Raheem Sterling (Liverpool -> Man City)

FSG propaganda of this deal is unbelievable. I know Martin Škrtel personally, and his talks with FSG about new deal a couple years ago was a f**king nighmare. In the end Martin did signed unlike Agger, but it took a lot of pressure from a horrible man Ayre.

Just rewatch Pool - City game just before Skrtel had signed, and you see something is not right. He was forced to what f**king Ayre wanted.

FSG are givin´ 90 milion dollars to a 22 years old baseball catcher on a 5 year contract, but they are reluctant to give a top european "soccer" player Sterling a 150k a week. You see their interests, FSG dont give a f**k a bout football. Please check players Boston Red Socks just signed, and then compare it to Liverpool. Henry is taking a piss, f**king w**ker

FSG propaganda of this deal is unbelievable. I know Martin Škrtel personally, and his talks with FSG about new deal a couple years ago was a f**king nighmare. In the end Martin did signed unlike Agger, but it took a lot of pressure from a horrible man Ayre.

Just rewatch Pool - City game just before Skrtel had signed, and you see something is not right. He was forced to what f**king Ayre wanted.

FSG are givin´ 90 milion dollars to a 22 years old baseball catcher on a 5 year contract, but they are reluctant to give a top european "soccer" player Sterling a 150k a week. You see their interests, FSG dont give a f**k a bout football. Please check players Boston Red Socks just signed, and then compare it to Liverpool. Henry is taking a piss, f**king w**ker

90 million dollars over 5 years works out around 250.000 pounds a week! Is this guy really worth 150,000 per week more  to the Socks, than Sterling is to Liverpool? Priorities John, where do they lie??? I guess that's the difference between having an emotional investment in a team, compared to a purely business based involvement.

FSG propaganda of this deal is unbelievable. I know Martin Škrtel personally, and his talks with FSG about new deal a couple years ago was a f**king nighmare. In the end Martin did signed unlike Agger, but it took a lot of pressure from a horrible man Ayre.

Just rewatch Pool - City game just before Skrtel had signed, and you see something is not right. He was forced to what f**king Ayre wanted.

FSG are givin´ 90 milion dollars to a 22 years old baseball catcher on a 5 year contract, but they are reluctant to give a top european "soccer" player Sterling a 150k a week. You see their interests, FSG dont give a f**k a bout football. Please check players Boston Red Socks just signed, and then compare it to Liverpool. Henry is taking a piss, f**king w**ker

You are comparing different sports with different market rates.

If FSG bought a table tennis team would you expect them to offer the same contract we have to Sterling?

At the end of the day the owners have a responsibility to fans and shareholders to get the best value they can for contracts. Martin looks perfectly capable of looking after himself and you can be the has access to some very highly paid people to represent his interests.

We are talking elite level professional sports here on hundreds of thousands of pounds a week not Taiwanese factory workers. 

FSG propaganda of this deal is unbelievable. I know Martin Škrtel personally, and his talks with FSG about new deal a couple years ago was a f**king nighmare. In the end Martin did signed unlike Agger, but it took a lot of pressure from a horrible man Ayre.

Just rewatch Pool - City game just before Skrtel had signed, and you see something is not right. He was forced to what f**king Ayre wanted.

FSG are givin´ 90 milion dollars to a 22 years old baseball catcher on a 5 year contract, but they are reluctant to give a top european "soccer" player Sterling a 150k a week. You see their interests, FSG dont give a f**k a bout football. Please check players Boston Red Socks just signed, and then compare it to Liverpool. Henry is taking a piss, f**king w**ker

90 million dollars over 5 years works out around 250.000 pounds a week! Is this guy really worth 150,000 per week more  to the Socks, than Sterling is to Liverpool? Priorities John, where do they lie??? I guess that's the difference between having an emotional investment in a team, compared to a purely business based involvement.

The LFC annual payroll of 2013/14 was 132 million pounds or 194,673,600.00 US Dollar + Payments to agents of £14,308,443.82.

The Redsox annual payroll for 2014 was 163,000,000 USD  or 110,538,453 British Pound Sterling

In 2012 the Redsox dumped over 30 million in salary at the trading deadline, last year they dumped over 20 million all of this by trading away the high earners to teams that wanted them for the post season race.

Totally different sports and how they are run, baseball has no transfer fees, no agent fees and teams can dump payroll down to nothing if they need to; but don't let facts and reality interfere with the piss take.


Oh and in before the American Plant rage post.

The LFC annual payroll of 2013/14 was 132 million pounds or 194,673,600.00 US Dollar + Payments to agents of £14,308,443.82.

The Redsox annual payroll for 2014 was 163,000,000 USD  or 110,538,453 British Pound Sterling

In 2012 the Redsox dumped over 30 million in salary at the trading deadline, last year they dumped over 20 million all of this by trading away the high earners to teams that wanted them for the post season race.

Totally different sports and how they are run, baseball has no transfer fees, no agent fees and teams can dump payroll down to nothing if they need to; but don't let facts and reality interfere with the piss take.


Oh and in before the American Plant rage post.

Totally different sports and how they are run, baseball has no transfer fees, no agent fees and teams can dump payroll down to nothing if they need to; but don't let facts and reality interfere with the piss take.


Sterling had no transfer fees nor agent fees at the time so what bolix you are talking about

The LFC annual payroll of 2013/14 was 132 million pounds or 194,673,600.00 US Dollar + Payments to agents of £14,308,443.82.

The Redsox annual payroll for 2014 was 163,000,000 USD  or 110,538,453 British Pound Sterling

In 2012 the Redsox dumped over 30 million in salary at the trading deadline, last year they dumped over 20 million all of this by trading away the high earners to teams that wanted them for the post season race.

Totally different sports and how they are run, baseball has no transfer fees, no agent fees and teams can dump payroll down to nothing if they need to; but don't let facts and reality interfere with the piss take.


Oh and in before the American Plant rage post.

But we also have extra monies coming through with the new TV deals, surely that money should go to player contracts & lower ticket prices.

Pelligrini says Sterling is worth 100 million so 250k per week sounds about right.

Sterling had no transfer fees nor agent fees at the time so what bolix you are talking about

Your the one talking about Baseball and a catcher getting a contract...what does that have to do with Sterling? 

If you don't know how the system works over here in regards to trades & salaries then it is probably best not to use them to form an argument.

Your 90 million dollar catcher will never see out his contract and might be gone 5 months after the season starts thus eliminating the salary and the contract from the club in its entirety.

Ask Bronx, ask FL or Firepool the salary structure of the MLB and how it is nothing like the PL.

But we also have extra monies coming through with the new TV deals, surely that money should go to player contracts & lower ticket prices.

I don't disagree with you Shabs, I have no idea how the Redsox got brought into the conversation, somebody saw a headline about a player getting a new contract and raged over Sterlings without doing any research. I can tell you this though, the Redsox are a cash cow for FSG, JWH does not put a dime of FSG money into that club, it supports itself.

Pelligrini says Sterling is worth 100 million so 250k per week sounds about right.

I'd give him 250k/week + £1 because Manuel is seldom wrong

FSG propaganda of this deal is unbelievable. I know Martin Škrtel personally, and his talks with FSG about new deal a couple years ago was a f**king nighmare. In the end Martin did signed unlike Agger, but it took a lot of pressure from a horrible man Ayre.

Just rewatch Pool - City game just before Skrtel had signed, and you see something is not right. He was forced to what f**king Ayre wanted.

...I don't understand, are you trying to imply Skrtel wanted to move?

...I don't understand, are you trying to imply Skrtel wanted to move?

No, he's just name dropping....

Full of contradictions but I hear you.

just the one contradiction... and I see it...

This is what I meant: The club believe he's worth a top end figure of £x... so after going back and forth for a bit they offer him that top amount!! end of!

sign or go!

just the one contradiction... and I see it...

This is what I meant: The club believe he's worth a top end figure of £x... so after going back and forth for a bit they offer him that top amount!! end of!

sign or go!

So basically we'll offer him what he wants, which is great as we'll then know we can afford to pay top wages.

sign or go!

Honest question

Do you think it's as easy as that to continue to grow and develop as a club if you just let players go all the time that are on the verge of progressing to a top level player?

It's not like we can go and replace him with a ready made say 23-26 year old.. We would be replacing with another kid with potential and development where we will have to watch those rough times in that development.

The only way of making this system work is to keep hold of the talent you have developed when they reach their potential not let them go and start again with more of the same

You can't continue to low ball your way through

He will sign anyway

Forget Raheem as an individual in this, think of it as an example of the who process.. It's not as simple as saying take it or leave it and off you go or this can never work

Honest question

Do you think it's as easy as that to continue to grow and develop as a club if you just let players go all the time that are on the verge of progressing to a top level player?

It's not like we can go and replace him with a ready made say 23-26 year old.. We would be replacing with another kid with potential and development where we will have to watch those rough times in that development.

The only way of making this system work is to keep hold of the talent you have developed when they reach their potential not let them go and start again with more of the same

You can't continue to low ball your way through

He will sign anyway

Forget Raheem as an individual in this, think of it as an example of the who process.. It's not as simple as saying take it or leave it and off you go or this can never work

As somebody said yesterday Jon, maybe there isn't a chapter in the Moneyball book about what happens when they start to reach their potential.  Carry on like we are and we'll be signing sperm so that they (the Club) have more time to work how to deal with it.

YES, just tell all those players who ask for a pay-rise , 'here is what we are offering , accept or go'
 I am pretty sure most will leave,
  the majority of  them  play mostly for the money be it liverpool, city celtic accrington etc etc
not saying we should pay all the players every penny that they ask for, but the club's offer must be a reasonable  to the abilities and importance of each player for the club
guess  we all agree that at the moment Raheem, is a major key player for the club, maybe he will not be like that in 2/3 years time , or maybe he will be better, who knows,
 
 the club has to  sort this out ,
 YNWA

Fact is that between 2012/13 and 2016/17 UK TV money will have TREBLED.  Premier League prize pool earnings per club will TREBLE from around £50M to £150M.

Giving Raheem an extra £2.5M a year or whatever is arguably peanuts for the club who will get an extra £50M from Sky and BT alone in the season after next.

So basically we'll offer him what he wants, which is great as we'll then know we can afford to pay top wages.

No we dont offer him what he wants... the club offer the top end of what they believe he is worth, which isnt going to be too shabby.... and then its down to Raheem to sign it or to check the greeness of other grass

Honest question

Do you think it's as easy as that to continue to grow and develop as a club if you just let players go all the time that are on the verge of progressing to a top level player?

It's not like we can go and replace him with a ready made say 23-26 year old.. We would be replacing with another kid with potential and development where we will have to watch those rough times in that development.

The only way of making this system work is to keep hold of the talent you have developed when they reach their potential not let them go and start again with more of the same

You can't continue to low ball your way through

He will sign anyway

Forget Raheem as an individual in this, think of it as an example of the who process.. It's not as simple as saying take it or leave it and off you go or this can never work

Of course you are right long term but this is a more individual scenario.

for me Sterling still has a lot to prove and his deal should reflect that

We have very similar players already in the squad and on loan with the same potential IMHO and it wouldn’t be the end of all things if he decided he was worth more and we then got an inflated fee for him.

The club should never be held to ransom, regardless of the ability of a player

Just my honest opinion

In other news, on November 24, 2014, Pablo Sandoval came to an agreement with the Boston Red Sox on a five-year, $100 million contract with a club option for a sixth year.

On November 25, 2014, Hanley Ramirez signed a four-year, $88 million deal with a fifth year vesting option worth $22 million, to return to the Boston Red Sox.

Raheem Sterling has the potential to be one of the very best players in the world, the key word though is potential and can we afford to throw this sort of money at potential that may never be fulfilled.

I see one of the following four scenarios playing out;

1 - We give Raheem Sterling 150k a week and he doesn't quite hit the potential and there'll be hundreds upon hundreds upon here steaming that we gave a 20 year old kid that sort of the money in the first place. (including some of those who think we should be paying him it now)

2 - We give Raheem Sterling 150k a week and he reaches his full potential and then some, becoming the best player in the League in the next two years and  we go through this whole pavlava again when he (or possibly his agent) wants another improved contract. That's the norm, sign a five year deal and after two years seek a better one.

3 - We give Raheem Sterling 150k a week and still end up selling him in the summer.

4 - We refuse to move on our current offer and Raheem Sterling is sold.

Raheem Sterling has the potential to be one of the very best players in the world, the key word though is potential and can we afford to throw this sort of money at potential that may never be fulfilled.

I see one of the following four scenarios playing out;

1 - We give Raheem Sterling 150k a week and he doesn't quite hit the potential and there'll be hundreds upon hundreds upon here steaming that we gave a 20 year old kid that sort of the money in the first place. (including some of those who think we should be paying him it now)

2 - We give Raheem Sterling 150k a week and he reaches his full potential and then some, becoming the best player in the League in the next two years and  we go through this whole pavlava again when he (or possibly his agent) wants another improved contract. That's the norm, sign a five year deal and after two years seek a better one.

3 - We give Raheem Sterling 150k a week and still end up selling him in the summer.

4 - We refuse to move on our current offer and Raheem Sterling is sold.

i think we offer 120k with potential to rise all dependant on goals, assists over the course of the season and the difference is a end of season bounus type thing, but he has to sign for 5yr deal as part of it.

i think we offer 120k with potential to rise all dependant on goals, assists over the course of the season and the difference is a end of season bounus type thing, but he has to sign for 5yr deal as part of it.

But like I said, even if signed a five year deal with the one you're suggesting, in two years time there'll be another long drawn saga when he (or his agent) wants an inflated flat wage before we even get into the bonuses.

n other news, on November 24, 2014, Pablo Sandoval came to an agreement with the Boston Red Sox on a five-year, $100 million contract with a club option for a sixth year.On November 25, 2014, Hanley Ramirez signed a four-year, $88 million deal with a fifth year vesting option worth $22 million, to return to the Boston Red Sox.

What is this obsession with Boston Red Sox? Think AZ just clarified that overall, LFC wage budget is higher than Red Sox, so your argument that Henry somehow channels funds towards them more is redundant.

Also, we don't actually know what is going on behind closed doors. For all we know, the contract negotiations may be at advanced stage at 120/130/140/150 k per week, or the agent is taking the piss with it, or it's on hold until summer for unrelated reasons...there is absolutely no evidence that either Raheem is being extra greedy, or FSG refusing to progress the talks.

I'm not having a go mate, but it's better to either talk about facts, or voice your opinion...not just rant about owners or Raheem, which falls into neither category.

Ps: Do you and American Plant play poker on Thursdays by any chance?