Not really
But you want to repeat the mistakes that lead to us getting there? Nice one.
But you want to repeat the mistakes that lead to us getting there? Nice one.
They'd have no basis for asking for the same amount. Fadz himself said in a Sky interview after the Boro 2nd leg that Hamer and Vik had carried the team to that point. That said, 20k feels like a ceiling we don't want to push through.
Disagree, unless we buy anyone that's had the same effect on a team in the same league last season, which we almost certainly won't do.
20k a week is what? A million a year roughly. Who wouldn't sign Hamer for a million now?
I understand not having stupid wages and I wouldn't encourage this regularly, but he's one of the best players in the league and our team. If he's willing to stay I would give it to him and do the extension. We can then sell him in the summer if we don't go up.
I think it would be short sighted of us not to do this. The other players would surely understand and it isn't like we're giving David Bell a braindead contract.
I understand not having stupid wages and I wouldn't encourage this regularly, but he's one of the best players in the league and our team. If he's willing to stay I would give it to him and do the extension. We can then sell him in the summer if we don't go up.
I think it would be short sighted of us not to do this. The other players would surely understand and it isn't like we're giving David Bell a braindead contract.
No I don’t
just want to give our best player what he’s worth, it’s not that crazy a figure
We don't know if the figures true.
I want him to stay, but it's quite simple, let's not spend money we haven't got and repeat the mistakes of the past.
We have got it though CVD!.... Tyler Walkers wages for example... add that to Gus's current wages, we are probably over the rumoured "20k".
That's what I was wondering. If it was 20k I think we would pay it. I feel he wants around 10k north of that.
Last edited:
That's not how it works though is it?
People can laugh about wage structure but it can soon spiral out of control, especially when there are opportunist agents on the scene.
I don't give a fuck if king wants to give them all an extra 10k a week as long as he funds it and doesn't load debt on to the club.
And we've got a squad that desperately needs depth, not to lose even more of it.
Yep, it seems to be being missed that if King turns out to be an arms dealer or human trafficker, then he can spend his money on wages. If, however, we're growing incrementally, then spending money we don't have won't grow us.
If it wasn't for King taking over, the fire sale of Hyam to pay for Hamer's current contract would have hurt us more than selling Hamer and improving the squad a bit.
Last edited:
And Hamer fucks off in a year anyway but every agent of every player knows the ceiling is higher, as happened with Dublin.
For me, the issue with giving Hamer £20k a week is other players will be knocking the door asking for pay rises. It's something that could potentially affect morale in the squad. In turn could crumble the stringent wage structure the club has implemented
Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk
Sent from my Pixel 6 using Tapatalk
I disagree, offering him a 20k weekly wage would only happen under the intention of the club having another run at promotion and it securing the club re-sale value should we not manage it. If other players are demanding it then they would have to be equally sought after and if not then pipe down.
It's complete nonsense, like I said surely Waghorn getting the top wage would piss them off if anything was going to, not giving our best player a well deserved pay rise.
Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
It's not. It happens at lots of clubs, I'm not sure why people think City should be any different.
And we don't know what Waghorn was on or if it lead to any disputes with other players.
I'm amazed you and NW are dying on this hill tbh, being able to keep hold of a player of that talent for a reported 20k a week is relative peanuts, we could flog him straight after he signed it if we really wanted to.
We have the third lowest wage bill in the league don't we? This club deserves better.
Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
Could've sworn Hamer, O'Hare became the highest earners with the their new contracts anyway? The Waghorn logic is slightly off too. He'd had a mediocre session with Derby who were going bust and wasn't in huge demand. I doubt he was badly paid(!) but the logic doesn't necessarily say we matched his Derby wage any more than his next club will match what we paid him.
I'm surprised you haven't understood my posts.
I've not once said we shouldn't give him 20k and none of us know if that's the figure he's after.
I'm amazed you can't accept that we're not saying don't pay him that, we're saying see if we can, and see what the consequences of doing so are rather than just automatically opening a cheque book!
We need a bigger squad for a start, so using all wages in Hamer and increasing what incomers will ask for could end up with us having a weaker squad overall, not stronger.
It might not.
But it might, and last time we gave him a better contract, it did!
No player is bigger than the club and all that.
We didn't match his Derby wage but I'm pretty sure it was common knowledge he was the top earner. All our players would have known that, while he was bumbling around not doing very much but I didn't hear stories of anyone kicking up a stink.
Honestly I would think the playing squad would be delighted if we kept hold of Hamer as it shows an ounce of ambition.
Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
No, although that was funny. I think there were far more credible sources than that. Walker would have also been near the top of the list, more than Godden I would think...
Sent from my SM-G973F using Tapatalk
City fans are Hilarious-on the one hand complaining over having to pay a measly 100 quid in difference on season tickets and in the same breath having a go (in a completely hypothetical scenario) at the club for not offering a player 20k per week !
Living within our means is really good business sense-no way I want to go bust and drift down the leagues again. Even Robbins knows there’s still a wage structure (which Grendel rightly pointed out we lose 5M a year on!).
Buy low sell high, try to keep our squad together, try and incrementally make it stronger too. All while sticking to the wage structure.
Fans have to be realistic, realise that we over achieved last season and hope we do better next.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Living within our means is really good business sense-no way I want to go bust and drift down the leagues again. Even Robbins knows there’s still a wage structure (which Grendel rightly pointed out we lose 5M a year on!).
Buy low sell high, try to keep our squad together, try and incrementally make it stronger too. All while sticking to the wage structure.
Fans have to be realistic, realise that we over achieved last season and hope we do better next.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Not if someone 10x as good as me in my job was getting the increase
Sent from my SM-G991B using Tapatalk
That’s the point though? 100 quid a year increase, 150 actually as got prem package, for what?
to not keep on of the best players in the championship for absolute peanuts.
This is just made up. No one has offered him £40k and if they did he’s gone