Summer Rebuild

[linkenholtroyal]

That's what I'm trying to say 2yrs on a popular player even if it is 20k a week makes a difference, if we replaced him what would we get for the same wage??? Stop mucking around reading and get our captain back, he may be a crock but he's our crock

[Ian Royal]

It's not really offering more money though is it. It's offering a commitment to pay money for longer, which is quite different. This is on an assumption that our wage offer is competitive for mid-Championship range, in which case barring relegation it's what we'd have to pay any replacement in a year anyway. At least.

Of course it's more money, certainly as far as what the club have to be able to afford to pay.

£1m > £500k, it's pretty simple and it's why a player wants a two year contract over one. If he shares the clubs niggling doubts about his ability then he wants a bit of security and to maximise every penny from this that he can. I don't blame him for that either but he's not worried about a 2 year deal because he can't afford to relocate next year or is worried about moving his kids out of school in 12 months time!

This is a very bizarre view you have. It's money that will come out of a different budget. It's not like he gets it at once. Players want longer contracts to keep earning and for job security, as you've said. But your emphasis is all wrong.

[Hoop Blah]

So why do you think the club doesn't want to offer a longer contract if they're not concerned about the financial implications of doubling their commitment?

[linkenholtroyal]

So why do you think the club doesn't want to offer a longer contract if they're not concerned about the financial implications of doubling their commitment?

Because Clarke seems to know better, I may eat my words but he's playing hardball with players we couldn't afford to lose, that could leave us with a very thin squad if replacements that he obviously believes he can find aren't found. Maybe securing key members should have been a priority such as Federici (I know he wanted to leave) and Karacan should have been more of a priority and culling the deadwood akpan pog Blackman....... Would have been a better idea. Offer them out to get them off the books. Not play hardball with players we can't afford to lose....

[Old Biscuitman]

Pity that football, which used to be enjoyable and interesting, is now dominated it seems by contracts, budgets and transfer windows etc. Where has all the fun gone? Tell me please young Nobbers.

[Maidenhead Royal]

Pity that football, which used to be enjoyable and interesting, is now dominated it seems by contracts, budgets and transfer windows etc. Where has all the fun gone? Tell me please young Nobbers.

Pay per click websites, which make their way into actual websites through news aggregators. Most of it's bollox, but they don't care.

[Royal Rother]

So why do you think the club doesn't want to offer a longer contract if they're not concerned about the financial implications of doubling their commitment?

Speaking for myself, I assume it's to do with his injury record.

Having paid him full whack for 2 years, even on reduced wages we need to see that he can do a full season before offering him a 2 year contract.

The club playing hardball (if that's what it is) seems reasonable to me to change the wages structure / philosophy after it all seems to have got a bit out of control under AZ's brief tenure.

[Hoop Blah]

So why do you think the club doesn't want to offer a longer contract if they're not concerned about the financial implications of doubling their commitment?

Speaking for myself, I assume it's to do with his injury record.

Well yeah, but the only concern about his injury record and if he's fully over it is the cost of keeping him on if it turns out he isn't, isn't it?

Having paid him full whack for 2 years, even on reduced wages we need to see that he can do a full season before offering him a 2 year contract.

The club playing hardball (if that's what it is) seems reasonable to me to change the wages structure / philosophy after it all seems to have got a bit out of control under AZ's brief tenure.

Agreed, and we've had a fair few long term injured players over the last 5-10 years who we've been paying for no effective contribution so I can understand the clubs stand point, but it all comes down to how much money that contract is committing the club to spending.

[Royal Rother]

Yes (but they are in the best possible position to make a valid judgement on that so it would seem reasonable to accept their call) and yes.

[Hoop Blah]

Yes (but they are in the best possible position to make a valid judgement on that so it would seem reasonable to accept their call) and yes.

I'm not questioning if it's the right call though, just getting in to a pointless discussion with Ian and linken about the fact that the choice between offering a 1 or 2 year deal is about the amount of expenditure the club is willing to commit on Karacan.

[Ian Royal]

So why do you think the club doesn't want to offer a longer contract if they're not concerned about the financial implications of doubling their commitment?

Because they don't feel Karacan has a long term future in the first team? Because we're a bit of a oxf*rd at the moment? Because there's an underlying problem we don't know about they are cautious of? Because they're preparing for life in League One and ready to make further big cuts?

[Extended-Phenotype]

If a new sofa costs £800 over two years I could afford it. I'm not going to buy it if it will fall apart in year 1, though.

[linkenholtroyal]

If a new sofa costs £800 over two years I could afford it. I'm not going to buy it if it will fall apart in year 1, though.

On the same note you can't never buy anything on finance thinking that you are always going to be sacked in the next year.

[Nameless]

If a new sofa costs £800 over two years I could afford it. I'm not going to buy it if it will fall apart in year 1, though.

Unfortunately you won't know if it will fall apart until the end of year 1 !

I don't think it is unreasonable of the club to be cautious with Jem, and I don't think it is unreasonable of Jem to want a bit of longer term security. Ideally a one year deal with an extra 2 if he proves his fitness, but those sort of deals are fatally flawed from both perspectives.

[Hoop Blah]

So why do you think the club doesn't want to offer a longer contract if they're not concerned about the financial implications of doubling their commitment?

Because they don't feel Karacan has a long term future in the first team? Because we're a bit of a oxf*rd at the moment? Because there's an underlying problem we don't know about they are cautious of? Because they're preparing for life in League One and ready to make further big cuts?

All of those things only matter if it's the cost of the second year that's an issue and they don't want to commit to it, and that's because it's MORE MONEY!

If they were so cautious because of our future and/or preparing for life in League One why would they then offer longer contracts to Hector, Pearce, Federici and take up the option to extend Gunters contract?

[PeterReadingborn59]

Gunter's deal extension seems a bit of a safe bet, as:
- he has shown in a confident / successful team he is an attacking option that helps create chances,
- good performances with Wales might attract an offer for him and / or HRK,
- next year he and RFC can review the position

The problem last season in an under performing team Gunter's defensive skills were showing to be light weight and wanting, and his support for attack showed a lack of confidence with a low successful pass rate.

Hopefully, the squad will be refreshed and more up beat for next season, otherwise it will be another long haul that will see crowd numbers dwindling as the football in the majority of last season home matches was not entertaining.

Outside of the Premiership, the majority of players are dealing with clubs that are reducing costs, i.e. player's contracts. I suspect that Jem and Kelly will be forced to accept the RFC offer, which is probably still way above the national average, as players like Baird are looking for clubs such as RFC.

[WoodleyRoyal]

some of these could surely be within our grasp - all out of contract:

Goalkeepers: Stephen Harper, Ben Amos, Thomas Sorensen, Gerhard Tremmel, Brad Jones.

Defenders: Ron Vlaar, Brede Hangeland, Peter Ramage, Antolin Alcaraz, Sylvain Distin, Maynor Figueroa, Paul McShane, Liam Rosenior, Matthew Upson, Glen Johnson, Micah Richards, Richard Dunne, Jos Hooiveld, Wes Brown.

Midfielders: Jonas Gutierrez, Ryan Taylor, Joey Barton, Karl Henry, Shaun Wright-Phillips, Wilson Palacios, Youssouf Mulumbu, Abou Diaby, Ross Wallace.

Strikers: Didier Drogba, Stephen Dobie, Yannick Sagbo, Gary Taylor-Fletcher, John Guidetti, Bobby Zamora.

[maffff]

Would love Bairdinho to return tbh.

[Hoop Blah]

I'd take Mackie for a bit of cash, Baird (only if Kelly doesn't sign probably), McShane, and Wallace from that lot of freebies. Add Zak Whitbread for some additional experience cover/competition at the back, Andy Williams on a free from Swindon for some variation and goals up front and a couple of decent keepers and let Clarke get on with moulding a decent side from it.

Throw in a couple of our kids, plus perhaps a bit of extra quality on loan from Chelsea perhaps, and we'll be ok.

If we can then manage to get rid of the likes of Pogrebnyak, Robson-Kanu, Blackman or Cox we can then replace with something more to Clarke's and the bank managers liking.

[JIM]

Save money , Stop paying players income tax, and national insurance,