Ross Barkley

[The Other Blues]

I know a few of you are saying that he's holding out to get the best deal possible, does that imply that you think Everton will break their current wage ceiling (I believe Distin is your top earner at 60k a week) when they give him a new deal? BTW if I were Kenwright it goes without saying that i'd be using the windfall of the PL TV deal to offer Ross and his agents whatever kind of wages they want. It's tough though when you see United paying Shaw 150k a week.

 

[roydo]

I know a few of you are saying that he's holding out to get the best deal possible, does that imply that you think Everton will break their current wage ceiling (I believe Distin is your top earner at 60k a week) when they give him a new deal? BTW if I were Kenwright it goes without saying that i'd be using the windfall of the PL TV deal to offer Ross and his agents whatever kind of wages they want. It's tough though when you see United paying Shaw 150k a week.

Ge wizz. They really paying that to Shaw?

 

[sageyefc]

I know a few of you are saying that he's holding out to get the best deal possible, does that imply that you think Everton will break their current wage ceiling (I believe Distin is your top earner at 60k a week) when they give him a new deal? BTW if I were Kenwright it goes without saying that i'd be using the windfall of the PL TV deal to offer Ross and his agents whatever kind of wages they want. It's tough though when you see United paying Shaw 150k a week.

Baines is our highest earner on around 80k, with the new tv money and the fact are wage bill is down about 30%, wages wouldnt be an issue unless he is asking something stupid like 120 k week

 

[The Other Blues]

Ge wizz. They really paying that to Shaw?

Yeah. You have to think City and Chelsea both walked away from the figures being bandied about for Shaw. He's a good player but he isn't Ross and he certainly isn't worth 150k a week.

 

[marty mcfly]

The hope is that because he is blue, and grew up blue, he is willing to forgo the quick pay day for a few years and try and achieve with his boyhood club at a discount. If he's willing to do that, then we should not sell for any amount of money...and I think I mean any amount - the club should show loyalty to players that show loyalty.

But that's the problem. Would you stay at a job when another one would offer you 2 to 3 times the same amount of money and as for loyalty. Do you not think he's seen a load of his friends in the junior teams not make it and then how much loyalty does the club show them?

I'm sure Ross would stay for less money but it's a matter of how much less. We're in a situation where we can't offer him 100K as that would upset everyone else at the club and he can't accept 50K when he's being offered 150K. Hopefully everyone will be happy if we split the difference.

I thought last year Martinez should have extended his contract before the start of the season. He should have offered him the money he's now offering him now because then he would have taken it. Having such a bright prospect on such a short deal was insane. Look at Arsenal or recently Porto with Gauld, they have them on 5 or 6 year deals. Allowing it to drop to 2 years puts us in a very weak position, not with teams looking to buy but with the players themselves or more so their agents.

 

[Chang Elephant]

Was just curious as to how Evertonians saw the fact no deal had been signed yet when other important players like Coleman had put pen to paper.

Seeing as no-one's answering this point I'll have a go mate:

frankly filling my kecks at the facts that no upgrade contract has been signed, that there are no rumours currently of talks on a new contract, and that public statements about new contracts in March dried up and the local press are totally silent on the subject.

We have a cancer at the top of our club and it's name is stupidity/greed/Kenwright.

 

[Toffeeman1878]

The reason he's not signed is probably because he was at the world cup and then went on holiday

 

[Matthew Martinez]

I know a few of you are saying that he's holding out to get the best deal possible, does that imply that you think Everton will break their current wage ceiling (I believe Distin is your top earner at 60k a week) when they give him a new deal? BTW if I were Kenwright it goes without saying that i'd be using the windfall of the PL TV deal to offer Ross and his agents whatever kind of wages they want. It's tough though when you see United paying Shaw 150k a week.

I'm not certain but I think baines is on 75k pw, also to answer you question yes. Everton would (or should) break the wage ceiling for Barkley. If there was ever anyone that deserves that kind of special treatment it's him. Homegrown supporters with world class potential don't come along to often. The lad is exceptional and should be treated as such.

 

[marty mcfly]

http://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/fo...oss-Barkley-and-John-Stones-are-going-nowhere

This might also be a big reason why he hasn't signed.

Kenwright is refusing to put any buy-out clause in any of their contracts.

 

[The Other Blues]

Baines is our highest earner on around 80k, with the new tv money and the fact are wage bill is down about 30%, wages wouldnt be an issue unless he is asking something stupid like 120 k week

Mate you have to pay him that ( probably a bit more ). He's worth that and Everton as a club have no reason to not pay him that kind of money. Especially if they're talking about inserting a ridiculous minimum fee clause in his contract too.

I actually had this conversation with a friend of mine about another player recently. The biggest problem is that the disparity between what players at non CL clubs earn in comparison to what clubs like City, Chelsea, and United pay is simply too big for it to not effect a player's thinking. For example, lets say Everton offer Ross 80k a week, and City come along offering 160k a week plus a raft of bonuses based on success which could push it as high as 200k a week. How do Barkley, his agents, his family, say no to that. Over a 5 year deal you're talking about him losing out on nearly 15 million pounds if not more. Plus he's staying at non CL club whilst lets be real for a minute, he's good enough and should be playing in the CL.

 

[roydo]

Mate you have to pay him that ( probably a bit more ). He's worth that and Everton as a club have no reason to not pay him that kind of money. Especially if they're talking about inserting a ridiculous minimum fee clause in his contract too.

I actually had this conversation with a friend of mine about another player recently. The biggest problem is that the disparity between what players at non CL clubs earn in comparison to what clubs like City, Chelsea, and United pay is simply too big for it to not effect a player's thinking. For example, lets say Everton offer Ross 80k a week, and City come along offering 160k a week plus a raft of bonuses based on success which could push it as high as 200k a week. How do Barkley, his agents, his family, say no to that. Over a 5 year deal you're talking about him losing out on nearly 15 million pounds if not more. Plus he's staying at non CL club whilst lets be real for a minute, he's good enough and should be playing in the CL.

I kind of hope your owners go bust reading that. Same for Abranovitz.

Nothing personal, but its is all what is wrong with footie.

 

[The Other Blues]

I kind of hope your owners go bust reading that. Same for Abranovitz.

Nothing personal, but its is all what is wrong with footie.

No offence but I really find comments like that pretty immature. It's no different than when you took Coleman from Sligo. It's the reality of football at all levels. As I said earlier, I really hope Kenwright finds a buyer with lots of money for Everton because you are a group of supporters who deserve the kind of revolution we've seen at City. I know for a fact that back when we were selling SWP to pay the bills and to ensure that the club didn't go into administration that I'd have bitten off the hand of anyone who offered to help us keep our best players and compete by signing other top players to compliment them. Your youth academy is excellent. I'm sure secretly you'd much rather be in the position City are in so that selling Barkley wasn't even a conversation which needed to be had.

As for our owners going bust. Good luck with that. I think we're pretty lucky to have owners who ensure City still have the cheapest ST in the PL, who are investing billions not just in the club, but in the surrounding areas to help stimulate the local economy, and who have since the day they came in kept good to every promise they have made us as supporters. As I say you deserve something similar.

 

[marty mcfly]

I kind of hope your owners go bust reading that. Same for Abranovitz.

Nothing personal, but its is all what is wrong with footie.

No it's not football's fault. It's ours for not giving him a longer contract in the first place.

If he was offered 30K for a 5 year deal instead of 15K for a 4 year deal then he would have 3 years on his deal now and that 75K we're offering would look pretty good as he knows we would have no reason to sell for at least a year, probably 2.

However we didn't put him on a long enough contract. Why do you think Gauld is on a 6 year deal will a buyout of 60m because Porto know they won't be able to extend his deal again so they have to think in 2-3 years time. He's too good for them and unfortunately Ross is too good for us.

 

[marty mcfly]

As for our owners going bust. Good luck with that. I think we're pretty lucky to have owners who ensure City still have the cheapest ST in the PL, who are investing billions not just in the club, but in the surrounding areas to help stimulate the local economy, and who have since the day they came in kept good to every promise they have made us as supporters. As I say you deserve something similar.

The only reason the seats are cheap is to attract fans who would normally go to Utd, at the moment City is investing for the future however eventually they'll raise the ticket prices etc.

The reason why it's wrong for City and Chelsea to be able to spend like they're doing is because the big clubs of football made the Champions League the commercial product that it is today not them.

It's cheaper to buy a small team and then invest the money in them rather than buy one of the big names. Personally I think FFP is a very good thing.

 

[The Other Blues]

The only reason the seats are cheap is to attract fans who would normally go to Utd, at the moment City is investing for the future however eventually they'll raise the ticket prices etc.

The reason why it's wrong for City and Chelsea to be able to spend like they're doing is because the big clubs of football made the Champions League the commercial product that it is today not them.

It's cheaper to buy a small team and then invest the money in them rather than buy one of the big names. Personally I think FFP is a very good thing.

I'm not going to have an argument with you as it's an Everton forum but I think your wildly misguided about our owners and what their motives are.

And as an Everton supporter for you to say you think FFP is a good thing shows how misinformed you are about FFP. They're pulling up the drawbridge but City and Chelsea are already on the inside. All it does is make it more difficult for the next rich owner to come along and invest in a club like Everton.