| Contracts Extended on 16:48 - Feb 19 with 5117 views | RBlock |
The last thing we heard from WLS and Dave Mc was that we were negotiating new contracts with both and expected them to sign on. As such, this seems a bit concerning, like talks have broken down and we've taken up our options instead. |  | |  |
| Contracts Extended on 16:57 - Feb 19 with 5069 views | stevec |
| Contracts Extended on 16:48 - Feb 19 by RBlock |
The last thing we heard from WLS and Dave Mc was that we were negotiating new contracts with both and expected them to sign on. As such, this seems a bit concerning, like talks have broken down and we've taken up our options instead. |
Probably as good as we can get these days.
Two good players secured for 20/21, during the summer we’ll get to determine whether the Board are similarly inclined to put a top six side around them or are playing us for fools and the obligatory 16th place again. |  | | |
| Contracts Extended on 16:59 - Feb 19 with 5062 views | Esox_Lucius |
| Contracts Extended on 16:57 - Feb 19 by stevec |
Probably as good as we can get these days.
Two good players secured for 20/21, during the summer we’ll get to determine whether the Board are similarly inclined to put a top six side around them or are playing us for fools and the obligatory 16th place again. |
That will be more dictated by P&S restrictions than any intention by the board. Are you wilfully ignoring that we are hamstrung by FFP? |  |
| The grass is always greener. |
| |
| Contracts Extended on 17:02 - Feb 19 with 5038 views | PinnerPaul |
| Contracts Extended on 16:48 - Feb 19 by RBlock |
The last thing we heard from WLS and Dave Mc was that we were negotiating new contracts with both and expected them to sign on. As such, this seems a bit concerning, like talks have broken down and we've taken up our options instead. |
On going I would say given the last line
'We will be continuing discussions..to extend...deals further' |  | | |
| Contracts Extended on 17:03 - Feb 19 with 5039 views | RBlock |
| Contracts Extended on 16:57 - Feb 19 by stevec |
Probably as good as we can get these days.
Two good players secured for 20/21, during the summer we’ll get to determine whether the Board are similarly inclined to put a top six side around them or are playing us for fools and the obligatory 16th place again. |
Nothing to do with playing us for fools. If one or both are sold, it's to mitigate losses and stay within FFP. We know Fernandes would love to go and splurge again and "put a top six side around them", if it wasn't for FFP.
Willfully ignorant. | | | |
| Contracts Extended on 17:06 - Feb 19 with 5016 views | PinnerPaul |
| Contracts Extended on 16:59 - Feb 19 by Esox_Lucius |
That will be more dictated by P&S restrictions than any intention by the board. Are you wilfully ignoring that we are hamstrung by FFP? |
I agree, also its real life folks - not football manager on the 'puter'
Its not like sign x, y an Z , and pay them a,b, and c and then shoot up the table.
Stoke and Huddersfield wage bills must be well above ours but both below us in the table,
Conversely there are clubs above us paying less in wages. | | | |
| Contracts Extended on 17:07 - Feb 19 with 5013 views | bosh67 |
I am kind of reading this as 'we'll be able to sell them for actual money in the summer' rather than them drifting away on a free.
Fair enough but we simply can't compete if the money is right to take them away and they are offered more cash. We have to get used to it and start producing a conveyor belt of these types of young players. [Post edited 19 Feb 2020 17:08]
|  |
| |
| Contracts Extended on 17:18 - Feb 19 with 4940 views | stowmarketrange |
I thought we were clear of previous ffp constraints as it’s done on a rolling 3 years?
Not that I expect us to go out and spend silly money,but I thought this summer might see the pursestrings loosened a bit. |  | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Contracts Extended on 17:23 - Feb 19 with 4903 views | CliveWilsonSaid |
| Contracts Extended on 17:18 - Feb 19 by stowmarketrange |
I thought we were clear of previous ffp constraints as it’s done on a rolling 3 years?
Not that I expect us to go out and spend silly money,but I thought this summer might see the pursestrings loosened a bit. |
Would we not be due compensation if they refuse to sign a new contract as they were both signed as young players?
Edit - Sorry didn’t mean to quote you Stowmarket [Post edited 19 Feb 2020 17:25]
|  |
| |
| Contracts Extended on 17:29 - Feb 19 with 4857 views | stevec |
| Contracts Extended on 17:03 - Feb 19 by RBlock |
Nothing to do with playing us for fools. If one or both are sold, it's to mitigate losses and stay within FFP. We know Fernandes would love to go and splurge again and "put a top six side around them", if it wasn't for FFP.
Willfully ignorant. |
Fair enough, 16th place it is then.
Deep joy. | | | |
| Contracts Extended on 17:29 - Feb 19 with 4861 views | Northernr |
| Contracts Extended on 16:57 - Feb 19 by stevec |
Probably as good as we can get these days.
Two good players secured for 20/21, during the summer we’ll get to determine whether the Board are similarly inclined to put a top six side around them or are playing us for fools and the obligatory 16th place again. |
I would absolutely fcking love to see your very understanding reaction if we turn down offers for Manning and BOS this summer to "go for the top six", don't go up, and then lose two of our three best assets for free the following year. I bet you'd be very c'est la vie about that. |  | | |
| Contracts Extended on 17:29 - Feb 19 with 4856 views | Northernr |
| Contracts Extended on 16:48 - Feb 19 by RBlock |
The last thing we heard from WLS and Dave Mc was that we were negotiating new contracts with both and expected them to sign on. As such, this seems a bit concerning, like talks have broken down and we've taken up our options instead. |
Same. Announcing something we already knew doesn't exactly suggest proper contract extensions are imminent does it? | | | |
| Contracts Extended on 17:31 - Feb 19 with 4832 views | Jeff |
It's also a very real possibility that we're triggering these extensions now because they are both coming to the end of their current contracts, and could be close to entering a 3 month or so window where we would be unable to trigger the extension, effectively a 'notice period' where one or the other party declares their intention to leave / terminate.
See: Adam Lallana being in the news today as Liverpool confirm that they're releasing him at the end of the season. |  |
| |
| Contracts Extended on 17:32 - Feb 19 with 4824 views | Northernr |
| Contracts Extended on 17:31 - Feb 19 by Jeff |
It's also a very real possibility that we're triggering these extensions now because they are both coming to the end of their current contracts, and could be close to entering a 3 month or so window where we would be unable to trigger the extension, effectively a 'notice period' where one or the other party declares their intention to leave / terminate.
See: Adam Lallana being in the news today as Liverpool confirm that they're releasing him at the end of the season. |
True, but why would you announce it? Since Hoos has been here basically every contract we've done has had an option, many times we've just quietly taken that option, I don't recall us announcing many of them? Maybe wrong. | | | |
| Contracts Extended on 17:50 - Feb 19 with 4726 views | CroydonCaptJack |
| Contracts Extended on 17:32 - Feb 19 by Northernr |
True, but why would you announce it? Since Hoos has been here basically every contract we've done has had an option, many times we've just quietly taken that option, I don't recall us announcing many of them? Maybe wrong. |
Agreed, I don't ever recall us announcing an option being taken up before. |  | | |
| Contracts Extended on 18:01 - Feb 19 with 4671 views | Rangersw12 |
| Contracts Extended on 17:32 - Feb 19 by Northernr |
True, but why would you announce it? Since Hoos has been here basically every contract we've done has had an option, many times we've just quietly taken that option, I don't recall us announcing many of them? Maybe wrong. |
PR exercise ? | | | |
| Contracts Extended on 18:12 - Feb 19 with 4603 views | NorthantsHoop |
I am just going to go to the remaining home games and enjoy watching BOS, Chair, Eze and Manning hopefully perform as well as we have seen so far, especially this season. We all know the club has to maximise the potential to sell players at a premium, and it is great that we actually have players that are starting to be regarded as exciting quality prospects. Think realistically BOS and Eze will go, Manning and Chair will stay a bit longer. Chair is really pushing on this season and a real diamond, showing the type of development that Eze and BOS went through last year. BOS and Eze have really stepped up this season and you can't deny them a shot at the Premier League. |  | | |
| Contracts Extended on 18:12 - Feb 19 with 4598 views | EastR |
| Contracts Extended on 18:01 - Feb 19 by Rangersw12 |
PR exercise ? |
Makes perfect sense
We've exercised the options to give us possible future options to negotiate further contracts and options, thereby limiting the option of earlier departures, which wouldn’t be the best option.. | |
| |
| Contracts Extended on 18:22 - Feb 19 with 4546 views | QPR_John |
I assume it is not the intention to sell all four so selling Eze will net a certain amount allowing leeway in contract offers to the other three. Keeping Bos, Manning and Chair is better use of the money than gambling on new players. All assuming the players want to say and are not tempted to sit on the bench and/or be a squad player for a Premier League club | | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 18:25 - Feb 19 with 4533 views | Hastings_Hoops |
I’m usually positive in my posts, but this has really annoyed me.
1) the club has rolled this tur6 un glitter and announced this like its a great success. It’s not, it’s a climb down to their last contractual resort.
2) the club was already reported to be operating within FFP headroom and then improved on this by sensibly letting Leistner, Scowen and Wells go.
3) the club therefore had about £50k additional headroom to operate with and extend BOS and Manning contracts properly to generate millions of additional sales value.
Because they have not implemented (3) they run the risk of being under pressure this summer to sell and certainly under significant pressure in Jan 2021 to sell! On this basis, because they have not implemented (3) as they should been able to because of (2), they could stand to have cost themselves millions!
Incompetent beyond belief! [Post edited 19 Feb 2020 18:41]
|  | | |
| Contracts Extended on 18:33 - Feb 19 with 4483 views | Match82 |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 18:25 - Feb 19 by Hastings_Hoops |
I’m usually positive in my posts, but this has really annoyed me.
1) the club has rolled this tur6 un glitter and announced this like its a great success. It’s not, it’s a climb down to their last contractual resort.
2) the club was already reported to be operating within FFP headroom and then improved on this by sensibly letting Leistner, Scowen and Wells go.
3) the club therefore had about £50k additional headroom to operate with and extend BOS and Manning contracts properly to generate millions of additional sales value.
Because they have not implemented (3) they run the risk of being under pressure this summer to sell and certainly under significant pressure in Jan 2021 to sell! On this basis, because they have not implemented (3) as they should been able to because of (2), they could stand to have cost themselves millions!
Incompetent beyond belief! [Post edited 19 Feb 2020 18:41]
|
3) the club has not used the £50k / week to extend these contracts with proper extended contracts.
Operating "within FFP" is still making a significant loss
The further under FFP limit we are the more room we have for future moves
We have no evidence the club hasn't attempted to do exactly this, but it still has to be within reasonable limits. If BOS for example said he'll extend his contract for 50k/week we should and would tell him to fck off
I wouldn't get too mad about this, for all we know this could have just been announced to stop the morons on Twitter posting nonsense about how we are going to lose players for nothing this year |  | | |
| Contracts Extended on 18:41 - Feb 19 with 4441 views | PunteR |
If we're going to add players next season and go for a genuine promotion push i can sort of see logic. These 2 are good players. If we're just aiming to be midtable and balance books by being a selling club this doesnt look like a positive step in that direction.
I dunno.. triggering contract extensions suggests things arent all rosey between player and club. Dont want to sound all doom mongery. |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| Contracts Extended on 18:45 - Feb 19 with 4426 views | Hastings_Hoops |
| Contracts Extended on 18:33 - Feb 19 by Match82 |
3) the club has not used the £50k / week to extend these contracts with proper extended contracts.
Operating "within FFP" is still making a significant loss
The further under FFP limit we are the more room we have for future moves
We have no evidence the club hasn't attempted to do exactly this, but it still has to be within reasonable limits. If BOS for example said he'll extend his contract for 50k/week we should and would tell him to fck off
I wouldn't get too mad about this, for all we know this could have just been announced to stop the morons on Twitter posting nonsense about how we are going to lose players for nothing this year |
My point on (3) - it is surely sensible to lock them in on higher contracts now (for easy maths(, equivalent to £1m additional operating cost for the season and flog them in the summer for an increased price of (for easy maths) +10m by not being a distressed seller! | | | |
| Contracts Extended on 18:47 - Feb 19 with 4406 views | gigiisourgod |
| Contracts Extended on 18:01 - Feb 19 by Rangersw12 |
PR exercise ? |
Like most things we do these days | | | |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 18:48 - Feb 19 with 4397 views | PinnerPaul |
| (No subject) (n/t) on 18:25 - Feb 19 by Hastings_Hoops |
I’m usually positive in my posts, but this has really annoyed me.
1) the club has rolled this tur6 un glitter and announced this like its a great success. It’s not, it’s a climb down to their last contractual resort.
2) the club was already reported to be operating within FFP headroom and then improved on this by sensibly letting Leistner, Scowen and Wells go.
3) the club therefore had about £50k additional headroom to operate with and extend BOS and Manning contracts properly to generate millions of additional sales value.
Because they have not implemented (3) they run the risk of being under pressure this summer to sell and certainly under significant pressure in Jan 2021 to sell! On this basis, because they have not implemented (3) as they should been able to because of (2), they could stand to have cost themselves millions!
Incompetent beyond belief! [Post edited 19 Feb 2020 18:41]
|
It says that discussions are CONTINUING
Blimey - some of you would make great Daily Mail journalists.
Let me explain that - editor was quoted once as saying he wanted all the stories in that paper to either upset, annoy or frighten the reader! [Post edited 19 Feb 2020 18:48]
| | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
