Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

Confirmed Signing James Tarkowski

Status
Not open for further replies.
roy vernon said:
According to the Athletic it's a 4 year deal forTarkowski, if so, we have learned nothing. 3 years should have been the absolute maximum offered and 2 years would have been ideal.
Click to expand...
He's out of contract so holds the cards. It's probably a 3 year plus 1 year extension if certain criteria are met.
 
hallamblue said:
He's out of contract so holds the cards. It's probably a 3 year plus 1 year extension if certain criteria are met.
Click to expand...
If it's 3 years with a club option of a year extension, it is just about acceptable, if however, it is, as the Athletic are reporting, a 4 year contract, the we will most likely be paying him 100k per week as a spectator for the final year to 18 months of the contract. He's no great shakes, in my opinion, but, he may well give us the bit of aggression we lack in central defence, but, on a 4 year deal, let him go elsewhere.
 
allen said:
33 for a centre back is okay. I think 4 years is probably fine.
Click to expand...
Can't agree mate, we've been offering contracts on too much money, for too long a duration for such a long time, we are finally saying goodbye to some of our perennial under achievers this summer, our next move, a massive contract for a bang average centre back who will be 30 early in the season, and the icing on the cake, we are offering him 4 years, I sincerely hope it is just newspaper talk.
 

roy vernon said:
If it's 3 years with a club option of a year extension, it is just about acceptable, if however, it is, as the Athletic are reporting, a 4 year contract, the we will most likely be paying him 100k per week as a spectator for the final year to 18 months of the contract. He's no great shakes, in my opinion, but, he may well give us the bit of aggression we lack in central defence, but, on a 4 year deal, let him go elsewhere.
Click to expand...
It depends on injuries etc. Thiago Silva is still top quality at 37. 33 is definitely the back end of most players careers now.
 
roy vernon said:
If it's 3 years with a club option of a year extension, it is just about acceptable, if however, it is, as the Athletic are reporting, a 4 year contract, the we will most likely be paying him 100k per week as a spectator for the final year to 18 months of the contract. He's no great shakes, in my opinion, but, he may well give us the bit of aggression we lack in central defence, but, on a 4 year deal, let him go elsewhere.
Click to expand...
If its 4 years, and during the first 2 and a half years he is solid and dependable and is an important part of helping us get back up the table and pushing to the top half etc, then he has been worth it considering where we were last season.

It's unlikely at 2 and a half years, when he is 32, he suddenly becomes league 2 standard, he will still be able to do a job while we transition a younger player through (branthwaite etc).
 

roy vernon said:
Can't agree mate, we've been offering contracts on too much money, for too long a duration for such a long time, we are finally saying goodbye to some of our perennial under achievers this summer, our next move, a massive contract for a bang average centre back who will be 30 early in the season, and the icing on the cake, we are offering him 4 years, I sincerely hope it is just newspaper talk.
Click to expand...
I see your point, but this lad is free, which offsets his wages. Villa just spent 26M on a 29 year old CB with no Premier league experience. Time will tell who's got the better player, but its far less of a risk getting a proven Prem player for free than the route Villa have taken. They seem to be doing what we were doing 3 years ago at the moment.
 
PhilRegan said:
It's been a necessity for 5 years though thats what I mean. It's great just referencing the state now, but this isn't anything new unfortunately.
Click to expand...
We had the finances to indulge in squad building and buying younger players, but we blew it.

Stability for two years and the stadium are now our best route.

The changes at the academy will take time to come to fruition. The situation with the first team squad is perilous. Until we are a bit more secure and stable, more of the decisions will be for the immediate needs of the first team squad. Besides which, we have almost no wriggle room in the transfer market. We have to sell to buy. If there are good youngsters tha fit the bill, then fine, if we sell a player like Richarlison, we will need a proper PL ready replacement.
 
Marius57 said:
If its 4 years, and during the first 2 and a half years he is solid and dependable and is an important part of helping us get back up the table and pushing to the top half etc, then he has been worth it considering where we were last season.

It's unlikely at 2 and a half years, when he is 32, he suddenly becomes league 2 standard, he will still be able to do a job while we transition a younger player through (branthwaite etc).
Click to expand...
Thing is, he's not even a very good player now, he's not bad, but, no great shakes. I really worry that he will be Michael Keane mark 2.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top