Alex Pearce

[urz13]

I want him to stay of course, but what if he is asking for a ridiculous salary - everyone is assuming he wants 25-30ka week- what if he really wants 40k? Or 50k?

i know where your coming from, but i dont think this is the case. pearcey knows the club and how the wage structure works and he loves this club. he has proven it time and time again how much he loves this club. he wouldnt go and offer some silly wage demands that he knows the club wont pay due to the wage structure. he probably asked for a fairly reasonable salary but the club being as frugal and well run as we are, are holding out on paying the little extra to force him to sign for his original wage. they are using pearce's love for the club as leverage imo.

Agree this is probably what I happening, however I don't think anyone knows for certain.

[royal_ross]

Has to be given a new contract. Made the difference in defence, Mapps & Pearcey look solid together. As others have said Pearce & Robson-Kanu deserve 10/10 for their passion at the end of the game.

[LoyalRoyal22]

Sign him up. Think Marriappa is just as good though, decent as a pair

[USA_Loyal_Royal]

I want him to stay of course, but what if he is asking for a ridiculous salary - everyone is assuming he wants 25-30ka week- what if he really wants 40k? Or 50k?

i know where your coming from, but i dont think this is the case. pearcey knows the club and how the wage structure works and he loves this club. he has proven it time and time again how much he loves this club. he wouldnt go and offer some silly wage demands that he knows the club wont pay due to the wage structure. he probably asked for a fairly reasonable salary but the club being as frugal and well run as we are, are holding out on paying the little extra to force him to sign for his original wage. they are using pearce's love for the club as leverage imo.

Agree this is probably what I happening, however I don't think anyone knows for certain.

absolutely the only people who know are pearcey, his agent, and certain members of the club. we may never know for certain what happened.

[West_Reading]

Pearce has won me over hugely over the last couple of years and I really hope he signs a new contract. But as mentioned before, he has definitely benefited from the change in approach to 451. He played at home to Spurs (exposed by Defoe for his lack of pace) and away to the mackems more recently, and both times we conceded three.

[9165]

I havent trawled through all 24 pages of this, just need to say 3 things :-
1: Pearce is Reading through and through, unlike some others of the first team. It is these players who have come through the ranks and are proving themselves in the PL that RFC need to make an example of and sign them up, not for silly money/contracts but on improved terms, to show everyone what we are about. Three of our best players this season (Pearce, Karacan, HRK) all fit in to this category.
2: I think it was Kevin Dillon who said, we he left, something like `Its frightening to think how many games Alex Pearce will play for Reading`.
3: We could be like QPR( ) - sign any old Tom Dick or Harry, losing millions in the process, and be worse off than before !

[Millsy]

Just one question for the pearcophiles...

Would you want the club to give in to pearce's demands if it then meant we were unable to afford the wages to bring in one or two decent players like perhaps a LB/RB/CM/CF?

Because that's what will happen. Money is limited and signing Pearce will inevitably mean one less player elsewhere. So the question is:

Pearce

Or

Make do with Morrison, mariappa, gorkss, + maybe a cheaper CB than Pearce to come in

PLUS another player?

It's very easy to say "yeah let's sign him" but there's not a bottomless pit of money and it will have its after effects.

[maffff]

I'd be more worried if Pearce had signed a contract in the last couple of weeks. That normally means a move is lined up and we want to get maximum ££ for it.

Sounds like we are getting closer to a resolution, anyway, and money isn't the sticking point.

[cmonurz]

Just one question for the pearcophiles...

Would you want the club to give in to pearce's demands if it then meant we were unable to afford the wages to bring in one or two decent players like perhaps a LB/RB/CM/CF?

Because that's what will happen. Money is limited and signing Pearce will inevitably mean one less player elsewhere. So the question is:

Pearce

Or

Make do with Morrison, mariappa, gorkss, + maybe a cheaper CB than Pearce to come in

PLUS another player?

It's very easy to say "yeah let's sign him" but there's not a bottomless pit of money and it will have its after effects.

You think we can afford two new centre backs by letting Pearce leave?

[SCIAG]

Just one question for the pearcophiles...

Would you want the club to give in to pearce's demands if it then meant we were unable to afford the wages to bring in one or two decent players like perhaps a LB/RB/CM/CF?

Because that's what will happen. Money is limited and signing Pearce will inevitably mean one less player elsewhere. So the question is:

Pearce

Or

Make do with Morrison, mariappa, gorkss, + maybe a cheaper CB than Pearce to come in

PLUS another player?

It's very easy to say "yeah let's sign him" but there's not a bottomless pit of money and it will have its after effects.

You think we can afford two new centre backs by letting Pearce leave?

That isn't what he's saying.

Let's say Pearce is on £15k per week and wants £45k. If we sell Pearce, we could add a young centre back on £10k- maybe Gunk- and an experience player somewhere else on £25k, and the savings on wages could go on any difference in transfer fee between Pearce and those two.

[Millsy]

Just one question for the pearcophiles...

Would you want the club to give in to pearce's demands if it then meant we were unable to afford the wages to bring in one or two decent players like perhaps a LB/RB/CM/CF?

Because that's what will happen. Money is limited and signing Pearce will inevitably mean one less player elsewhere. So the question is:

Pearce

Or

Make do with Morrison, mariappa, gorkss, + maybe a cheaper CB than Pearce to come in

PLUS another player?

It's very easy to say "yeah let's sign him" but there's not a bottomless pit of money and it will have its after effects.

You think we can afford two new centre backs by letting Pearce leave?

That isn't what he's saying.

Let's say Pearce is on £15k per week and wants £45k. If we sell Pearce, we could add a young centre back on £10k- maybe Gunk- and an experience player somewhere else on £25k, and the savings on wages could go on any difference in transfer fee between Pearce and those two.

Exactly. Not rocket science is it.

[Big Ern]

I'd be more worried if Pearce had signed a contract in the last couple of weeks. That normally means a move is lined up and we want to get maximum ££ for it.

Utter tosh. If he signs a new contract, he would not be able to command as high wages or signing on fee if he were to move on.

[Ian Royal]

Of course we'd need transfer fees for both players and anyone better than Pearce coming in is going to want similar to what he wants at least. But other than that it's a flawless idea.

[cmonurz]

Just one question for the pearcophiles...

Would you want the club to give in to pearce's demands if it then meant we were unable to afford the wages to bring in one or two decent players like perhaps a LB/RB/CM/CF?

Because that's what will happen. Money is limited and signing Pearce will inevitably mean one less player elsewhere. So the question is:

Pearce

Or

Make do with Morrison, mariappa, gorkss, + maybe a cheaper CB than Pearce to come in

PLUS another player?

It's very easy to say "yeah let's sign him" but there's not a bottomless pit of money and it will have its after effects.

You think we can afford two new centre backs by letting Pearce leave?

That isn't what he's saying.

Let's say Pearce is on £15k per week and wants £45k. If we sell Pearce, we could add a young centre back on £10k- maybe Gunk- and an experience player somewhere else on £25k, and the savings on wages could go on any difference in transfer fee between Pearce and those two.

Which ignores the very likely case that Pearce doesn't want £45k a week, as well as the fact that any transfer fee received for Pearce will be relatively low since his contract is running down.

[cmonurz]

Of course we'd need transfer fees for both players and anyone better than Pearce coming in is going to want similar to what he wants at least. But other than that it's a flawless idea.

And this. What sort of 'experienced player' is going to want less than Pearce?

[Born 'n Bred Royal]

Super Alex Pearce, super Alex Pearce, super Alex Pearce, you're the love of my life I'll let you shag my wife, super Alex Pearce...

He's been a stalwart at the back the last few games. Not much he could really do today as wave after wave of Spurs attacks was inevitable. I just wish he'd played every game this season as we've looked a different side since he's been back. I also think he brings passion and leadership to the team, something which Jobi fails to do.

[Millsy]

Of course we'd need transfer fees for both players and anyone better than Pearce coming in is going to want similar to what he wants at least. But other than that it's a flawless idea.

And this. What sort of 'experienced player' is going to want less than Pearce?

Who said anything about an experienced straw man?

What's so incredibly difficult to understand about putting funds we DON'T use on Pearce's likely significant wage request towards getting other players? Like we have only been doing for the past, um, several decades or so!

Don't get me wrong I want Pearce to stay, but it's more than naive to believe that giving in to a large wage demand will not have any negative effects. Two free/cheap transfers from lower leagues/abroad a la Morrison or stay with Pearce. Is that so difficult to get???


If youre winding me up youve done a grand job. This feels like teaching a 5 year old to add!!! Sheesh....

[cmonurz]

Forgive me, I was assuming that as a fan of a Premier League team fighting relegation there was more to your point than suggesting we could replace Pearce with two lesser players. Like that would us any good whatsoever.

FTR, SCIAG mentioned an 'experienced' player, so whilst picking up your toys accept that maybe I just misread the author of his post.

To buy a better centre-back than Pearce would cost us at least £5m, nevermind the salary we'd have to pay anyone any good at this level.

[The Royal]

He managed to make Garth Crooks's team of the week on the BBC sport website he said::

I've given Reading a fair bit of stick this season for failing to close out games from winning positions. They showed that with their recent last-minute defeat at Manchester City. I gave Alex Pearce a mention then for his battling qualities and sheer commitment. Once again, he put himself on the line for the cause against West Ham, only this time he and his team got their rewards. Reading need more of the same if they intend to remain among the big boys.
Did you know? Made 16 clearances on Saturday, only two players made more in the Premier League this weekend.

[rhroyal]

We can't let Pearce go; he has always been destined to be a Reading FC legend. Loves the club, academy product.

And actually looks good enough to play at this level. Whatever wages Guthrie is on, surely Pearce is worth the same? I imagine he'll look at it that way. Can't bear the thought of us letting him go; AZ's money is meant to help us keep our better players. They say that all the time.