Let's say Teixeira is exactly what we need and he shores up our defence like Johnson did last season and we stay up as a result. And let's say that the only way Jorge was willing to relocate to England to sign for a team in the relegation zone was if he had his long term future secured.
Would that be so crazy a decision? I don't think so.
Let's say Teixeira is exactly what we need and he shores up our defence like Johnson did last season and we stay up as a result. And let's say that the only way Jorge was willing to relocate to England to sign for a team in the relegation zone was if he had his long term future secured.
Would that be so crazy a decision? I don't think so.
No it wouldn't, and if Polish Pete, Reza, Lepointe, Nego, Ajdarevic or Thuram-Ulien had turned out to be world beaters that wouldn't have been bad business either. But they were woeful for the most part. Why would you expect this to be any different?
Is there no proven centre half in England that would sign for two years for a reasonable fee? Do you think that our still rudderless scouting operation has been exploring that option? Or is the ONLY man who fits the bill someone who just happens to come from a club the CEO and Chairman are very familiar with?
Like I said, I hope he is just the player we need, but in two years I have not seen one jot of evidence to give me confidence that that will be the case.
Let's say Teixeira is exactly what we need and he shores up our defence like Johnson did last season and we stay up as a result. And let's say that the only way Jorge was willing to relocate to England to sign for a team in the relegation zone was if he had his long term future secured.
Would that be so crazy a decision? I don't think so.
No it wouldn't, and if Polish Pete, Reza, Lepointe, Nego, Ajdarevic or Thuram-Ulien had turned out to be world beaters that wouldn't have been bad business either. But they were woeful for the most part. Why would you expect this to be any different?
Is there no proven centre half in England that would sign for two years for a reasonable fee? Do you think that our still rudderless scouting operation has been exploring that option? Or is the ONLY man who fits the bill someone who just happens to come from a club the CEO and Chairman are very familiar with?
Like I said, I hope he is just the player we need, but in two years I have not seen one jot of evidence to give me confidence that that will be the case.
You're right for the most part but up until now we've had to make do with players thrown at us by people that have probably never even set foot inside The Valley. It seems this could be our first signing hand picked by a manager under the Duchatelet regime. I'm hoping for better.
It's worth pointing out that lots and lots of managers take players from clubs they've worked at previously. If Riga did pick Teixeira himself, then I'm glad he has gone for someone he has worked with before rather than someone he thinks might be good but hasn't actually had any close experience with.
We've been let down again and again by foreign signings since Duchatelet took over so I can see why people are apprehensive, but I think it's different this time. Obviously we have no idea how he will adapt to the Championship, and that remains to be seen, but on the face of it, I'm happier about this signing than many of our others.
Be nice if they could get the Tex..... Stories consistent. One says 3.5 year contract and the other 4.5 years...which is it @Ollywozere ?
Unfortunately, we were given the wrong info. We were only told it was 4.5 after publishing. Should all be in line now.
4.5 years for an unproven (in this league) 29-year-old is thoroughly absurd, no matter how highly Riga rates him.
Almost every step they take seems to be twisted and interpreted as them destroying the club.
Fixed that for you.
He's respected and highly rated at Liege. We've been shipping goals at a ridiculous rate lately so have moved to stop it.
Four and a half years? Really? They wouldn't give Yann two years, but this guy gets four and a half. C'mon Swisdom, get real mate.
Yann was 32 Jorge is 29, so 4.5 years is 1.5 years after his 32nd birthday. Defenders tend to mature and peak later than strikers, and usually retire later.
Correct in age, but the risk of decline is also greater over four and a half years than two and a half and Yann had proven he coud play at this level, whereas Jorge hasn't.
I suspect the contract length is to secure an overall value, e.g. if the player wanted £1m Charlton weren't willing to pay more than £250k a year.
Also if we assume that he will not be able to secure as lucrative a deal at 32 there is a tax advantage in spreading the pay over four years rather than over two.
The thing about that is that it's likely to be paid up early, so not sure the tax advantage is real.
Let's say Teixeira is exactly what we need and he shores up our defence like Johnson did last season and we stay up as a result. And let's say that the only way Jorge was willing to relocate to England to sign for a team in the relegation zone was if he had his long term future secured.
Would that be so crazy a decision? I don't think so.
No it wouldn't, and if Polish Pete, Reza, Lepointe, Nego, Ajdarevic or Thuram-Ulien had turned out to be world beaters that wouldn't have been bad business either. But they were woeful for the most part. Why would you expect this to be any different?
Is there no proven centre half in England that would sign for two years for a reasonable fee? Do you think that our still rudderless scouting operation has been exploring that option? Or is the ONLY man who fits the bill someone who just happens to come from a club the CEO and Chairman are very familiar with?
Like I said, I hope he is just the player we need, but in two years I have not seen one jot of evidence to give me confidence that that will be the case.
You're right for the most part but up until now we've had to make do with players thrown at us by people that have probably never even set foot inside The Valley. It seems this could be our first signing hand picked by a manager under the Duchatelet regime. I'm hoping for better.
It's worth pointing out that lots and lots of managers take players from clubs they've worked at previously. If Riga did pick Teixeira himself, then I'm glad he has gone for someone he has worked with before rather than someone he thinks might be good but hasn't actually had any close experience with.
We've been let down again and again by foreign signings since Duchatelet took over so I can see why people are apprehensive, but I think it's different this time. Obviously we have no idea how he will adapt to the Championship, and that remains to be seen, but on the face of it, I'm happier about this signing than many of our others.
I am too. But the blind optimism of some others is baffling?
My rationale is that everyone signed under this regime now are shit until proven good. So sorry to prejudice our Tex, but 4.5 years is too long, purely based on Sarr, Mak, Ba etc
They have ruined the neutrality I would've given him
Be nice if they could get the Tex..... Stories consistent. One says 3.5 year contract and the other 4.5 years...which is it @Ollywozere ?
Unfortunately, we were given the wrong info. We were only told it was 4.5 after publishing. Should all be in line now.
4.5 years for an unproven (in this league) 29-year-old is thoroughly absurd, no matter how highly Riga rates him.
Almost every step they take seems to be twisted and interpreted as them destroying the club.
Fixed that for you.
He's respected and highly rated at Liege. We've been shipping goals at a ridiculous rate lately so have moved to stop it.
Four and a half years? Really? They wouldn't give Yann two years, but this guy gets four and a half. C'mon Swisdom, get real mate.
A short contract shows we have no ambition A long contract shows we are foolhardy.
The bottom line is a contract means very little. If he's turnip we'll get rid of him. If he is great we'll keep him for the duration of the contract.
I actually think he will become very popular (certainly with the ladies) and maybe even a bit of a cult hero. There - that's my cock on the block!
I don't think anyone would have batted an eyelid at a 2.5-year contract, to be honest. It's all very well saying we'll just get rid, but players don't simply agree to walk away from these deals, they expect to be paid a substantial part of what they have been promised in agreeing to leave, particularly if their residual earning potential is lower than the existing commitment.
More to the point we now have a whole list of these stupidly long contracts, including Polish Pete, which we can't get out of because in Meire's words "there is no market" for him.
It comes down to the fact that she's not up to doing these negotiations, IMO.
"It comes down to the fact that she's not up to doing these negotiations, IMO"
Airman - evidence is there that this is not just your opinion. There is a lot of fact to support this. The failures are a long list and successes very short. This is very expensive and RD must realise this and that her decisions are costing him large sums every year. Therefore I am convinced we will have a new CEO, either shortly or in the summer.
More to the point we now have a whole list of these stupidly long contracts, including Polish Pete, which we can't get out of because in Meire's words "there is no market" for him. It comes down to the fact that she's not up to doing these negotiations, IMO.
Spot on. She has shown repeatedly she is not up to it which RD cannot be overly happy about, not because of the football part of it but because of the impact on his bottom line.
Presumably, this was why she was in Belgium last weekend?
Be nice if they could get the Tex..... Stories consistent. One says 3.5 year contract and the other 4.5 years...which is it @Ollywozere ?
Unfortunately, we were given the wrong info. We were only told it was 4.5 after publishing. Should all be in line now.
4.5 years for an unproven (in this league) 29-year-old is thoroughly absurd, no matter how highly Riga rates him.
Almost every step they take seems to be twisted and interpreted as them destroying the club.
Fixed that for you.
He's respected and highly rated at Liege. We've been shipping goals at a ridiculous rate lately so have moved to stop it.
Four and a half years? Really? They wouldn't give Yann two years, but this guy gets four and a half. C'mon Swisdom, get real mate.
A short contract shows we have no ambition A long contract shows we are foolhardy.
The bottom line is a contract means very little. If he's turnip we'll get rid of him. If he is great we'll keep him for the duration of the contract.
I actually think he will become very popular (certainly with the ladies) and maybe even a bit of a cult hero. There - that's my cock on the block!
I don't think anyone would have batted an eyelid at a 2.5-year contract, to be honest. It's all very well saying we'll just get rid, but players don't simply agree to walk away from these deals, they expect to be paid a substantial part of what they have been promised in agreeing to leave, particularly if their residual earning potential is lower than the existing commitment.
More to the point we now have a whole list of these stupidly long contracts, including Polish Pete, which we can't get out of because in Meire's words "there is no market" for him.
It comes down to the fact that she's not up to doing these negotiations, IMO.
That's outrageous Murray said she was a fantastic negotiator and we all believe Murray
Disappointed, thought this was gonna be a cyber attack suggestion. Think someone may have floated the idea before. Obviously it's naughty & illegal but could you imagine if the official CAFC website/social media pages were hacked and were satirised into posting the truth a la the Charlton parody account on twitter? Would be impossible for them to ignore.
IIRC, the CAFC site is powered by another company who - the involvement of the comms team at Charlton is pretty much content-only.
Be nice if they could get the Tex..... Stories consistent. One says 3.5 year contract and the other 4.5 years...which is it @Ollywozere ?
Unfortunately, we were given the wrong info. We were only told it was 4.5 after publishing. Should all be in line now.
4.5 years for an unproven (in this league) 29-year-old is thoroughly absurd, no matter how highly Riga rates him.
Almost every step they take seems to be twisted and interpreted as them destroying the club.
Fixed that for you.
He's respected and highly rated at Liege. We've been shipping goals at a ridiculous rate lately so have moved to stop it.
Four and a half years? Really? They wouldn't give Yann two years, but this guy gets four and a half. C'mon Swisdom, get real mate.
A short contract shows we have no ambition A long contract shows we are foolhardy.
The bottom line is a contract means very little. If he's turnip we'll get rid of him. If he is great we'll keep him for the duration of the contract.
I actually think he will become very popular (certainly with the ladies) and maybe even a bit of a cult hero. There - that's my cock on the block!
I don't think anyone would have batted an eyelid at a 2.5-year contract, to be honest. It's all very well saying we'll just get rid, but players don't simply agree to walk away from these deals, they expect to be paid a substantial part of what they have been promised in agreeing to leave, particularly if their residual earning potential is lower than the existing commitment.
More to the point we now have a whole list of these stupidly long contracts, including Polish Pete, which we can't get out of because in Meire's words "there is no market" for him.
It comes down to the fact that she's not up to doing these negotiations, IMO.
That's outrageous Murray said she was a fantastic negotiator and we all believe Murray
Agent: "I want a minimum of 3 years on the contract." KM: "NO, we wont give you any less than 4.5."
Are there tax advantages for the club if contract is 4.5 years rather than 2.5 years?
Bearing in mind that KM has a legal background, perhaps this is the case?
Not sure if footballers' contact and resale values are depreciated in the same manner as conventional fixed assets. Would be interested to know.
I'm sure they amortise the fee over the term of the contract but I'm not sure that would be of any benefit to a club losing money each year, especially when the FFP allowances are way more than we are losing.
Well no matter how you amortise the cost you're still paying his wages the whole time.
He might be great but its a crazy gamble.
I do think KM is over her head and gets pushed around in these negotiations. I just cant imagine her being competent considering her lack of experience.
Well no matter how you amortise the cost you're still paying his wages the whole time.
He might be great but its a crazy gamble.
I do think KM is over her head and gets pushed around in these negotiations. I just cant imagine her being competent considering her lack of experience.
The problem is that with these ridiculous long term contracts it may well devalue the potential selling price if ever RD decides to become a rational human being again.....this may put potential suitors off.
Well no matter how you amortise the cost you're still paying his wages the whole time.
He might be great but its a crazy gamble.
I do think KM is over her head and gets pushed around in these negotiations. I just cant imagine her being competent considering her lack of experience.
I did say it didn't matter.
However, if the contract is longer the average cost per season is reduced. It offers no value if the player is not good enough, but it does, potentially, offer better value for money if the player can hold down a first team place for four season or be sold on before then.
I agree with you though in that the overriding factor here is probably that his agent saw Ms Miere coming and is probably still wriggling around on the floor in his own pi$$.
I thought someone said he was on this length contract at Standard Liege and so really to get him to move we had to offer the same?
Whether that's a good idea or not depends on whether he plays well but it's certainly not risk free is it?
Still if you run the club like an idiot, eventually you will have to pay the price.
I reckon I could have saved the club a good £5m over the past two years by:
A) not being a twat all of the time bothering to send a couple of fans over to games to watch players I was interested in and then listening to their views as to suitability in the Championship C) not selling players who are doing well for less than market value D) not bringing in players who haven't demostrated current championship form on long contracts (Naby Sarr, I'm thinking of you, and Johnson etc etc) E) not employing Meire in the first place and if I'd made such an error, rectifying it quickly. F) employing a manager who isn't an idiot, knows the league and has at least some say in transfer decisions and total say in team selection along with his (probably would be a man) choice of back room team G) employ decent doctor/Physio/nutritionist and look to integrate into training plans to ensure potential weaknesses are trained against H) not alienated the fans but instead talked to them from the start, maybe even given the supporters trust 15% of the shares and an elected representative on the Board I) 3 football for a fiver a year or reductions on home midweek games to £10
Comments
Would that be so crazy a decision? I don't think so.
Is there no proven centre half in England that would sign for two years for a reasonable fee? Do you think that our still rudderless scouting operation has been exploring that option? Or is the ONLY man who fits the bill someone who just happens to come from a club the CEO and Chairman are very familiar with?
Like I said, I hope he is just the player we need, but in two years I have not seen one jot of evidence to give me confidence that that will be the case.
It's worth pointing out that lots and lots of managers take players from clubs they've worked at previously. If Riga did pick Teixeira himself, then I'm glad he has gone for someone he has worked with before rather than someone he thinks might be good but hasn't actually had any close experience with.
We've been let down again and again by foreign signings since Duchatelet took over so I can see why people are apprehensive, but I think it's different this time. Obviously we have no idea how he will adapt to the Championship, and that remains to be seen, but on the face of it, I'm happier about this signing than many of our others.
They have ruined the neutrality I would've given him
A long contract shows we are foolhardy.
The bottom line is a contract means very little. If he's turnip we'll get rid of him. If he is great we'll keep him for the duration of the contract.
I actually think he will become very popular (certainly with the ladies) and maybe even a bit of a cult hero. There - that's my cock on the block!
More to the point we now have a whole list of these stupidly long contracts, including Polish Pete, which we can't get out of because in Meire's words "there is no market" for him.
It comes down to the fact that she's not up to doing these negotiations, IMO.
Airman - evidence is there that this is not just your opinion. There is a lot of fact to support this. The failures are a long list and successes very short. This is very expensive and RD must realise this and that her decisions are costing him large sums every year. Therefore I am convinced we will have a new CEO, either shortly or in the summer.
Presumably, this was why she was in Belgium last weekend?
KM: "NO, we wont give you any less than 4.5."
Bearing in mind that KM has a legal background, perhaps this is the case?
He might be great but its a crazy gamble.
I do think KM is over her head and gets pushed around in these negotiations. I just cant imagine her being competent considering her lack of experience.
However, if the contract is longer the average cost per season is reduced. It offers no value if the player is not good enough, but it does, potentially, offer better value for money if the player can hold down a first team place for four season or be sold on before then.
I agree with you though in that the overriding factor here is probably that his agent saw Ms Miere coming and is probably still wriggling around on the floor in his own pi$$.
Whether that's a good idea or not depends on whether he plays well but it's certainly not risk free is it?
Still if you run the club like an idiot, eventually you will have to pay the price.
I reckon I could have saved the club a good £5m over the past two years by:
A) not being a twat all of the time
C) not selling players who are doing well for less than market value
D) not bringing in players who haven't demostrated current championship form on long contracts (Naby Sarr, I'm thinking of you, and Johnson etc etc)
E) not employing Meire in the first place and if I'd made such an error, rectifying it quickly.
F) employing a manager who isn't an idiot, knows the league and has at least some say in transfer decisions and total say in team selection along with his (probably would be a man) choice of back room team
G) employ decent doctor/Physio/nutritionist and look to integrate into training plans to ensure potential weaknesses are trained against
H) not alienated the fans but instead talked to them from the start, maybe even given the supporters trust 15% of the shares and an elected representative on the Board
I) 3 football for a fiver a year or reductions on home midweek games to £10