Christan Eriksen

[Plastik Man]

Jeez. I can't believe anyone seriously thinks we'd pay Eriksen £300k pw.  Is there ANY team out there who would right now?

 

I've no idea if we'll sign him on loan, but he could be a great addition and I trust the club in only making the signing if it works for us. 

 

We're  an extremely well run club. Surely it's  bloody obvious if we do get him in on loan Inter will still be paying a % of his wages.  And it wouldn't be a major issue with the other players.... because we're not paying him double Vardy's wages!

 

[reynard]

No chance this will happen as things stand.

[sacreblueits442]

37 minutes ago, shen said:

Injury has cost Ricardo 10 months of his career. What's your point? 

Silva was able to get settled, slowly integrate with the team with the view of being ready after four months. He bombed, massively.

 

Of course there'd be massive expectation if Eriksen arrived - as with any big name signing. But he would be gone again by summer. At worst he'd be a moderate gamble that didn't pay off; at best he'd play a significant part in achieving our short term goals and regain some of his fading reputation and increasing ours in the process.

....If I recall Silva was unable to train with the other players as he was not officially registered!!!

The sequence of events regarding his time here had disaster written all over it, as he failed to gain the match fitness required and in the end his playing style did not suit us.

  In response to the previous post I responded to, no one could have foresaw what would happen when he eventually got on the pitch and played for us.

[hackneyfox]

27 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

....If I recall Silva was unable to train with the other players as he was not officially registered!!!

 

Have the rules changed? weren't King & Simpson training with us when out of contract?

[whitlock]

5 minutes ago, hackneyfox said:

Have the rules changed? weren't King & Simpson training with us when out of contract?

I think it was more using the facilities than training with the first team, could wrong though.

[hackneyfox]

That makes sense.

[hackneyfox]

I thought Birchenall mentioned that Silva was unbelievably good in training. 

[The_77]

Wow, this thread is still going. 

[sacreblueits442]

18 minutes ago, hackneyfox said:

Have the rules changed? weren't King & Simpson training with us when out of contract?

....King and Simpson were due to to the generosity of the club!!!

I suspect as their contract had ended they would have had some kind of insurance as LCFC was not liable for any injury they might sustain on their premises.

   Danny Simpson said the physio worked on him but he (Simpson) could  expect any long term physio treatment on a one to one basis at the ground, as he was no longer part of the club.

  Silvas' registration precluded him from training with his teammates or representing the club on the pitch in any capacity until the new transfer window was opened. He was receiving training. (in order to maintain a level of fitness, although he could never be match fit) by I believe his brother.

[shailen]

He's past it imo and we've got players in the same position who are better than him. He's actually not good enough to start every game for us. 

[Tom12345]

3 hours ago, Foxy_Bear said:

I respectfully disagree. 

 

I think it is very simplistic in that regard. If your work hired someone who done the exact job you did for twice or three times the pay you got, I doubt you would be very happy. I wouldn't. Footballers are no different. 

 

As for your examples of Slim and Silva, it's really no coincidence that the major players in our squad then renegotiated their contracts around that time for massive wage rises in keeping with their role in the squad I.e, Morgan, Vardy, Mahrez and Kasp, our most influential players got the lions share but if you look at someone like Morgans wages in comparison to the rest of the squad now, it's not as high as he is not as influential whereas Vardy is still our main man so he is still our highest earner and Kasp is captain so he is one of them. 

 

To bring anyone in for twice Vardy' wages is to indirectly say he is twice as important to our team. 

 

As for the structure of the deal, your right. Inters business is their own and it really makes bo differance to how the deal is structured if the money remains the same. No difference EXCEPT a reflection on how we view him within our squad. I would feel happier paying £150k a week with a £3m fee as it would bring him in as ONE OF the most important players here as opposed to THE most important that the £300k with no fee would suggest. 

Agree. Human psychology. This is why it is very important that Vardy has accepted only getting paid around 150k a week when he could have easily gotten 250k plus elsewhere and indeed he deserves that here given his importance to the team and what the club has gotten out of him (more than just goals but fame, loyalty, stability, spirit, culture, leadership, etc). I hope there is a secret deal where he will get paid still after he retires. But the point is that he sets the example and that is key to keeping everyone happy. Maguire gets 200k a week! Do we think he is better than Evans, Fofana or Cags? They can probably live with getting paid less here (still very good) because they feel it is a great club and they still get paid right in comparison to their TEAMMATES even if at times they may envy Maguire getting paid double or triple. BUT if someone on loan gets paid 300k a week, whoever pays for that, that comparison becomes distorted and this bad apple may set off a train of discontent or thinking that grass may be greener on other side.

Edited 22 January 2021 by Tom12345

[peach0000]

38 minutes ago, hackneyfox said:

Have the rules changed? weren't King & Simpson training with us when out of contract?

International clearance was the issue. You have to get international clearance to change associations. As Silva was registered to the Portuguese FA we had to apply to FIFA for international clearance for him to switch to being registered under the English FA. Normal procedure just to make sure everything is above board and transparent (so teams don't steal players from foreign leagues). The paper work on that was delayed by 14 seconds so he was unable to get international clearance and that's what stopped him from training with us. As King and Simpson were free agents who last played in England that wouldn't be an issue at all.

[Tom12345]

4 hours ago, shen said:

Unless you speak for the players, then your guess is as good as anyone else's surely? I don't agree that it's irrelevant whether it's a loan or permanent. 

By your logic, we will either see massive wage increase at Spurs or a mass exodus of players thinking they should get Bale-level wage. That will not happen though because no-one will pay them anything close to that - with the possible exception of Kane.

 

Our players are handsomely paid. Our young players who are performing well will be demanding wage increases which reflect their value regardless of whether Eriksen comes or not.

I can’t quite agree with you. You don’t know yet what is going on within Spurs. It may have turned some heads and in any event Mourinho needs to carefully manage this. Also Bale is a little different - he is from Real Madrid and has a special reputation. It is not like we are bringing in Messi who everyone respects and is clearly five levels above and so no one will be too upset if he gets paid five times more.

 

Or imagine this. I don’t know what you do so apologies in advance, but say you work in a team of 10. You all get paid 100k a year. Due to extra work, your boss decides to bring in a temp consultant from a consultancy firm who gets paid 300k a year for one year. He comes in, does the same thing as you, shows off his nice watches, etc. He leaves and goes back to his consultancy firm after a year. Maybe not you but some members may want to ask for a pay rise next time or they may start to think that your boss pays crappy wages and start to look elsewhere. Now perhaps not all can succeed in finding a higher paying job, but the team members may start bitching with each other and a sense of injustice starts to creep in and the place becomes toxic.

 

So sorry, not worth risking the wonderful team spirit we have now.

Edited 22 January 2021 by Tom12345

[shen]

Just now, Tom12345 said:

I can’t quite agree with you. You don’t know yet what is going on within Spurs. It may have turned some heads and in any event Mourinho needs to carefully manage this. Also Bale is a little different - he is from Real Madrid and has a special reputation. It is not like we are bringing in Messi who everyone respects and is clearly five levels above and so no one will be too upset if he gets paid five times more.

I don't know, that's correct. Maybe you have some info? Spurs have notoriously kept a tight grip on wages, and MY guess based on history is they will not bend over for any demands they find unreasonable - except maybe Kane. 

 

Trying to differentiate and justify the Bale deal over Eriksen is dubious, in my opinion. Suggesting Eriksen wouldn't be highly respected by the squad is being disingenuous. Have we made a signing with better pedigree since Cambiasso?

[Tom12345]

4 minutes ago, shen said:

I don't know, that's correct. Maybe you have some info? Spurs have notoriously kept a tight grip on wages, and MY guess based on history is they will not bend over for any demands they find unreasonable - except maybe Kane. 

 

Trying to differentiate and justify the Bale deal over Eriksen is dubious, in my opinion. Suggesting Eriksen wouldn't be highly respected by the squad is being disingenuous. Have we made a signing with better pedigree since Cambiasso?

I added to my post after you started responding. But it is not just about what the club will do or will pay. It is not as simple as a black and white negotiation matter. A very important thing to keep in mind is team spirit and culture.

 

Quote from my edited post above:

 

Or imagine this. I don’t know what you do so apologies in advance, but say you work in a team of 10. You all get paid 100k a year. Due to extra work, your boss decides to bring in a temp consultant from a consultancy firm who gets paid 300k a year for one year. He comes in, does the same thing as you, shows off his nice watches, etc. He leaves and goes back to his consultancy firm after a year. Maybe not you but some members may want to ask for a pay rise next time or they may start to think that your boss pays crappy wages and start to look elsewhere. Now perhaps not all can succeed in finding a higher paying job, but the team members may start bitching with each other and a sense of injustice starts to creep in and the place becomes toxic.

 

So sorry, not worth risking the wonderful team spirit we have now.

[Tom12345]

10 minutes ago, shen said:

I don't know, that's correct. Maybe you have some info? Spurs have notoriously kept a tight grip on wages, and MY guess based on history is they will not bend over for any demands they find unreasonable - except maybe Kane. 

 

Trying to differentiate and justify the Bale deal over Eriksen is dubious, in my opinion. Suggesting Eriksen wouldn't be highly respected by the squad is being disingenuous. Have we made a signing with better pedigree since Cambiasso?

Also, further to above. Please refer to this:

 

 

[shen]

42 minutes ago, Tom12345 said:

Or imagine this. I don’t know what you do so apologies in advance, but say you work in a team of 10. You all get paid 100k a year. Due to extra work, your boss decides to bring in a temp consultant from a consultancy firm who gets paid 300k a year for one year. He comes in, does the same thing as you, shows off his nice watches, etc. He leaves and goes back to his consultancy firm after a year. Maybe not you but some members may want to ask for a pay rise next time or they may start to think that your boss pays crappy wages and start to look elsewhere. Now perhaps not all can succeed in finding a higher paying job, but the team members may start bitching with each other and a sense of injustice starts to creep in and the place becomes toxic.

You are making a lot of assumptions here.

 

Firstly, our players are not paid equally - far from it. Football economics seem to work different than in 'normal' society. If you are talking basic human psychology, then why are women not revolting at this point after being serially paid less than male counterparts throughout history for 'the same job'? 

 

Secondly, the 'consultancy' (or loan) part is crucial here. Companies will hire consultants for projects or temporary jobs to do a specific task. It's by definition a short, finite period - partly because the hiring company will not or cannot take the financial burden and responsibility of a permanent hire. I like to think most employees will understand such a situation and while jealousy can happen, it will not lead to a sudden line at the manager's door. I've been in such a situation myself, not that it really matters or proves anything.

 

Thirdly, you are saying 'the consultant' (loanee) will perform exactly the same job as me. Again, Eriksen comes with a pedigree that is superior to the majority to our current players. He has won titles, he's played in the very biggest games of club football, has a ton of caps and goals and been the star player for a competitive national team for years, played in the latter stages or World Cups and Euros, recognised as an elite player in the richest league. This 'consultant' would have proved he can do a job for this team.
 

Our players might set their sights on clubs like Inter who are able to offer such contracts - but agents (and players) already know this, regardless of whether a highly-paid player comes here or not. Why do Maguire, Kanté, Mahrez, Chilwell et al leave us you think?

Taking in loans usually was a sign that clubs could not afford buying the player. The difference between Nathan Dyer, Ryan Bennett and Eriksen is that the latter possesses quality that conceivably challenges first XI regulars for their place.

Out of curiosity though, what do you make of the Ünder loan? 

Edited 23 January 2021 by shen

[Tom12345]

48 minutes ago, shen said:

You are making a lot of assumptions here.

 

Firstly, our players are not paid equally - far from it. Football economics seem to work different than in 'normal' society. If you are talking basic human psychology, then why are women not revolting at this point after being serially paid less than male counterparts throughout history for 'the same job'? 

 

Secondly, the 'consultancy' (or loan) part is crucial here. Companies will hire consultants for projects or temporary jobs to do a specific task. It's by definition a short, finite period - partly because the hiring company will not or cannot take the financial burden and responsibility of a permanent hire. I like to think most employees will understand such a situation and while jealousy can happen, it will not lead to a sudden line at the manager's door. I've been in such a situation myself, not that it really matters or proves anything.

 

Thirdly, you are saying 'the consultant' (loanee) will perform exactly the same job as me. Again, Eriksen comes with a pedigree that is superior to the majority to our current players. He has won titles, he's played in the very biggest games of club football, has a ton of caps and goals and been the star player for a competitive national team for years, played in the latter stages or World Cups and Euros, recognised as an elite player in the richest league. This 'consultant' would have proved he can do a job for this team.
 

Our players might set their sights on clubs like Inter who are able to offer such contracts - but agents (and players) already know this, regardless of whether a highly-paid player comes here or not. Why do Maguire, Kanté, Mahrez, Chilwell et al leave us you think?

Taking in loans usually was a sign that clubs could not afford buying the player. The difference between Nathan Dyer, Ryan Bennett and Eriksen is that the latter possesses quality that conceivably challenges first XI regulars for their place.

Out of curiosity though, what do you make of the Ünder loan? 

In fact after reading this, you and I are not thinking too differently in that we both think it is complicated and it is more than just a black and white negotiation matter as between the club and the player and more than it being something that can be easily controlled by club through a one sided policy handed down by the club, as you seemed to suggest before . You brought in a lot of other considerations here about different wages at the club, the players’ pedigree, what do they think, etc etc. This was exactly my point although we come from different angles and we may see things differently. It seems the difference from your thoughts is mainly coming down to views concerning Eriksen’s pedigree, which I also acknowledged. And it is a fair point that you may see Eriksen as a special player who is well respected and despite the risks that I mentioned they can be managed in light of the pedigree of the player. However, I have a different view and yes he is good but I dont think it is worth the risk if he is on 300k a week (different if he is Messi or Ronaldo). Having said that, I read somewhere that he is in fact on around 130k so who knows what to believe.

 

As for Under, I like him and I think it could still end up as a permanent deal. I hope so anyway. He is reportedly on around 40k so I am not sure what the point is here - we only pay the 20m plus transfer fee if it becomes permanent.

 

At the end of the day, it is all about managing expectations and perception, and that is important to keeping good team spirit and culture. It is complicated.

Edited 23 January 2021 by Tom12345

[MPH]

Surely they know that no one is going to pay his full wages. 300k.  
 

Are they really going to let him stay in their reserves, pay his full 300k a week whilst he decreases in value?

 

 

that’s the sort of stupid decision that ruins clubs.

 

 

They’ll end up paying some of his wages whilst he gets a shop window and they get a chance of recouping some money back.

 

 

we all know it will end up that way, it’s just it probably won’t be sanctioned until the last day or two of the transfer window after clubs have called their bluff.

 

on those terms, he’ll probably get bigger suitors than us in for him...

Edited 23 January 2021 by MPH

[Guest Danny Clender]

10 hours ago, Jimbo said:

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 

Exactly.

Of course it would help us as a club and we'll find out at the end of the season if we qualify or not.

We can see clearly how it affects teams around us that don't regularly qualify for CL, they are still in business and competing. 

 

The club are excellent at setting out clear expectations year on year, surely we've met every one so far.

Therefore, I follow the clubs vision and enjoy our current process rather than listening to fans who spend expectation from an emotional overdraft. 

 

[Deeg67]

I think bombing out of the CL two years running would be a pretty big disaster, personally.  It's a huge deal financially, first and foremost.  But also critical in a more general sense for a club trying to establish an identity as a serious player.

[Wizerud]

It's not worth a 300k/week gamble hoping that he's the same player he was two years ago. It would be different otherwise because at his best he is far better than a backup to Maddison or Tielemans and we're not spending 300k/week on a backup.

[Deeg67]

No one is spending 300k/week on Eriksen.  Inter will eat part of it in the end.

[Strokes]

If there was £5m loan fee, I doubt anyone would get there knickers in a twist over it.

[shailen]

This will be a Bale esque signing for whoever goes for him. Expensive, past it now and will take a long time for his confidence to return for him to play like he was at Spurs a few years back. A short term loan would not help us and who's place on the team will he take?