Christan Eriksen

[The whole world smiles]

51 minutes ago, TJB-fox said:

 👍

Don't know why I'm wasting my time debunking Sean from Enderby Lol but...

 

he doesn't want 300k a week he's already on 300k a week. An inflated figure because there wasn't a transfer fee involved. A bit like Aaron Ramsay getting 400k  week from Juve. He will rightly be against taking a pay cut and we will rightly be against paying 1.2 million a month for him so Inter will probably have to contribute some for him to go anywhere this Jan. 

[AKCJ]

57 minutes ago, wattolcfc said:

Why are people still quoting Sean on here? It's a banter account 

@mods.

 

Can't be having Sean slander on here.

[Wolfox]

5 hours ago, Danny Clender said:

Two points here that I firmly disagree with, 

 

1 - 'we need Champions League football desperately to level up as a club' - We don't, not yet.

 

2 - 'We can’t afford to blow it again' - We can. 

That fact that we are still considering champs league never fails to blow my mind!!!

[Wolfox]

2 hours ago, Babylon said:

People actually turning their noses up at Christan Eriksen. 

Me included…. Not because I don’t think he’s a fantastic player - he is

 

I just don’t think he has the right attributes for the way we play…. Hard press is not his style and we rely on every last player to execute that effectively…. He’s also out of form…. Do we have 6 months to help him recover it?

 

Big wages could upset a very happy camp too…

 

It’s a no from me (not that this makes any odds!)

[Raw Dykes]

59 minutes ago, Simoken said:

I still think theirs life in this deal yet tbh.

 

Eriksen is in desperate need of a career boost, he aint scored in 14 games for inter so if he is in it for the sport (i hope) and not the money then taking a 50% cut temporarily for half a season to get his career back on track in a loan deal in the PL will be very good for him, going forward if he performs. LCFC is hot right now its a no brainer.. unfortunately agents swan over like fly's on shit soo hmmm well see!

I don't think he'll be taking a significant pay cut to join anyone on loan. I think it's a case of how much a club is willing to pay towards his wages. Inter would be have to cover the rest. If this happens, then it's probably going to happen near the end of the transfer window when Inter run out of options.

[Babylon]

4 minutes ago, Wolfox said:

Me included…. Not because I don’t think he’s a fantastic player - he is

 

I just don’t think he has the right attributes for the way we play…. Hard press is not his style and we rely on every last player to execute that effectively…. He’s also out of form…. Do we have 6 months to help him recover it?

 

Big wages could upset a very happy camp too…

 

It’s a no from me (not that this makes any odds!)

Wages shouldn't really be a consideration, we aren't paying 300k a week. The club wouldn't pay stupid money. 

 

As for form, if we are having to operate in the loan market, we aren't going to be getting anyone in form. They will be squad filler or out of form players, that we think are quality and can turn it on. Remember Tielemans, slated at Monaco. Walks in the door here and was a revelation.

 

We need someone in to cover asap. I'll have a top quality player who doesn't chase as much, over someone who runs around a lot and not much else. January is difficult to deal in, expecting perfection now will be very very difficult. 

[ajthefox]

I'm not sure about this.

 

I don't think anyone would disagree that he was one of, (if not the best) attacking midfielder in the league for some time, but clearly there's a lot more to it than that. If we sign him I would certainly look forward to seeing him play, but it does feel a bit odd. Even if we get him for 50% of his wages for the rest of the season, we'd presumably be paying that for him to be cover/rotation. It's not a massive amount of money, especially if he does bag a few goals/assists that get us CL, but I do worry a little about what that says to the rest of the squad.

I've not seen him play at Inter at all but I do also wonder how quickly he would slot in for us, and how we would utilise him. Presumably he would mainly be cover for Maddison and perhaps one of the "wide" roles although I wouldn't have thought that would suit him. 

 

It just doesn't sit right with me personally, but I trust the club to do the right thing.

 

[Basildon Fox]

5 hours ago, Danny Clender said:

Two points here that I firmly disagree with, 

 

1 - 'we need Champions League football desperately to level up as a club' - We don't, not yet.

 

2 - 'We can’t afford to blow it again' - We can. 

I suppose it depends on what you want for your club.

 

If we make top 4 this season it shows a positive step forward for the players we have let alone players coming in.  If we blow top 4 again I have a feeling a number of the current players may wish to move on to a 'bigger' club to maximise their careers. 

 

We as a club do not have the right to expect , nor do I expect a top 4 position but after so many lows I want this high to stay for as long as possible. It is far easier to attract better players to the club if we have the incentive of Champions League and more of an establiished name so if we do lose a Ricardo or an Ndidi in the future we have a better chance of getting the best youngsters to come to our club. 

 

I also love us as a club putting 2 fingers up to the Pro North West and Cockney reporters who bring up a little bit of sick everytime they have to mention 'Little Leicester' as contenders.

[Rasmic123]

2 hours ago, Simoken said:

I still think theirs life in this deal yet tbh.

 

Eriksen is in desperate need of a career boost, he aint scored in 14 games for inter so if he is in it for the sport (i hope) and not the money then taking a 50% cut temporarily for half a season to get his career back on track in a loan deal in the PL will be very good for him, going forward if he performs. LCFC is hot right now its a no brainer.. unfortunately agents swan over like fly's on shit soo hmmm well see!

That LCFC's so hot right now

[moore_94]

 

 

[TJB-fox]

2 hours ago, The whole world smiles said:

Don't know why I'm wasting my time debunking Sean from Enderby Lol but...

 

he doesn't want 300k a week he's already on 300k a week. An inflated figure because there wasn't a transfer fee involved. A bit like Aaron Ramsay getting 400k  week from Juve. He will rightly be against taking a pay cut and we will rightly be against paying 1.2 million a month for him so Inter will probably have to contribute some for him to go anywhere this Jan. 

Well he does want 300k a week doesn’t he, because that’s his contract and what he’s entitled to. Unless Inter pay 65-70% minimum of his wages this won’t happen. Simple as that. 

[rachhere]

1 hour ago, moore_94 said:

 

 

Convinced from this that he's our main target and this is all part of the game playing to negotiate on price. 

[Simoken]

1 hour ago, Rasmic123 said:

That LCFC's so hot right now

Clearly so you don't so have much so going on so in life.. to correct my so mistakes... 

[mozartfox]

He is a very expensive serial loser.  Does he actually better what we have?   No.    Send him back to Spuds then him and Bale will be squirreling off UKP 600k per week.  Terrific value.

[shen]

5 hours ago, Nicolo Barella said:

Maybe. All I know is that a loan represents next to no risk and lots of potential positives; we need depth now Praet is injured if we really want to push for trophies this season.

Hey Nicolo, can you have a chat with Christian about this? I know Antonio prefers you, so Eriksen's no threat to you really

 

4 hours ago, Heymister2015 said:

Surprised how excited some fans got for a player that’s been crap for about 3 years. We don’t do West Ham signings 

Behave. He was in the PFA team of the year less than three years ago and an integral part of a squad that reached the CL final less than two years ago. Meanwhile, he's still been performing for the national team, so you're being overly harsh here. Would he still be a gamble? Absolutely, every signing is, but there is undoubted quality here and I have massive trust in the environment our club provides to players with the right mentality. If there is something in this, you can be sure they will have quizzed Kasper about Eriksen's suitability. 

 

4 hours ago, Foxy_Bear said:

I was thinking about that too. 

 

In keeping the rest of the squad content, it would make much more sense to pay £3m for the loan deal with £150k wages than it would to pay no fee and eat his £300k a week. 

 

3 hours ago, Wolfox said:

Me included…. Not because I don’t think he’s a fantastic player - he is

 

I just don’t think he has the right attributes for the way we play…. Hard press is not his style and we rely on every last player to execute that effectively…. He’s also out of form…. Do we have 6 months to help him recover it?

 

Big wages could upset a very happy camp too…

 

It’s a no from me (not that this makes any odds!)

I'm really bemused at the "will he upset the applecart?" argument. Surely it's just semantics whether we pay a loan fee or cover his wages when it's just a 4½-5 month loan. Why would what Inter choose to pay Eriksen in wages have any influence on our squad? Do you think the big deals getting Tielemans, Perez or Fofana here have "upset the applecart"? Anyone have knowledge of how the Cengiz Ünder loan is structured, i.e. whether a loan fee is involved, how much his wages are and how big a part we're covering? That might give some perspective. 

For those worried about 'the signal this would send to the squad', I would rebut that the signal could be that of ambition. He'd be the highest reputation player since Cambiasso, easily. And for the club to sign a player of that calibre to essentially cover for Praet, would signal that we mean proper business and are an attractive destination even for top players. Fofana, Soyuncu, Tielemans, Maddison, Ndidi (i.e. players who might want to springboard to the elite clubs) I suspect would take this as a sign that we have the will and ability to compete with the biggest in the business.

 

3 hours ago, ajthefox said:

I've not seen him play at Inter at all but I do also wonder how quickly he would slot in for us, and how we would utilise him. Presumably he would mainly be cover for Maddison and perhaps one of the "wide" roles although I wouldn't have thought that would suit him. 

He could cover for Maddison, Praet, Perez and Tielemans really. At a push, he can play on the left as well, but IF we're actually in for him, I suspect we would only consider him for the 8 or 10 role.

 

 

[Jimbo]

Just imagine Rudkin on the phone to inter

 

"So I hear Christian might be available for loan, is that correct"

 

"Sure, but you'd have to cover 100% of his wages"

 

"OK, how much is he on?"

 

"English pounds? About 300k a week"

 

"................"

[surrifox]

4 hours ago, The whole world smiles said:

Don't know why I'm wasting my time debunking Sean from Enderby Lol but...

 

he doesn't want 300k a week he's already on 300k a week. An inflated figure because there wasn't a transfer fee involved. A bit like Aaron Ramsay getting 400k  week from Juve. He will rightly be against taking a pay cut and we will rightly be against paying 1.2 million a month for him so Inter will probably have to contribute some for him to go anywhere this Jan. 

anybody just a tad concerned that a player pulling down £300k (or euros ) a week is unable to get a game for the Club he joined not too long  ago?

[MGLCFC]

5 minutes ago, surrifox said:

anybody just a tad concerned that a player pulling down £300k (or euros ) a week is unable to get a game for the Club he joined not too long  ago?

Erickson or Bale

[urban.spaceman]

 

 

[surrifox]

3 minutes ago, MGLCFC said:

Erickson or Bale

Bale makes no secret that he's just taking the p*** and would rather be out playing golf whilst banking £600k a week , I haven't got that from Ericson, but maybe he's not playing because he's  just not very good. Always thought he was one of Spurs' better players but no world beater and as for £300k pw - GTFO

[Jimbo]

2 minutes ago, surrifox said:

Bale makes no secret that he's just taking the p*** and would rather be out playing golf whilst banking £600k a week , I haven't got that from Ericson, but maybe he's not playing because he's  just not very good. Always thought he was one of Spurs' better players but no world beater and as for £300k pw - GTFO

Eriksen is a good Gylfi Sigurdsson. Will drift in and out of play and looks like he's never really trying. Always dangerous in the final third but never really struck me as a player who's going to win the ball back for you and isn't arsed unless the ball is no more than 3 yards away from him

[CrispinLA in Texas]

Eric's been poor for over 2 years now, does anybody actually think he will be brilliant starting next month for us. He thought he was better then he really is, and the Spurs fans on their forum always wrote that he didn't play well throughout 90mins but occasionally produced a magical moment in a match. 

Edited 22 January 2021 by CrispinLA in Texas

[Scotch]

44 minutes ago, shen said:

 

I'm really bemused at the "will he upset the applecart?" argument. Surely it's just semantics whether we pay a loan fee or cover his wages when it's just a 4½-5 month loan. Why would what Inter choose to pay Eriksen in wages have any influence on our squad? Do you think the big deals getting Tielemans, Perez or Fofana here have "upset the applecart"? Anyone have knowledge of how the Cengiz Ünder loan is structured, i.e. whether a loan fee is involved, how much his wages are and how big a part we're covering? That might give some perspective. 
 

 

 

So let's say that you're Jamie Vardy, one of our greatest ever players. Our main man and someone waltzes into your team on double your wages..... You really don't think that has an impact? Especially if he doesn't do well.

 

Or someone like say Thauvin or Maddison, coming into negotiate a free tansfer or new contract and the club offer you £90k a week when they were just paying someone 3x that....

 

What each member is being paid is relevant to the rest of the squad or future members of the squad as, if you think your playing better or more valuable to the team, you immediately use that wage as a benchmark for what they should be paying you. 

 

None of the examples you used came into the squad immediately on twice as much as everyone else so its bot a relative argument.

[Jimbo]

10 hours ago, Danny Clender said:

Two points here that I firmly disagree with, 

 

1 - 'we need Champions League football desperately to level up as a club' - We don't, not yet.

 

2 - 'We can’t afford to blow it again' - We can. 

I agree almost completely, we don't desperately need champions league football, but it would help us level up as a club.

 

Football is an uncertain world. Champions league football, sooner rather than later would help us attract a different calibre of player plus (not saying it's gonna happen) if a club shows interest in Rodgers, already having champions league football could be a difference maker.

 

But, as we both agree it wouldn't be a disaster to not have right away, we're still in the process of building towards that 

[Steve_Guppy_Left_Foot]

Everyone who's quoted me about it potentially upsetting the apple cart have basically said the same thing and missed the salient point imo. None of you have looked at it from a players point of view, they don't care how the. Moneys trousered if it's trousered, and more than the players, the agents of the players will use it as a wedge for the future for certain. How much it costs the club in terms of finances over 6 months is a very, very blinkered way of looking at what it will cost the club.