The media suddenly seem to have stepped up a gear in the will he won't he Danny Ings new contract saga at Southampton, Tottenham have been linked, Liverpool have been linked, Leicester have been linked, but where do they get their info from ?

If there is one thing managers do in football, at least the good ones, it is play their cards close to their chests, in general they try to get transfer deals done quietly and quickly and under the radar, they do that because they want to do one thing and that is keep the price down.

They do not want to get into bidding wars with other clubs over not only the transfer fee but the player's wages.

Most noise in transfer windows is being generated by the press fuelled by agents, I say this every transfer window, but it is true and the situation with Danny Ings is no different.

It is not just Ings agent who will be putting the word about to the media but dozens of them, a big deal often triggers a chain reaction that at the top end can be clearly seen, but is still going right down the divisions, so somewhere right down the chain is an agent putting out an ings story, in the hope that if the player gets sold then it will trigger a deal for his replacement and about 4 down the line his client will get a move to a League 1 club.

Transfer rumours are big money spinners for the media, they generate page clicks which generate more ad income and they sell newspapers.

There are only two genuine global clubs in English football, Liverpool & Manchester United and if you link one of those clubs as a media outlet on line then you are guaranteed millions of page hits from across the World and that generates a lot of money you are hitting a truly global market.

The truth though, going back to Danny Ings, is at the moment it is hard to see who has got the money to spend, everyone is hit by this virus financially and have seen their income drop massively, it is the fan base that generates the differential income and by that I mean the income over and above the Premier League and TV money which broadly speaking is not massively different for the club finishing 5th from top and the one 5th from bottom.

For Premier League clubs it is that money on top that buys the players and that relies on size of the fanbase that either directly through buying tickets and merchandise or indirectly by the sponsorship and advertising the club can generate itself '

Manchester united get around £70 million for their shirt sponsor, Saints around £7 million, that is what buys you Danny Ings, that £63 million differential money, not the £16 million difference in prize money between Saints in 11th last season and United in 3rd.

For a lot of clubs the advertising revenue has all dried up, hence Spurs have had to take out massive loans and they are not alone, no one has got a lot of cash to splash around at the moment. The veneer of the Premier League is that it is the richest and most successful league in the World, the truth is that in this pandemic only around 3 clubs are comfortable, the rest are losing money hand over fist.

Saints were lucky in some respects in that the owner Jisheng Gao due to the trade war between China and the West was unable to get money out of China and into Saints, that means we had to run as a business and that has helped in the past year, but we are still losing £3 million a month, god knows what Tottenham are losing having to service massive debt spent to build the stadium and no revenue from that stadium to service it.

So if we take away who can afford Ings in this climate then there is the question of who would want him, Leicester could do with him to replace Vardy, but Vardy has just turned 34, he has no sale value, Leicester's problem is that they have to find money to replace a man who if he was 27 would cost them £50-60 million in terms of his goal scoring value.

The probably cant even get his wages off the books as he still has two years left on his contract.

The issue Saints have is finding the extra money Ings wants, at the moment that is difficult, we are losing £3 million a month, we do not want to add that to that debt, behind the scenes we will be trying to raise that cash, hence trying to get Wesley Hoedt off the books this window as was rumoured last month, I would be surprised if this happens, why would Lazio pay for a player they could get for free in the summer and why would Hoedt drop his wages now and also miss out on his loyalty bonus in July at the end of his contract ?

But there will come a time when it hits a point where we find out whether anyone is serious about buying Ings or he realises that it is all folly.

Ryan Bertrand was linked with a move to a top four club literally every summer since he arrived in 2014, but it was all just agent and media talk, when he realised that there was no substance in what his agent was telling him and the media pumping out it did his head in for a while, but now he has got his head around the fact that he will end his career here and his form returned.

Danny Ings is a great player but he will be 29 at the end of the season, the truly big clubs will feel that his shelf life is short and perhaps more importantly his sell on value is going to be non existent.

There is also the question of his fitness, last season was the only one where he stayed injury free, this season he has had issues.

He is not an attractive transfer in this respect, Liverpool & Manchester United can afford him, but it doesn't fit their strategy, Manchester City don't need him, Arsenal can't afford him, in the big six that leaves just Tottenham & Chelsea, Spurs are said to be in the hunt, but it is a question of cash for them, if they could squeeze the cash, it is a lot of money for a player who would be behind Son & Kane in the pecking order and that being the case would Ings want to go to be back up ?

Chelsea can afford him, but they don't need him, at least in terms of who they have at the moment, albeit they are misfiring.

Leicester haven't got the money and are they going to mount a serious Champions League challenge if they qualify ? probably not.

So Danny has to ask himself some serious questions in the next few months, is he going to chase money or success.

If he wants the money, then I'm sure Spurs will oblige, they will do their normal snidy derisory offer in the summer, looking to disturb the player as they have done to us over the last 30 years starting with Neil Ruddock, through Dean Richards & Victor Wanyama with Hojbjerg being the latest in that line.

What it is going to come to is Danny Ings himself, from a footballing point of view a good end to this season will see him make the England squad for this summers European Championships, but the pinnacle of his career would be playing in a World Cup Final, this should be his priority.

No one will remember a defeat in the quarter finals of the Champions League, but in terms of glory they will remember a glorious campaign in a World Cup.

Danny has to decide whether to potentially upset the apple cart with a big move that may see him in a Champions League squad, but with a big price tag on his shoulders to justify and a media once so praising now looking to pull him apart as the latest big money flop when he suddenly can't gel in his new team.

If he stays at St Mary's he remains a hero in his home City, he is in a side that plays to his strengths, it is the best place for him to play to his highest standards and force his way into the England team.

The glory for Danny Ings is to be found in Saints and England, not in a couple of years in a Big Six squad.

I don't blame Ings for deliberating and holding out for the best deal, that is the right thing to do for any player, in truth Saints won't be too upset, it gives them time to raise the money and when they get Wesley Hoedt off the books more salary money freed up to pay Ings.

But from a Saints perspective they are in a win win situation, at the moment they have a player who is in form and with ambition, if he stays then we can benefit from that.

But at some time we have to replace him, in truth we don't want to be in the Leicester position where our star striker has grown old and we haven't got the money too replace him.

The Saints way has always been about finding players, bringing them on, selling them and replacing them, strengthening the squad in the process.

This has been the Southampton Way since Ted Bates in the 1950's, it has never been any different in the last 60 years, so why do people get so het up when a successful process is about to be repeated.

If you want to support a club that spends £70 million on a player and pays him £125k a week, then you need to change allegiances now, the Southampton Way has brought us success in that last 60 years, it only fails when we don't reinvest the money wisely.

I would say that if we are selling players that doesn't make us a club that lacks ambition, it makes us a club that knows how to succeed and take on the big boys on our own terms, we can't do it on their terms ie money.

If we are not selling players, that doesn't mean we have ambition, it means we have failed as we have no one that anyone wants to buy.

We had a blip 4-5 years ago, but the people who were in charge then are gone, we are now back on track, lets stop harping on about what went wrong and look to what we are doing right.

We obviously want Danny Ings to stay and help with Ralph Hasenhuttl's project, but the Austrian himself knows the score and has said himself that football clubs have to keep movin forward, players don't stay at clubs forever it is only a question of when they leave and when they do we move on.

Photo: Action Images

ElijahK added 10:42 - Jan 20 Look I mean you have to keep in mind that loads of people were going on about Ings going to Spurs during the summer (although they did say they were also looking to wait a year or so) but we’ve heard this for ages now. But all I will say which makes me wonder is of why he wasn’t on the bench yesterday as he went back to training on Friday so would almost certainly be for enough by now, hence why if he’s not playing on Saturday may make me a little more worried about what’s going on. But even if these rumours are true, Ings has got two pretty simple and blatant options. Either he stays with us keeps doing a great job, goes to the Euros and World Cup with England and ends his career on a high going down as a club legend and maybe helping us to get back into Europe! Or the other option is that he leaves us for the likes of Liverpool/Spurs, and spends almost his whole season on the bench, gets dropped from England, everyone forgets him, doesn’t gain anything that special from saints fans... and for just getting a bit more money and getting to play a champions league group stage game against some random team from Greece! Turning out no different to the likes of Clyne, Wanyama, Schniderlyn or even Lambert (but no where near as respected by us as he was!).

2

Sanguin added 11:14 - Jan 20 The only realistic option is Spurs, but he'll have to play as backup to Kane and will throw away his chance of representing England. Given Ings' age, I'd happily do a swap deal for Timo Werner if Chelsea were keen. Hassenhuttl clearly knows how to get the best out of Werner.
4

SaintPaulVW added 11:19 - Jan 20 If he won't sign, he'll be sold in the summer. Unfortunately richer clubs seem to have an unwritten 'do not compete with one another' policy on domestic transfers. To my eyes it reeks of being off to Tottenham for £15 million in the summer. He'll be into the last year of his contract almost 30 and Levy won't miss a trick. I really hope I am wrong. However, if he cost us a net £5 million plus a loan fee and his wages for the 3 years here, that seems a pretty good deal even in that worst case scenario.

0

dirk_doone added 11:28 - Jan 20 Can we all just lay off Danny Ings, please? He is our best player and deserves the 100% support of all of our fans. The last thing we should be doing is spreading negative rumours about him. We want him concentrating on our next game, where hopefully he will score another winning goal for us.
0

SanMarco added 11:42 - Jan 20 If he wants to go he will go - disappointing but nothing we can do. I think even the cynics amongst us tend to psychologically impose 'loyalty' constraints on players and managers. We then feel betrayed when those people leave (only Lallana in my memory said he was definitely staying for good). We thought Koeman was loyal, Bridge was a Saints fan, MoPo, Ralph himself and all the rest. Ings can go to Spuds and still be a Saints fan. MLT style loyalty is verging on the unique I am afraid. Even Micky Channon b*ggered off to Manchester... The stuff about Ings wanting to play in CL is fascinating. If we assume the two Manchesters and Liverpool will be there that leaves a more than even chance that Spuds won't be. I would back Leicester at the moment. I don't believe he will go solely for the money but would Spuds vs 'Team no one has ever heard of' in the Europa League on a cold Thursday evening really be worth it? So, in my view, he may well go to Spuds if they qualify (remember Kane might be sold) but other than that it is Leicester and in my bones I feel he won't go there - but I am nearly always wrong of course.

0

davidargyll added 12:20 - Jan 20 Virtually all successful wage negotiations are not done in the glare of the spotlights but quietly behind closed doors. Danny Ings has a value to us and on the open market, what that is is anybody's guess in these difficult times but it makes perfect sense for him or his agent to say to the club, "I've got X months left on my contract, what is the deal?" The club goes away and thinks about it and comes back with a figure and then Danny and his agent will think about it, spread a few rumours around that ABC FC is interested to try and get the price up and so the merry-go-round continues until he reckons they pushed us as far as they can and does a deal. But ElijahK is absolutely right that the stark choice Danny has is, it's either Private Godfrey at Spurs or Captain Mainwaring at the Saints - well something rather better than Mainwaring of course but you get the point... Finally I would say that the last time Danny was interviewed after a game - was it after the Liverpool game? or earlier? - he certainly did not have the look of someone who was about to leave. As a comparison, even if he hasn't been playing much, when was the last time Dele Ali was interviewed..?

2

halftimeorange added 13:53 - Jan 20 My personal view is that what happens to Harry Kane will dictate what happens with Danny Ings. If Spurs sell then they still have Son and a partnership of him with Ings at a bargain £15-£20M would see virtually no change on the field and plenty of cash in their coffers and time to weigh up other player options for the future and to service their debt. As I've remarked before, the only loyalty in football is in fan's heads.

0

underweststand added 15:27 - Jan 20 Looking at it another way, one journo suggested that the thing delaying a new Ings deal was not money...(Ings is well paid already, but a "release clause" (if he were to move on). The article suggested that there is a large gap between the valuation the club wants, and that which Danny ('s agent ) considers acceptable - if he were to move on to a top club. Clearly having paid out £20 million PLUS two year's salary already, we need enough to pay off the original fee and have some over to buy a replacement - if such a player exists. If we got (say) £40 million in such a sale, we'd be left with c. £ 20 million ... if such a player exists at that level ..bearing in mind that the original Ings deal was a bargain, but that for Carrillo (was at a similar level) and we don't need a repeat of that fiasco. Looking at the current Prem. strikers, I think even £40 million would be "a steal" for some club, (consider what Chelsea paid for Werner and (the other guy), but like everyone else I'd want Danny to stay, but in all honesty having gone through the injury years when he was out, I wouldn't blame him one iota for wanting to get some deserved success in the remainder of his career. Sadly, in this day and age, there's no place for sentiment or loyalty, but only making "a fast buck" whilst you can. IF... a player spends half his playing life on the bench - at least he can do it in the knowledge that he has a big bank balance to retire on.

1

saintmark1976 added 19:22 - Jan 20 With no early end to Covid-19 in sight and the club supposedly losing £3 million a month I think it’s odds on that Ings will go. Not forgetting of course losing £112 million with our assets reduced by £63 million during the last two seasons for which accounts are available.The only question being when he departs. From a footballing point of view I suggest we would miss him initially but let’s face it selling our best players is what our business plan dictates in order to survive.

-1

darthvader added 19:55 - Jan 20 Didnt Ralph say that Danny is going nowhere ?
2

AirFlorida added 20:21 - Jan 20 Whilst we're doing well and have a chance of pushing for Europe, why not break our wage rules to keep someone who can get us there? I'm sure we did something similar when Chelsea were chasing MLT. Let's not get moralistic over the bloody wages thing 🙄- putting the ball in the onion bag is the hardest thing to do in prem football. After Ings goes we'll have to wait another 5 years plus before we find our next 15 goals a season player, maybe ten years for a 20 plus player. I like Che but he'll never be a prolific scorer. He'll score in short bursts. So I say fight (financially) to keep Danny.

1

Boris1977 added 21:07 - Jan 20 We don't know what's going to happen but when these rumours start they are usually fulfilled. We have the potential to compete with Leicester and spuds but never will if we sell at a critical point of building momentum. The club could weigh up the cost of replacing ings v that of increasing his wage but ultimately if £75 k a week isn't enough money to keep a player at the club then they need to leave for more money. Sorry for champions league football. How spuds can afford to buy anyone of any value is beyond me but I guess who would shut them down if they can't afford to pay off their debts? Too many vested interests to let them go under and risk a voluntary wind up order.

0

underweststand added 11:39 - Jan 21 Everyone has had a bite at this story and it's a tough call, but the simple facts are; If Danny does move...to any of " the big clubs ", the best he can hope for a place on the bench, waiting for the likes of; Kane, Aguero, Rashford or Salah (depending on eventual destination) ..to get injured ..OR may get the occasional 15 minutes sub.appearance in matches with no long term guarantee of regular first team football. Having paid out £20 million on the original transfer..Saints need a big fee in selling him in order to get a suitable replacement ..and I'm not even sure if we've paid the whole £20 million to Liverpool already? Many deals are on staggered payments over 2-3 years. Any buying club would make a killing on the deal, and (cynically) don't even need to play him. As long as he's elsewhere, he'd not be scoring for Saints, and we'd become less of a threat to Top Six clubs, because we see what happens when he's not in the side.

0

MRHALL93 added 12:08 - Jan 21 It's all up in the air at the moment. It seems like there is a lot of factors in place. From what you hear from journalists who are close to the club, it sounds like Ings wants to stay at the moment, but he wants to keep his options open. Which is fair enough. That's why a release clause is important. If we add a release clause to his contract for £70m then that's unrealistic. Even if he scores 20+ goals this season and next, £70m for a 30-year-old striker is a lot of money. If it was set to £20m, then any club could activate that and even if Ings scores 10 goals next season, £20m for a proven PL striker isn't a risk for a big club. I think if we get European football, he will sign and maybe a new contract will be drawn up where we disregard a release clause. The only issue is that the longer this goes on the more you fear that a club could come in over the summer and bid £25m for him and it wouldn't surprise me if the club is to accept that offer. I'm not against selling Ings. However, I would say we'd want to get his replacement in the transfer window before we sell him, which is the only issue when you consider the club finances. If you look at the length of time it takes players to adapt to Ralph's system, then 6 months for a striker to get up to speed with the system and we might not necessarily be missing as much as we initially thought. Obviously, 20 goals a season strikers don't grow on trees, but if we can find a young striker who is good at making runs in behind the defence and can finish 1-on-1 then that would be the ideal replacement for Ings.

0

Braveheart added 16:31 - Jan 24 All this contract talk is immaterial. He could sign a new deal now and still be off in the summer. Contracts are not worth the ink or the paper they are written on.
0

Blogs 31 bloggers

Rochdale Polls