The point here is that players talk to each other, see how each other are handled and make judgements from there. Raheem was in a similar situation to Jordan 18 months or so ago and signed for 30K a week. Now we're talking about NOT releasing him from that contract should he refuse to sign another, and NOT countenancing a sale either. I actually agree with our stance (not that I think we'll actually stick to it), but Ibe is probably thinking "hang on a second here, do I want to get tied down in a similar fashion?".
The answer is to sign the player on a sensible, reasonable and equitable contract in the first place, ie somewhere near what he would get if he were to put himself on the market. I know it makes the money men feel all clever and pat each other on the back when they persuade a young player to sign for less than they could have held out for, but you are simply storing up problems for the future. We should have put Sterling on double what he is currently on when he first signed, and we should be offering Ibe double what we are currently offering him as well. there should also be a clause based on appearances where his money goes up, and sharpish.
Next it'll be Phillipe Coutinho. "Weren't we clever" for getting him to sign a contract for 70K per week? Yes we were, that is until he talks to Oscar, Ramirez and the like when he's on international duty and thinks "F*** this for a game", then he'll be off as well. The answer is to give his agent a ring today and tell him we've decided to put his money up by 60% in light of his nomination for PFA player of the year. If you want to keep players that's what you do (that would cost 2 million quid per season BTW, not bad value if you ask me). If you're not actually bothered about keeping players and want a ready made conveyor belt of potential sales, you do things the way we do them. We shouldn't really blame players for not playing the game the way our owners decree it should be played.
Logged
