Tuna Posted 30 August Posted 30 August 57 minutes ago, kingpowerout said: Wilder deffo has posters of both Hamza and Souttar on his bedroom wall. Obsessed! Managed him and rates him, nothing strange about that. 3
Brizzle Fox Posted 30 August Posted 30 August 11 minutes ago, Tuna said: Managed him and rates him, nothing strange about that. Well I'd say it's pretty strange that anyone rates Hamza... 2
coolhandfox Posted 30 August Posted 30 August 1 minute ago, Brizzle Fox said: Well I'd say it's pretty strange that anyone rates Hamza... Played well on loan there.
Brizzle Fox Posted 30 August Posted 30 August Just now, coolhandfox said: Played well on loan there. Did he? Bloody hell that is a shocker. Anyway as long as it helps us get rid of him then fair play.
Bluearmyfox28 Posted 30 August Posted 30 August Can anyone explain to me why with the new financial rules, wages appear more important than book values and profit margins. I’ve seen a couple of people allude to it but can’t fully get my head around it.
coolhandfox Posted 30 August Posted 30 August 6 minutes ago, Brizzle Fox said: Did he? Bloody hell that is a shocker. Anyway as long as it helps us get rid of him then fair play. Well liked by the Sheff U fans and the transfer will be well received. 2
Jon the Hat Posted 30 August Posted 30 August 11 minutes ago, Bluearmyfox28 said: Can anyone explain to me why with the new financial rules, wages appear more important than book values and profit margins. I’ve seen a couple of people allude to it but can’t fully get my head around it. We are only allowed to spend I think 85% of revenue on wages in league 1. Different system.
coolhandfox Posted 30 August Posted 30 August (edited) 16 minutes ago, Bluearmyfox28 said: Can anyone explain to me why with the new financial rules, wages appear more important than book values and profit margins. I’ve seen a couple of people allude to it but can’t fully get my head around it. Pretty simple system you can only spend 50% of your income on wages, as a relegated club we are allow 65%. Both the PL and Championship are changing to similar systems it allows for more real time monitoring. Edited 30 August by coolhandfox
Bluearmyfox28 Posted 30 August Posted 30 August 9 minutes ago, coolhandfox said: Pretty simple system you can only spend 50% of your income on wages, as a relegated club we are allow 65%. Both the PL and Championship are changing to similar systems it allows for more real time monitoring. Interesting. So again, hugely favours the big clubs which for now benefits us. Be interesting to see how many clubs just find the loophole of offering huge signing on bonuses in return of lesser weekly wages.
StevieH Posted 30 August Posted 30 August Hamza was just a spoiler player. Nothing creative about his play. From what I've seen so far Page and Braybrooke miles better. Get him gone and off our books. 2
coolhandfox Posted 30 August Posted 30 August 2 minutes ago, Bluearmyfox28 said: Interesting. So again, hugely favours the big clubs which for now benefits us. Be interesting to see how many clubs just find the loophole of offering huge signing on bonuses in return of lesser weekly wages. No they would be included in calculations. Simpler, real-time reporting, aligned with UEFA model. Remove the 3 year cycle trap as it annual.
Bluearmyfox28 Posted 30 August Posted 30 August (edited) 8 minutes ago, coolhandfox said: No they would be included in calculations. Simpler, real-time reporting, aligned with UEFA model. Remove the 3 year cycle trap as it annual. That’s much better in all fairness. I’ve always found financial rules a difficult conversation to make them fair for all without introducing a similar system to a salary cap like in the NFL. Revenue is always going to be a huge factor in any financial rules which no one other than the top 6 can compete with. It also makes sense why the PFA had an issue with the new rules as it’ll force clubs to be more careful with the wages they’re offering. Edited 30 August by Bluearmyfox28
Ric Flair Posted 30 August Posted 30 August 5 minutes ago, stu said: Surely it's not a bastard free transfer then is it 1
coolhandfox Posted 30 August Posted 30 August (edited) 40 minutes ago, Ric Flair said: Surely it's not a bastard free transfer then is it That's my take, says bid. I heard rumours of 2m for the Derby move. Edited 30 August by coolhandfox 1
st albans fox Posted 30 August Posted 30 August (edited) 43 minutes ago, Ric Flair said: Surely it's not a bastard free transfer then is it Only a year left on his contract we can either get a million quid and pay the difference between what they’ve offered him and what we’re contracted to (which isn’t going to be very different) or let him go on a free and they cover his high wage this season also think that if we ask for a fee then we have to pay a loyalty bonus. so wouldn’t surprise me if the easiest thing all around is to just let him go for nowt on the basis that we don’t have to pay him another penny. there’s no way that he’s worth £2m into his final year - that’s rubbish unless we have to cover a lot of outgoings out of that money. Edited 30 August by st albans fox 2
coolhandfox Posted 30 August Posted 30 August 5 minutes ago, st albans fox said: Only a year left on his contract we can either get a million quid and pay the difference between what they’ve offered him and what we’re contracted to (which isn’t going to be very different) or let him go on a free and they cover his high wage this season also think that if we ask for a fee then we have to pay a loyalty bonus. so wouldn’t surprise me if the easiest thing all around is to just let him go for nowt on the basis that we don’t have to pay him another penny. there’s no way that he’s worth £2m into his final year - that’s rubbish unless we have to cover a lot of outgoings out of that money. I think whatever it is the move is best for both parties, whatever the deal. Just getting he's wages of the books is a good thing. 1
Ric Flair Posted 30 August Posted 30 August 8 minutes ago, st albans fox said: Only a year left on his contract we can either get a million quid and pay the difference between what they’ve offered him and what we’re contracted to (which isn’t going to be very different) or let him go on a free and they cover his high wage this season also think that if we ask for a fee then we have to pay a loyalty bonus. so wouldn’t surprise me if the easiest thing all around is to just let him go for nowt on the basis that we don’t have to pay him another penny. there’s no way that he’s worth £2m into his final year - that’s rubbish unless we have to cover a lot of outgoings out of that money. His wage reduction in league one is surely not more than what they'd offer him. 1
foxgas Posted 30 August Posted 30 August I think Derby wanted us to pay them for taking him off our hands whereas Blades are probably paying his wages for the remainder of his contract.
st albans fox Posted 30 August Posted 30 August 7 minutes ago, Ric Flair said: His wage reduction in league one is surely not more than what they'd offer him. It’s open to abuse isn’t it they can say they can’t pay more than 15k/week he’s probably on 35k here
Muzzy_no7 Posted 30 August Posted 30 August Who on earth would pay a fee for this prat while matching his current earnings and bonuses?! Free transfer getting him off the books without a pay off is a cracking deal.
dmayne7 Posted 30 August Posted 30 August 1 hour ago, foxgas said: I think Derby wanted us to pay them for taking him off our hands whereas Blades are probably paying his wages for the remainder of his contract. Find that entirely implausible. Even if it was sensible (good argument to say it is), there's no way we'd be paying another club to take a player we're using. We turn down money for players we struggle to get rid off so no chance with board 1
Recommended Posts