

But that’s what confuses me as Ballard and cirkins new deals will have been healthy pay rises
Click to expand...
Southampton will also probably give him a decent signing on fee.
 
Turnip from the Tip said:
Yep that’s a completely fair analysis of the situation. I do agree about the wage structure however every club faces this - whether it’s Liverpool with Mo Salah (ultimately they cut Mane loose to pay him his going rate) etc. Haaland will be on more than KDB because he puts the ball in the net. They are just examples at the top of the game but it’s relative for all clubs.

And by all accounts when we got promoted Stewart wasn’t asking for the earth.

It seems we have no intention of investing in a team to challenge for promotion this season. We obviously can’t afford to so yes it does now make sense from a financial view to sell him in this window. But from a sporting / entertainment / seeing a team win point of view, there’s nothing for the fans to like about this move at all. It’s deeply frustrating that because the club fucked up, we lose a really good player and effectively it’s a bit of a write off of a season following so much promise last year.
Click to expand...
Spot on, excellent write up
 
if he stays he'll end up tip toeing around to avoid injury knowing there's a massive signing on fee coming his way in the summer. got to get rid for as much as we possibly can
 
MadMackem10 said:
Because it’ better than the crap wages he would be on for the next 6 months if not a year. Say he’s on 5k a week now and Southampton will give him 30k. We could easily offer him 15-20k

But that’s what confuses me as Ballard and cirkins new deals will have been healthy pay rises
Click to expand...

He’d get far more than that signing for free 6 months later. If he’s away then him signing any kind of contract makes no sense from his point of view
 
wigwams said:
He’d get far more than that signing for free 6 months later. If he’s away then him signing any kind of contract makes no sense from his point of view
Click to expand...
Especially as he's been refusing for over 12 months to sign one, seems daft to sign one on low wages (relatively) when he's so close to being a free agent
 
Agreed he’s not signing a contract. If he doesn’t go now he won’t leave in January, as he’ll be but a few months away from being a free agent.

We need to sell now. As usual we’ve screwed this right up.
 
wigwams said:
He’d get far more than that signing for free 6 months later. If he’s away then him signing any kind of contract makes no sense from his point of view
Click to expand...
True but does his injury not also play a part in this. Say he comes back plays until Jan has only a couple of goals, with southampton even still want him? I doubt they’d want to pay a fee for him
 
Given the extensive treatment he has received to aid his recovery the cost for his rehabilitation etc should be added to his transfer fee.
A figure between 14 and 15 million would seem reasonable. Akpoms price was apparently 14 million but Stuarts goals total was better of the two, admittedly based on his 10 goals in 13 games. Food for thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top