Nogbad the Bad Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 I hope the club are being realistic on the amount they are willing to offer Maynard. Some of the figures I see quoted on this and other forums by supposedly ITK fans are frightening for a club of our size, and would be completely unacceptable. I too remember '82 - we're not going up with or without Maynard, we've got Pitman ready and able to step in so talk of BCFC apparently being willing to pay one player in excess of one million pounds per year to play Championship football are absolutely staggering. I can't believe City won't eventually accept a bid from a Championship club if it is the best offer we get and Maynard makes it clear he wants to go - I'd hope so anyway, anything else would surely be the club cutting off it's nose to spite it's face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 I hope the club are being realistic on the amount they are willing to offer Maynard. Some of the figures I see quoted on this and other forums by supposedly ITK fans are frightening for a club of our size, and would be completely unacceptable. I too remember '82 - we're not going up with or without Maynard, we've got Pitman ready and able to step in so talk of BCFC apparently being willing to pay one player in excess of one million pounds per year to play Championship football are absolutely staggering. I can't believe City won't eventually accept a bid from a Championship club if it is the best offer we get and Maynard makes it clear he wants to go - I'd hope so anyway, anything else would surely be the club cutting off it's nose to spite it's face. in 82 we didn't have a owner with a net worth of 750 million Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kibs Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 I hope the club are being realistic on the amount they are willing to offer Maynard. Some of the figures I see quoted on this and other forums by supposedly ITK fans are frightening for a club of our size, and would be completely unacceptable. I too remember '82 - we're not going up with or without Maynard, we've got Pitman ready and able to step in so talk of BCFC apparently being willing to pay one player in excess of one million pounds per year to play Championship football are absolutely staggering. I can't believe City won't eventually accept a bid from a Championship club if it is the best offer we get and Maynard makes it clear he wants to go - I'd hope so anyway, anything else would surely be the club cutting off it's nose to spite it's face. Have to agree with this, I would be very surprised if the figures that are being quoted are correct. That's simply crazy money. in 82 we didn't have a owner with a net worth of 750 million So what? I thought the whole point of him standing down and letting sexstone take over as chairman was to get the club to be more self sufficient? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 Have to agree with this, I would be very surprised if the figures that are being quoted are correct. That's simply crazy money. So what? I thought the whole point of him standing down and letting sexstone take over as chairman was to get the club to be more self sufficient? that will never happen as long as we stay at Ashton Gate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Port Said Red Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 I hope the club are being realistic on the amount they are willing to offer Maynard. Some of the figures I see quoted on this and other forums by supposedly ITK fans are frightening for a club of our size, and would be completely unacceptable. I too remember '82 - we're not going up with or without Maynard, we've got Pitman ready and able to step in so talk of BCFC apparently being willing to pay one player in excess of one million pounds per year to play Championship football are absolutely staggering. I can't believe City won't eventually accept a bid from a Championship club if it is the best offer we get and Maynard makes it clear he wants to go - I'd hope so anyway, anything else would surely be the club cutting off it's nose to spite it's face. As much as i hate the kind of wages players get these days, I would see paying NM a high wage to extend his contract by 2 seasons as a calculated gamble. At the end of this season, I believe his value will increase well beyond the figures quoted so far. If we go up or at least make the money spinning play offs, we make our money back and more. If we don't then we sell and make our money back and more. I don't see the possibility of him not scoring goals, so I think the only possible gamble is he gets injured again, but that is the gamble we take with all players, new or old signings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kibs Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 that will never happen as long as we stay at Ashton Gate Which we are not going to are we? Unless you know something that I don't know? At the moment its looking odds on that we will be moving to a new stadium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 Which we are not going to are we? Unless you know something that I don't know? At the moment its looking odds on that we will be moving to a new stadium. I know where your coming from, I see it like this, We want to tie him up on a contract (maybe him on silly money) as clubs a bidding 4 million for him now in a years time after a good campaign in the championship for us we'd have him under contract and clubs hopefully would be bidding 8 million for him, I think thats the risk the club want to take as he is a valuable assit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 that will never happen as long as we stay at Ashton Gate With the new financial fair play rules that will be coming in soon, we'll have no choice.... we'll have too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kibs Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 I know where your coming from, I see it like this, We want to tie him up on a contract (maybe him on silly money) as clubs a bidding 4 million for him now in a years time after a good campaign in the championship for us we'd have him under contract and clubs hopefully would be bidding 8 million for him, I think thats the risk the club want to take as he is a valuable assit Yeah I agree it's a gamble and it is from everyone's point of view to be honest not just City's. He should and probably will be City's highest paid player, I just hope we don't completely break the bank. As you say, if we get him under contract and he has good season then the club will certainly be looking at a lot more than the £4m or whatever being offered now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 With the new financial fair play rules that will be coming in soon, we'll have no choice.... we'll have too. been thinking about that, Does that just count for basic wage or does it take bonuses into it, as I have a feeling bonuses don't count, Which could be a sticking point with the contract we've offered, then again how are leicester paying the wages of all these high profile players they are signing? they are gambling on promotion and if they don't get it, Its a merky and fine line riaz and I think most clubs will find a way around the rules coming in, I know prem clubs are Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 been thinking about that, Does that just count for basic wage or does it take bonuses into it, as I have a feeling bonuses don't count, Which could be a sticking point with the contract we've offered, then again how are leicester paying the wages of all these high profile players they are signing? they are gambling on promotion and if they don't get it, Its a merky and fine line riaz and I think most clubs will find a way around the rules coming in, I know prem clubs are I dont think it will be that easy to get round. I think its about at least breaking even or only being allowed a very small loss - So giving bonuses instead of basic wages, will not be a way round it. Interesting times ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 I dont think it will be that easy to get round. I think its about at least breaking even or only being allowed a very small loss - So giving bonuses instead of basic wages, will not be a way round it. Interesting times ahead. in a nutshell, what is this new rule? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 in a nutshell, what is this new rule? The basics of it, is that you are only allowed to spend what you earn - the books need to balance. Big losses are the thing of the past or at least thats the aim. Chelsea and Man City are the biggest clubs who will struggle.. of course we will. Arsenal already get their books to balance so they will be fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy082005 Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 The basics of it, is that you are only allowed to spend what you earn - the books need to balance. Big losses are the thing of the past or at least thats the aim. Chelsea and Man City are the biggest clubs who will struggle.. of course we will. Arsenal already get their books to balance so they will be fine. I thought as much, I had heard about it but wasnt sure. Another kick in the teeth for the lower leagues though, the chances of smaller clubs like us reaching the promised land will decrease even further Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 I thought as much, I had heard about it but wasnt sure. Another kick in the teeth for the lower leagues though, the chances of smaller clubs like us reaching the promised land will decrease even further The football league chairmen actually voted for it. On the one hand its much needed to control finances in football. But yeah, on the other hand its stops us competing with the bigger clubs. The premier league does not have these rules - but those clubs in europe will have to adhere to the rules or face being expelled from the Champions League/Europa league. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 The basics of it, is that you are only allowed to spend what you earn - the books need to balance. Big losses are the thing of the past or at least thats the aim. Chelsea and Man City are the biggest clubs who will struggle.. of course we will. Arsenal already get their books to balance so they will be fine. The FFP requirements are going to have little to no impact on UK clubs because of the way the expenses and income are defined. Also, clubs will be able to make a £27m loss for a few years from it's first application in 2013. Ignore the hype, the full details are here: http://www.uefa.com/MultimediaFiles/Download/uefaorg/Clublicensing/01/50/09/12/1500912_DOWNLOAD.pdf To all intents and purposes we don't have any cause for concern as these regs do not apply to us, and when (eventually) the broad agreement reached at the last FL chairman's do turns into real applicable regs we will have even less stringent requirements and several years to meet them. If we're still in the Championship in 2016 or so without the new stadium we may have to reduce our wage bill a little. That's the most it will impact us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slave to the rhythm Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 If we're still in the Championship in 2016 or so without the new stadium we may have to reduce our wage bill a little. That's the most it will impact us. If there's still no stadium by 2016, I suspect Lansdown will have walked away by then. Is he really going to foot the bill for 5 more years of annual losses of £10million knowing that the new stadium won't materialise? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 If there's still no stadium by 2016, I suspect Lansdown will have walked away by then. Is he really going to foot the bill for 5 more years of annual losses of £10million knowing that the new stadium won't materialise? I don't think he'll walk away unless he finds good hands to put it into and even then I suspect they will be Jon's. But you're right he won't let us keep pissing that much money away which is why I doubt it will impact us. SL has been pretty clear that he expects the club to reduce losses and invest more wisely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nogbad the Bad Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 As much as i hate the kind of wages players get these days, I would see paying NM a high wage to extend his contract by 2 seasons as a calculated gamble. At the end of this season, I believe his value will increase well beyond the figures quoted so far. If we go up or at least make the money spinning play offs, we make our money back and more. If we don't then we sell and make our money back and more. I don't see the possibility of him not scoring goals, so I think the only possible gamble is he gets injured again, but that is the gamble we take with all players, new or old signings. Some very good points there Hornbeam, and I agree that Maynard could be worth much more in the future if he maintains his scoring record. I suppose it's a matter of principle with me. For BCFC to be paying a player (possibly) in excess of 1M. to play Championship football is something I fundamentally disagree with, whatever the potential benefits to the club financially in the future. We don't know the figures of course, but it's fair to assume that the offer will make NM our highest paid player ever, and by some margin. We may be making a rod for our back for the future with other players, whether already at the club, or incoming, being aware that City are willing to be very high payers when it suits them and this in itself could cause difficulties. I'd like to see City cutting their coat according to their cloth and realising that sometimes you just have to steadfastly say 'No more' and accept it may be time for a player to move on because what other clubs are willing to pay him is now well beyond your wages structure. There's nothing wrong or shameful about being a 'selling club' if an exceptional individual outgrows BCFC as long as we use the system to our advantage to sell at the optimum time and continue to purchase lower league gems like we have done with Pitman, Albert, and indeed Maynard. I'm not sure we can have it both ways while we remain an unremarkable Championship club making big losses every season - and I don't see the retention of Maynard alone altering that situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 Some very good points there Hornbeam, and I agree that Maynard could be worth much more in the future if he maintains his scoring record. I suppose it's a matter of principle with me. For BCFC to be paying a player (possibly) in excess of 1M. to play Championship football is something I fundamentally disagree with, whatever the potential benefits to the club financially in the future. We don't know the figures of course, but it's fair to assume that the offer will make NM our highest paid player ever, and by some margin. We may be making a rod for our back for the future with other players, whether already at the club, or incoming, being aware that City are willing to be very high payers when it suits them and this in itself could cause difficulties. I'd like to see City cutting their coat according to their cloth and realising that sometimes you just have to steadfastly say 'No more' and accept it may be time for a player to move on because what other clubs are willing to pay him is now well beyond your wages structure. There's nothing wrong or shameful about being a 'selling club' if an exceptional individual outgrows BCFC as long as we use the system to our advantage to sell at the optimum time and continue to purchase lower league gems like we have done with Pitman, Albert, and indeed Maynard. I'm not sure we can have it both ways while we remain an unremarkable Championship club making big losses every season - and I don't see the retention of Maynard alone altering that situation. every club is a selling club except Man City, We all know that if a stupid offer came in then he's gone we also know that offer has to be alot more then 4 million thats been offered, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 Your mate is talking rubbish. QPR will make many loan signings when Champions league squads are decided. They do not want to end up making the errors of others that go up and come down and are left with a huge wage bill. If you can hang in there, like Stoke have done, or Bolton, you can improve the squad every year. QPR are not trying to get rid of Colin , if they want rid they will get rid. There is a stand off between QPR's owners and Warnock. The owners wish to bring in numerous foreign players like Fabio Cannovaro, most are over the hill. Warnock doesn't want to sign them, and i don't blame him. Heard all this yesterday through a very good source. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nibor Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 There is a stand off between QPR's owners and Warnock. The owners wish to bring in numerous foreign players like Fabio Cannovaro, most are over the hill. Warnock doesn't want to sign them, and i don't blame him. Heard all this yesterday through a very good source. billys "source" is Briatore himself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudski Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 billys "source" is Briatore himself. I'm not doubting it for one instance, but it still doesn't hide the fact, that the owners 'Briatore et al' wish to bring in numerous players, and Warnock wishes to bring in different players. A case of the owners wanting to pick the squad and not letting the manager get on with doing his job. I'd love to say who my source is. Put it this way, he's closer to Warnock than Briatore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riaz Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 I'd love to say who my source is. Put it this way, he's closer to Warnock than Briatore. BRADLEY ORR! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim S Posted July 7, 2011 Report Share Posted July 7, 2011 Leicester have today bought Matt Mills from Reading for £5million. If they were to end up getting Maynard, it will be for a minimum of £5million too.... so that would mean £10million on 2 players - thats some serious spending for a Championship club, not to mention the further millions they have already splashed out. They mean business this season, but as Cardiff know money doesnt always buy you success, but I have a feeling it might on this occasion for Leicester. They were showing signs of a really good team towards the end of last season, with the additions over the summer they should be top 2 come May. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.