But there's a wider issue I was alluding to before and that is that whether you pay that to him or not is largely irrelevant while we're unable to attract top end talent to the club because until we do we will remain unsuccessful.
We don't attract the top end talent because we don't pay, as you rightly point out, the top wages.
What we are tryimng to do is buy the top end talent before they become that by investing in young players with the potential to be those tope end players 2, 3 or even 5 years down the line.
What many of us worry about though is if and when those players start to look like they are becoming top level talent, and you can argue if Raheem is there, close to it or even if he won't be there at all, will we then not want to pay those players the top end wages that we saved in the first place by buying them before they were the top talent?
It's all well and good buying young players and hope they progess to being among the best if you don't want to pay them as the best around when they start to fulfill that potential.
we simply don't have enough money to pay both Sterling and a Top striker top wages. The choice is clear to me.
Is this true though?
I highlighted a few players the other day who are on big wages who are likely to be leaving along with a few players who don't feature who when you combine their wages could pay for both Raheem's pay rise and a new striker.
Gerrard, Johnson, Balotelli, Aspas, Alberto, Borini.
Six players one of which is already leaving, one is almost ceratin to be leaving, two are on loan and not needed and the other two, Borini and Balotelli, have question marks about whether or not they will be here next season.
I would hazard a guess that you at over £300K a week in wages right there.
Logged