Raheem Sterling (Liverpool -> Man City)

What does everyone think would be a fair weekly wage for him, personally I would not want him to have anything more than £100,000k, I'd be more than happy though to offer bonuses in the same way Suarez had so that with enough goals/assists that figure rises to approx £150,000 pw. Surely that would be enough, if not then he really isn't worth the money or hassle. He's very good but he's no Luis Suarez or Stevie G (in his prime)

Yeah mate, I reckon its safe to assume that the "money men" made the first move with an offer of a "wonderful", "incredible" new contract. Which begs the question - why?

Its not as if they are kicking down doors offering every player an improved deal. In fact they [the "money men"], often offer reduced wages with new contracts (Stevie & Glen, for e.g.).

So why Raheem and why now? After all he has, as we're often reminded, 2.5 years left on his contract. Without checking; I reckon we have a few players, with the same or less time, who aren't and won't be offered an improved contract.

The naive, romantic in me wants to believe that the wonderful offer has been made by people who are dripping with the milk of human kindness: people with no vested interest. But, having established that they [the money men/the professional 'accountants'] are anything but altruistic...

So the intelligent human (lurking deep) in me fully understands that the motive, behind the incredible offer, is protection of financial interest and not much else.

Think about this: if, for example, Glen doesn't accept a pay cut -  he's gone - he accepts it and he'll remain a Liverpool player. Less about football: more about finance. 

I realise that we have a number of fans who can't sleep at night for worrying about the state of Liverpool FC finances so a crumb of comfort to the bar-room accountants...

The real accountants, the professional money men, only offered Raheem Sterling an improved contract because it benefits the club - it protects their (financial) interest. An extended, improved, contract (including, no doubt, a fat buy-out clause) believe it or not is, at worst, mutually beneficial.

Finally: the "held to ransom" (as some call it) argument - hmm... Well I'm sort of torn on this one: I appreciate the moral stance... as long as its integrity is maintained and the same morals are applied evenhandedly and without hypocrisy.

I mean: a player, who's offered a reduced contract, on a 'take it or leave it' basis is also being "held to ransom".

Personally - I don't buy all that emotive language - truth is: both sides are looking for a deal which benefits them. The shrewd negotiator will arrive at a position which is mutually beneficial. That's what will happen here.

I wonder if these talks now was down to an agreement that both parties had whilst negotiating his last contract.
i.e. "we're not giving you what you're asking for now, but if you prove yourself and you're a regular starter in the next 1-2 years, then we'll get back together and renegotiate".

If the rumours were true back then, wasn't he asking for silly money in the circa £70k/w region? And now that he has proved himself, our hierarchy are trying to be canny in offering what he originally asked for whilst on the other hand his agent is obviously saying he's more than proved himself, is an integral part of the team now and therefore deserves far more than what was agreed or proposed back then.

What does everyone think would be a fair weekly wage for him, personally I would not want him to have anything more than £100,000k, I'd be more than happy though to offer bonuses in the same way Suarez had so that with enough goals/assists that figure rises to approx £150,000 pw. Surely that would be enough, if not then he really isn't worth the money or hassle. He's very good but he's no Luis Suarez or Stevie G (in his prime)

Mate he is just 20.Probably the best 20 year old in Europe.Suarez had his prime at 27,Gerrard at 24-27 if im correct.So comparison is invaild on all propotions.

So... just to be clear; Glen (for e.g.) is not being held to ransom because the club have made a "value judgement" on his worth but Raheem, who too has made a "value judgement" on his worth, is holding the club to ransom?   
I'd assume that they would both be on a standard, basic wage with a bonus which reflects their productivity: they would if I owned the place.

But what that has to do with the subject of double standards and hypocrisy, when crying "held to ransom", f**k knows.

As a fan of Football: how upset will you be if/when Raheem signs a new, improved, contract?

I'll be happy when Sterling signs a new improved contract. I'm not happy that he's NOT signed one yet.

And in my opinion it's foolish that he's not signed one yet if it's as stated over 100k.

I'll be happy when Sterling signs a new improved contract.

That's all that matters FL... it's not like you're going to be angry if he, holds out, gets his wedge and stays. 

Players ['new' and 'old'] demanding a higher wage is something all big, successful, teams have to contend with. If we consider ourselves to be in that group it's something that we should all get used to. Any players who'll bring 'next level' improvement to the team, (the way it sits now), are more than likely going to be of the quality which commands a higher wage.

There's going to be some angst-ridden, fans in our number when we eventually begin to compete, with the best, for the best... if they don't learn (very quickly) to concentrate on ability rather than cost.

I honestly think he's got A LOT to learn before he starts holding the club to ransom.

Players should be awarded contracts based on consistency and performance - he's not doing that right now. Yes he scored today but apart from that, I thought he was awful.

It's time for football clubs to remember they have the power, not the agents.

I honestly think he's got A LOT to learn before he starts holding the club to ransom.

Players should be awarded contracts based on consistency and performance - he's not doing that right now. Yes he scored today but apart from that, I thought he was awful.

It's time for football clubs to remember they have the power, not the agents.

He should look at Ibe and think, geeze i better sign it before they rip it up.

I honestly think he's got A LOT to learn before he starts holding the club to ransom.

Players should be awarded contracts based on consistency and performance - he's not doing that right now. Yes he scored today but apart from that, I thought he was awful.

It's time for football clubs to remember they have the power, not the agents.

Be fair to him though he's playing way out of position and still delivering results. You could see the improvement the moment Sturridge came on, not just in Studge but in Sterling too.

A front 4 of Sterling, Coutinho, Sturridge, Ibe has the chance to be absolutely incredible.

We need: Sturridge to stop being quite so selfish. Think the fact he doesn't have a song and the Balotelli crap might just be getting to him, he could do with a bit of love from the kop imo.

Sterling: To just get back to doing what he does best, you can see he's trying to be a hold up player, trying to come deep and get involved. Just stick wide (not touch-line wide but you get the point) and the end product will be there.

Ibe: Keep developing at the rate he's at now.

Manage that and next season we will be a frightening prospect to play against.

Be fair to him though he's playing way out of position and still delivering results. You could see the improvement the moment Sturridge came on, not just in Studge but in Sterling too.

A front 4 of Sterling, Coutinho, Sturridge, Ibe has the chance to be absolutely incredible.

We need: Sturridge to stop being quite so selfish. Think the fact he doesn't have a song and the Balotelli crap might just be getting to him, he could do with a bit of love from the kop imo.

Sterling: To just get back to doing what he does best, you can see he's trying to be a hold up player, trying to come deep and get involved. Just stick wide (not touch-line wide but you get the point) and the end product will be there.

Ibe: Keep developing at the rate he's at now.

Manage that and next season we will be a frightening prospect to play against.

Just imagine the faces of defenders from opposing teams seeing those four on the team sheet. Collective groans from both old and young at the thought of being turned, twisted and run ragged throughout the whole game.

Come on Raheem lad and just sign. You can either stay here and be revered or just become another number elsewhere.

12 goals for the season now, does that make him our top scorer?

Could concievably hit the magical 20 goal mark, having been shifted around all season and he's only 20 years old.

He might not be on fire every week, but he is starting to make a difference every week, with little moments of quality and players like that aren't easily available.

12 goals for the season now, does that make him our top scored?

Could concievably hit the magical 20 goal mark, having been shifted around all season and he's only 20 years old.

He might not be on fire every week, but he is starting to make a difference every week, with little moments of quality and players like that aren't easily available.

12 goals and 6 assists in 37 games in all comps isn't too bad for him. He's got 2 more goals than last season and he's played without the production of Suarez and Sturridge. He's also had to play up top on his own for a fair few games. It puts him 1 goal ahead of Gerrard.

Had a bit of a change of heart on this - simple economics.

As much as I don't think he deserves massive bucks - at the end of the day does it affect my life? No.

Looking at the figures I assume it comes down to him asking for an extra £3M a year before tax.  Considering the amount of money that is washing around the Premier League and how much it would cost to get a talented 20 year old in - why not just pay it - get him on a long contract?

We spent about £25M on Dejan Lovren for fucks sake. 

Obviously the risk is it opens the door to some dissent within the team but then anybody who has a problem could maybe come to board telling them how many goals they scored for Liverpool at age 20?

Had a bit of a change of heart on this - simple economics.

As much as I don't think he deserves massive bucks - at the end of the day does it affect my life? No.

Looking at the figures I assume it comes down to him asking for an extra £3M a year before tax.  Considering the amount of money that is washing around the Premier League and how much it would cost to get a talented 20 year old in - why not just pay it - get him on a long contract?

We spent about £25M on Dejan Lovren for fucks sake. 

Obviously the risk is it opens the door to some dissent within the team but then anybody who has a problem could maybe come to board telling them how many goals they scored for Liverpool at age 20?

But in terms of economics every other player in the squad will be looking to increase their paypacket too.

Look at today's match match for example; Coutinho's goal was the decisive one - can we really say we should be paying him less than Sterling?

If the option is between keeping him and seeing the total wage budget increase by 20%, preventing furtehr investment, or getting a big transfer fee to put back in the team and letting a petrodollar club pay for his upkeep then the decision becomes much more difficult.

IN the end it's a question of power. If we are letting players and their agents set our financial outgoings we are screwed; we're already so far behind our rivals financially that we have to be far smarter with our money than they are.

ok at today's match match for example; Coutinho's goal was the decisive one - can we really say we should be paying him less than Sterling?

Coutinho's just signed a new deal which I'm fairly sure he was happy with.  Sterling's already a regular international player.  And yes, when LFC get an extra £40M the following season maybe they should distribute a percentage of it to their best players because I'm sure as sh*t the other top Premier League sides won't be penny pinching.

Coutinho's just signed a new deal which I'm fairly sure he was happy with.  Sterling's already a regular international player.  And yes, when LFC get an extra £40M the following season maybe they should distribute a percentage of it to their best players because I'm sure as sh*t the other top Premier League sides won't be penny pinching.

I'd say only  Man United and Man City of the "top" Premier League sides haven't been "penny pinching" - and if United miss out on the top four this year they will have to rethink their strategy. 

Chelsea have been selling top stars, Arsenal are famous for their parsimony, Spurs and West Ham (who are currently the two teams under us in the table) "penny pinch" every season.

Southampton decided to cash in on their three players by selling them to us rather than keeping them at St. Marys with TV money and they are currently above us in the table.

We are already behind our rivals financially - we have to be smarter with our resources than they are. If we let players and their agents determine our outgoings surely that can only disadvantage us?

Not paying for top class players "disadvantages" us...

Had a bit of a change of heart on this - simple economics.

As much as I don't think he deserves massive bucks - at the end of the day does it affect my life? No.

Looking at the figures I assume it comes down to him asking for an extra £3M a year before tax.  Considering the amount of money that is washing around the Premier League and how much it would cost to get a talented 20 year old in - why not just pay it - get him on a long contract?

We spent about £25M on Dejan Lovren for fucks sake. 

Obviously the risk is it opens the door to some dissent within the team but then anybody who has a problem could maybe come to board telling them how many goals they scored for Liverpool at age 20?

Exactly how I've always seen it JD.

I'd say only  Man United and Man City of the "top" Premier League sides haven't been "penny pinching" - and if United miss out on the top four this year they will have to rethink their strategy. 

Chelsea have been selling top stars, Arsenal are famous for their parsimony, Spurs and West Ham (who are currently the two teams under us in the table) "penny pinch" every season.

Not quite sure how you can label Chelsea as penny pinching because they have sold a few of their players for very good money? And what's more they replace quality with quality. We don't, we have taken gambles of a numbers of players at next level down in the hope that they come good.

I also don't buy the idea that should Sterling be offered a contract some where in the region of what he is asking that it will equate to the entire first team banging on the door demanding a rise. And the threat that this will mean missing out on a potential big signing (or signings) as a result. Who cares? I don't have a great deal of faith in our transfer policy, I'd much rather keep hold of a player who will be pretty much nailed on to be excellent for the next 10 years IMO

I also don't buy the idea that should Sterling be offered a contract some where in the region of what he is asking that it will equate to the entire first team banging on the door demanding a rise.

Me neither.

If that was the case everytime a club signed a player on big wages every other player would be in looking a pay rise.

Not quite sure how you can label Chelsea as penny pinching because they have sold a few of their players for very good money? And what's more they replace quality with quality. We don't, we have taken gambles of a numbers of players at next level down in the hope that they come good.

I also don't buy the idea that should Sterling be offered a contract some where in the region of what he is asking that it will equate to the entire first team banging on the door demanding a rise. And the threat that this will mean missing out on a potential big signing (or signings) as a result. Who cares? I don't have a great deal of faith in our transfer policy, I'd much rather keep hold of a player who will be pretty much nailed on to be excellent for the next 10 years IMO

That's why I put "penny pinching" in inverted commas - it depends what you mean by the term.

FFP means that clubs have to be aware of where they can maximise their resources to get an advantage over rivals.

That's why I put "penny pinching" in inverted commas - it depends what you mean by the term.

FFP means that clubs have to be aware of where they can maximise their resources to get an advantage over rivals.

But could it be argued that spending a bit more on wages on a player we already own and not having to spend big money on transfer fees to replace him is a better way to use resources?

Could be something in that, plus if he's marketed properly the shirt sales will make in-roads into the salary increase.

But could it be argued that spending a bit more on wages on a player we already own and not having to spend big money on transfer fees to replace him is a better way to use resources?

Yes absolutely - and that's our strategy; but it only works if it's the club making the decisions rather than the player and their agent.

We are letting Steven Gerrard go in Summer - every player has their price.