Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Tom12345

Ricardo Pereira - So underrated

Recommended Posts

Fully deserved but I fear this is the beginning of the end in terms of us losing him to a top Champions League team.  So important for us to get CL football next season if we want to keep hold of him, Maddison and a couple of others.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I actually think him getting called up increases our chances of keeping him, surely he would've have felt a move was necessary if he had continued to have been overlooked here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He's in boyyss, congratulations

 

This doesn't mean he's more or less likely to leave us, no big team worth their salt will let callups decide their transfer policy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From r/soccer u/illustrious_Engineer

 

Goes to show how insanely good Ricardo is and that Chilwell and Fuchs are both good players, with Fuchs being more solid defensively but Chilwell contributing more in an attacking sense. 

03gl4lp7rkr31.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Cheesemaker22 said:

From r/soccer u/illustrious_Engineer

 

Goes to show how insanely good Ricardo is and that Chilwell and Fuchs are both good players, with Fuchs being more solid defensively but Chilwell contributing more in an attacking sense. 

03gl4lp7rkr31.jpg

If only we could combine Fuchs and Chilwell into one per... Oh, wait...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

There is an argument that instead of spending money on new players, much of the maguire  money could be used to inflate salaries of players we want to keep but are in demand elsewhere (and on higher wages) 

 

I'm all for that approach - you keep a valuable asset (which is still saleable and if anything, because of the higher wage worth more) and don’t run the risk of their replacement not meeting expectations....

Doesn't seem like rocket science does it. As long as we show serious intent and progression to be the best.

Lots of money, enjoying football and working hard. Any player who doesn't want that should go to United. Not here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

There is an argument that instead of spending money on new players, much of the maguire  money could be used to inflate salaries of players we want to keep but are in demand elsewhere (and on higher wages) 

 

I'm all for that approach - you keep a valuable asset (which is still saleable and if anything, because of the higher wage worth more) and don’t run the risk of their replacement not meeting expectations....

And that’s possible now with the change of FFP rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2019 at 14:18, brucey said:

:ph34r:

Joke of a source aside, I'd expect Ricardo will sign a new contract before the end of this calendar year. Even if there is a gentleman's agreement Mahrez style to let him leave, it would vastly increase his transfer fee. Joao Cancelo went to Man City for 60m, though this was part-amortized by Danillo going to Juventus. Ricardo is a proven PL and international full back who has shown he can do it in France, Portugal, England and European level. Thus the minimum bid must be 70m!

 

If we get Champions League football or maybe "just" Europa League football I reckon he will stay an additional year though. He looks happy enough at the club, even though he must be thinking he's capable of playing for anyone, which he is!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2019 at 18:13, st albans fox said:

There is an argument that instead of spending money on new players, much of the maguire  money could be used to inflate salaries of players we want to keep but are in demand elsewhere (and on higher wages) 

 

I'm all for that approach - you keep a valuable asset (which is still saleable and if anything, because of the higher wage worth more) and don’t run the risk of their replacement not meeting expectations....

I don't know, that can be difficult to negotiate because when re-signing other player's contracts that introduces a problem. Rather reinvest the money (in players, infrastructure, whatever) and grow our wages naturally and in accordance with growing profits for the club. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2019 at 15:13, st albans fox said:

There is an argument that instead of spending money on new players, much of the maguire  money could be used to inflate salaries of players we want to keep but are in demand elsewhere (and on higher wages) 

 

I'm all for that approach - you keep a valuable asset (which is still saleable and if anything, because of the higher wage worth more) and don’t run the risk of their replacement not meeting expectations....

Incentive driven perks, what happens if the players form drops off a cliff and he is on 180k a week for the next 4 or 5 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

Incentive driven perks, what happens if the players form drops off a cliff and he is on 180k a week for the next 4 or 5 years.

One of those risks you have to take these days with quality players

 

They are a lot less likely to take contracts made up of incentive driven perks when they know they could go to another club for more money upfront

 

We took the same route with Vardy, offering a 31 year old our highest ever paid contract on a 4 year deal could have been a massive risk, luckily it has worked out well for us

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

Incentive driven perks, what happens if the players form drops off a cliff and he is on 180k a week for the next 4 or 5 years.

Insurance would cover this.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, FOXSE said:

Insurance would cover this.....

No it wouldn’t - only covers catastrophic injury situation that finishes career 

 

58 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

Incentive driven perks, what happens if the players form drops off a cliff and he is on 180k a week for the next 4 or 5 years.

why would a player stay for incentive driven pay rise when he can get non incentive driven higher package elsewhere ?  A player who stays with us for another couple years will still target a move to a ‘big club’ going forward so their form cannot drop off a cliff ......

 

I really don’t see much of a risk in giving a player who has already shown they can perform consistently in the premier league a large salary package rather than selling them and then risking not finding an effective replacement. (Who is definitely costing you a pretty penny in fee and salary)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

I really don’t see much of a risk in giving a player who has already shown they can perform consistently in the premier league a large salary package rather than selling them and then risking not finding an effective replacement. (Who is definitely costing you a pretty penny in fee and salary)

Most likely scenario is we will do what we have done with Maguire, give them a new longer contract on increased wages, keep them at the club for a year or 2 while we also bring in a replacement who gets time to setlle in(Cags and Benkovic), then sell for the asking price we set with maximised profits

 

Most sustainable way of doing business for a club of our size

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, moore_94 said:

Most likely scenario is we will do what we have done with Maguire, give them a new longer contract on increased wages, keep them at the club for a year or 2 while we also bring in a replacement who gets time to setlle in(Cags and Benkovic), then sell for the asking price we set with maximised profits

 

Most sustainable way of doing business for a club of our size

But we didn’t really break the bank for maguire ........ he was on approx 80k.  Had we paid him 140k then perhaps he may have felt it more difficult to move just yet.  Of course his inflated fee provides the income to begin the policy ..... how sustainable it is depends on our achievements next couple seasons ..... if it proves to be unsustainable then we can still sell those in demand players for a tidy sum 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, st albans fox said:

No it wouldn’t - only covers catastrophic injury situation that finishes career 

 

why would a player stay for incentive driven pay rise when he can get non incentive driven higher package elsewhere ?  A player who stays with us for another couple years will still target a move to a ‘big club’ going forward so their form cannot drop off a cliff ......

 

I really don’t see much of a risk in giving a player who has already shown they can perform consistently in the premier league a large salary package rather than selling them and then risking not finding an effective replacement. (Who is definitely costing you a pretty penny in fee and salary)

Why would he stay? because his contract expires in 4 years 

The club dont need to sell

So if he is offered improved terms via bonuses and other perks its better that taking 80k basic for the next 3 to 4 years

The club are in a strong position, they dont suddenly need to make him a Top earner yet.

 

That said

Im sure they will offer him a better deal if he continues his good form till the end of the season

 

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, HankMarvin said:

Why would he stay? because his contract expires in 4 years 

The club dont need to sell

So if he is offered improved terms via bonuses and other perks its better that taking 80k basic for the next 3 to 4 years

The club are in a strong position, they dont suddenly need to make him a Top earner yet.

 

That said

Im sure they will offer him a better deal if he continues his good form till the end of the season

 

The question here is do we try and compete with some of the top six by paying those we don’t want to leave higher salaries then we have in the past? Whilst you say we can refuse to sell, an ‘unhappy’ player who is denied what he feels is a move that cements his families future for the remainder of his life isn’t going to help team spirit etc .....

 

I am aware of the risks posed by paying a couple players ‘big monies’ with the remainder of the squad ..... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...