Jump to content
IGNORED

Weimann's contract


NcnsBcfc
 Share

Recommended Posts

With the news this morning in the Post , that we've decided not to exercise the optional year on AW's contract; a few questions now arise.

Are we unwilling or unable to afford a further year on his current contract? And as such is he now technically a free agent?

I understand that we've offered him a longer contract on reduced terms. But in previous years we would of course of exercised the optional year, and used that time to negotiate the new contract. That doesn't seem to be happening this time.

It all points to the fact, that alongside probably all clubs outside the PL, and those with parachute payments; we are having to cut out cloth considerably this summer.

The new contracts given out to the under 23s point towards there involvement in the first team next season; rather than putting them out on loan in my opinion.

It may well be, that although we all think that there should be/will be 5-6 signings in this window. Maybe there will only be a couple, and the gaps in the squad will be filled with this season's under 23s until revenue streams increase again.

Certainly food for thought, and for me a demonstration of the fact that we won't be paying any transfer fees for players this summer.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ncnsbcfc said:

With the news this morning in the Post , that we've decided not to exercise the optional year on AW's contract; a few questions now arise.

Are we unwilling or unable to afford a further year on his current contract? And as such is he now technically a free agent?

I understand that we've offered him a longer contract on reduced terms. But in previous years we would of course of exercised the optional year, and used that time to negotiate the new contract. That doesn't seem to be happening this time.

It all points to the fact, that alongside probably all clubs outside the PL, and those with parachute payments; we are having to cut out cloth considerably this summer.

The new contracts given out to the under 23s point towards there involvement in the first team next season; rather than putting them out on loan in my opinion.

It may well be, that although we all think that there should be/will be 5-6 signings in this window. Maybe there will only be a couple, and the gaps in the squad will be filled with this season's under 23s until revenue streams increase again.

Certainly food for thought, and for me a demonstration of the fact that we won't be paying any transfer fees for players this summer.

If true I’m a bit disappointed by this. We definitely missed his creativity for most of the season and he’s not a player that get injured that often. I’m guessing if true we are just trying to save money on the higher wage players

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would hope that if Weimann decides against the new offer the club will trigger the one year option. I assume there is still plenty of time to do this - June 30th I believe ?

I hope it gets sorted as he was sorely missed last season.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ncnsbcfc said:

With the news this morning in the Post , that we've decided not to exercise the optional year on AW's contract; a few questions now arise.

Are we unwilling or unable to afford a further year on his current contract? And as such is he now technically a free agent?

I understand that we've offered him a longer contract on reduced terms. But in previous years we would of course of exercised the optional year, and used that time to negotiate the new contract. That doesn't seem to be happening this time.

It all points to the fact, that alongside probably all clubs outside the PL, and those with parachute payments; we are having to cut out cloth considerably this summer.

The new contracts given out to the under 23s point towards there involvement in the first team next season; rather than putting them out on loan in my opinion.

It may well be, that although we all think that there should be/will be 5-6 signings in this window. Maybe there will only be a couple, and the gaps in the squad will be filled with this season's under 23s until revenue streams increase again.

Certainly food for thought, and for me a demonstration of the fact that we won't be paying any transfer fees for players this summer.

Has he actually earned a further year though? Granted he has been injured but he has hardly set the world alight since he has been here.

  • Like 10
  • Thanks 1
  • Confused 3
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Super said:

Has he actually earned a further year though? Granted he has been injured but he has hardly set the world alight since he has been here.

I agree. He's not worth the rumoured £25k-£30k a week figure that's been put about. He works hard yes, but I don't believe he provides much in terms of goals and assists. One of the "busy bees". 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, bcfc01 said:

I would hope that if Weimann decides against the new offer the club will trigger the one year option. I assume there is still plenty of time to do this - June 30th I believe ?

I hope it gets sorted as he was sorely missed last season.

The article says that we've decided not to trigger it.

I'm sure there would be a deadline as to when you would have to notify the player of your intentions. I doubt you can exercise it, if new contract negotiations break down.

As far as I can see, he's a free agent now; and able to start talking to other clubs.

When we exercised Elliason's option last year, it was to enable us to get the transfer fee from Nimes I'm sure. We still had some control on that situation. It seems we're going down a different route now

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Redpool said:

I agree. He's not worth the rumoured £25k-£30k a week figure that's been put about. He works hard yes, but I don't believe he provides much in terms of goals and assists. One of the "busy bees". 

Is that what he's on at the moment though?

The option year would just carry over his existing contract. I didn't think he was in our top 5 earners. Some of whom of course, are still with us for next season.

I'm all for offering lower terms on a new contract (who knows what the market is, wages wise). It's the principle of letting a player that the club/NP obviously want to keep go out the door for free, because you won't/can't pay his existing wages.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ncnsbcfc said:

Is that what he's on at the moment though?

The option year would just carry over his existing contract. I didn't think he was in our top 5 earners. Some of whom of course, are still with us for next season.

I'm all for offering lower terms on a new contract (who knows what the market is, wages wise). It's the principle of letting a player that the club/NP obviously want to keep go out the door for free, because you won't/can't pay his existing wages.

 

 

That's what has been said on here I believe. Perhaps his injury is more of a concern than what has been told publicly, and the club do not want to risk another injury crisis with Weimann. 

Or, perhaps the clubs just want to cut costs down. Who knows. We'll just have to see if he stays or not. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Redpool said:

 

That's what has been said on here I believe. Perhaps his injury is more of a concern than what has been told publicly, and the club do not want to risk another injury crisis with Weimann. 

Or, perhaps the clubs just want to cut costs down. Who knows. We'll just have to see if he stays or not. 

Fair points.

We do need to retain some experience in the squad though from my perspective; and NP said he was training well at the end of the season.

I think it's just a demonstration of quite how tight money is this summer. In the past, we would have operated differently.

Interesting couple of months ahead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ncnsbcfc said:

The article says that we've decided not to trigger it.

I'm sure there would be a deadline as to when you would have to notify the player of your intentions. I doubt you can exercise it, if new contract negotiations break down.

As far as I can see, he's a free agent now; and able to start talking to other clubs.

When we exercised Elliason's option last year, it was to enable us to get the transfer fee from Nimes I'm sure. We still had some control on that situation. It seems we're going down a different route now

That doesn't mean that it won't be triggered, it would be stupid not to - why let him walk away for nothing when the club could get a fair price ?

I think the options for him are a new longer contract at different salary, or another year on the same money. Walking away for nothing isn't an option I would hope.

The article is a bit misleading imo.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ncnsbcfc said:

Fair points.

We do need to retain some experience in the squad though from my perspective; and NP said he was training well at the end of the season.

I think it's just a demonstration of quite how tight money is this summer. In the past, we would have operated differently.

Interesting couple of months ahead.

Hence why I believe we will not see many "big money moves" unless you're one of the big PL clubs. I think a lot of teams will be depending on free transfers and hidden gems at low cost this summer while the economy recovers. 

I'm somewhat concerned this summer won't be as busy as we would all like to hope. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Redpool said:

Hence why I believe we will not see many "big money moves" unless you're one of the big PL clubs. I think a lot of teams will be depending on free transfers and hidden gems at low cost this summer while the economy recovers. 

I'm somewhat concerned this summer won't be as busy as we would all like to hope. 

So am I.

Risky letting so many contracts wind down without replacements lined up (I'm assuming there is nothing lined up of course).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

That doesn't mean that it won't be triggered, it would be stupid not to - why let him walk away for nothing when the club could get a fair price ?

I think the options for him are a new longer contract at different salary, or another year on the same money. Walking away for nothing isn't an option I would hope.

The article is a bit misleading imo.

 

What do you want the club to do?  Line up a club to buy him, trigger the contract and then  sell him?  

What if we trigger it and then nobody wants him and we have to pay him £1m over the next year and see him leave on a free? 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recently predicted he will leave and I'm sticking to that.

We have lowered the bar regards what we are willing to pay and therefore a one-year extension is off the table.

It is also likely that Weimann could negotiated better pay elsewhere, so let's see who fancies him.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There will, as has been said, a date by which AWs contract extension must be triggered. My guess is that it’s by the end of this month as that gives one month notice. We could, theoretically, up until that point have said we’re not renewing and then done it anyway but that would be total bad faith!

From AWs point of view. If we say the £25k a week is accurate, then he’s not going to take (say) 2 years at 12.5k pw then it’s just the same money over a longer term - and he’d probably bet he could get that elsewhere, with a signing on fee. I do think it’s sensible post COVID to temper the offers down so reckon we’re either looking at a 3 year deal at c£15k pw or a 2 year deal at c£20k (again, assuming the £25k is accurate).

Clearly AW doesn’t “have” a contract for £25k if we don’t take the option, but I would think his thinking would be that’s his current start point

  • Like 1
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

That doesn't mean that it won't be triggered, it would be stupid not to - why let him walk away for nothing when the club could get a fair price ?

I think the options for him are a new longer contract at different salary, or another year on the same money. Walking away for nothing isn't an option I would hope.

The article is a bit misleading imo.

 

As others have said, there must be a date where we need to notify Weimann in order to take up the option. If that date passes/has passed, we don't legally have an option any more.

I would assume it has passed or we've been through some sort of formal legal procedure not to trigger before negotiating. Otherwise the negotiations are a bit of a farce. Nobody would enter negotiations for a pay cut if they knew an offer for more dosh was still on the table. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Silvio Dante said:

There will, as has been said, a date by which AWs contract extension must be triggered. My guess is that it’s by the end of this month as that gives one month notice. We could, theoretically, up until that point have said we’re not renewing and then done it anyway but that would be total bad faith!

From AWs point of view. If we say the £25k a week is accurate, then he’s not going to take (say) 2 years at 12.5k pw then it’s just the same money over a longer term - and he’d probably bet he could get that elsewhere, with a signing on fee. I do think it’s sensible post COVID to temper the offers down so reckon we’re either looking at a 3 year deal at c£15k pw or a 2 year deal at c£20k (again, assuming the £25k is accurate).

Clearly AW doesn’t “have” a contract for £25k if we don’t take the option, but I would think his thinking would be that’s his current start point

30 years old and a kid on the way... AW will take the best contract he can find, within reason. 

If we offer 13k and he gets 16k offered elsewhere, that's him gone.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, ncnsbcfc said:

Is that what he's on at the moment though?

The option year would just carry over his existing contract. I didn't think he was in our top 5 earners. Some of whom of course, are still with us for next season.

I'm all for offering lower terms on a new contract (who knows what the market is, wages wise). It's the principle of letting a player that the club/NP obviously want to keep go out the door for free, because you won't/can't pay his existing wages.

 

Rumoured to be on £20k p.w. (I previously suggested £18k, so probably in that ballpark)….it’s £1m p.a. Pretty much.

13 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

That doesn't mean that it won't be triggered, it would be stupid not to - why let him walk away for nothing when the club could get a fair price ?

I think the options for him are a new longer contract at different salary, or another year on the same money. Walking away for nothing isn't an option I would hope.

The article is a bit misleading imo.

 

If we trigger, likelihood is that no clubs would take on wages and pay a fee….so just avoiding kicking the can down the road, but moving on now.

Contractually, Weimann is in a strong position, either he walks for free and can negotiate with any interested clubs, or he gets £1m in wages.

Another example of Ashton / Lansdown’s poor execution of re-contracting strategy.

For me, what can we do with that £1m we’d save on Weimann’s wages?  Jerry Yates - £1m fee and £6-8k p.w over a 4 year deal???

  • Like 2
  • Flames 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Super said:

Has he actually earned a further year though? Granted he has been injured but he has hardly set the world alight since he has been here.

IMO he's one of the few that gave his all everytime he put the shirt on.

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
  • Robin 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ncnsbcfc said:

With the news this morning in the Post , that we've decided not to exercise the optional year on AW's contract; a few questions now arise.

Are we unwilling or unable to afford a further year on his current contract? And as such is he now technically a free agent?

I understand that we've offered him a longer contract on reduced terms. But in previous years we would of course of exercised the optional year, and used that time to negotiate the new contract. That doesn't seem to be happening this time.

It all points to the fact, that alongside probably all clubs outside the PL, and those with parachute payments; we are having to cut out cloth considerably this summer.

The new contracts given out to the under 23s point towards there involvement in the first team next season; rather than putting them out on loan in my opinion.

It may well be, that although we all think that there should be/will be 5-6 signings in this window. Maybe there will only be a couple, and the gaps in the squad will be filled with this season's under 23s until revenue streams increase again.

Certainly food for thought, and for me a demonstration of the fact that we won't be paying any transfer fees for players this summer.

I can’t see the club or Nige wanting to fill too many gaps with inexperienced youth players to be honest. Pearson is an experienced manager and he said many times last season he is very wary of damaging younger players confidence by throwing them in too soon.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The question should be along the lines of who we could afford using the same cash.  It may well be that we could get two or three very promising younger players instead of the old favourite. Hard times and hard choices for all concerned.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really difficult situation all round, but to answer the specific question, yes this potentially makes him a free agent.

£18k a week is a lot for someone who is 30 before the next season starts & who is coming back from a very serious injury.

It strikes me as a gamble in that we are hoping that he won’t get offered a better deal elsewhere so presumably our rumoured offer of a couple of years at lower terms is still on the table?

My hunch is despite the injury his reputation will see him get a better offer from another Championship club & therefore he’ll be lining up against us next season.

Personally although I am not in favour of usually doing this, I’d have offered him another year on his current money, he is the sort who is likely to come back from injury well & we will miss his energy & professionalism hugely if he departs.

If so it simply makes the rebuilding of the squad even bigger.

Edited by GrahamC
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Super said:

I'm not doubting his effort. 

I didn't mean to suggest that, apologies if it came over that way. It just proves to me how inefficient we've been in contract setups in the past.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, GrahamC said:

Really difficult situation all round.

£18k a week is a lot for someone who is 30 before the next season starts & who is coming back from a very serious injury.

It strikes me as a gamble in that we are hoping that he won’t get offered a better deal elsewhere so presumably our rumoured offer of a couple of years at lower terms is still on the table?

My hunch is despite the injury his reputation will see him get a better offer from another Championship club & therefore he’ll be lining up against us next season.

Personally although I am not in favour of usually doing this, I’d have offered him another year on his current money, he is the sort who is likely to come back from injury well & we will miss his energy & professionalism hugely if he departs.

If so it simply makes the rebuilding of the squad even bigger.

He was pretty much the only OOC player that i wanted to keep.

He's one of those players that you don't realise what he brings from an energy/drive perspective until he's not around.

AW was one of the reasons why we started off last season so well, and was a huge miss when he did his knee. Is his future at City, or will he have recovered fully from the ACL, i'm not so sure.

What i do know is we don't have anyone like him in the squad at the present.

The rebuild is of course, going to be huge; and time consuming. I would of at least exercised his option. As that gives us time to either renegotiate,  and evaluate him in the new process.

I realise his wages are at the top end of our earners. But if we only committed for a further year, he could have been part of bringing the new team together.

My fear, is that as others have said he will get better offers elsewhere; and will leave us with yet another position to fill in the next 2.5 months until the season starts.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm nearly 100 percent sure that we cant offer a new contract when one has been offered at a higher rate of pay, whilst the player has been employed in the same role on that different rate as it breaks some  employment laws. 

There'd have to be a substantial difference to be able to go, lower. 

 

Happy to be corrected though. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...