|
|
Post by sufolkstokie on Aug 1, 2014 6:36:49 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Aug 1, 2014 6:53:57 GMT
Just posted the same link - but you beat me to it so I have deleted it.
I'll be interested to see how this pans out. Personally, I would not want to let Geoff go until we have seen how he performs in the holding midfield role - which is where he played in the last of his World Cup games for the USA. Hopefully, he will be fit enough to play some part in the Blackburn game in that position.
|
|
|
|
Post by Billybigbollox on Aug 1, 2014 6:56:44 GMT
I don't mind GC, but didn't realise he was 29. He is likely to be a squad player this season, so I could understand it if he moved on.
I'm not saying I want him to go, but could see why he may want to. It may be the last chance for the club to get any money for him too.
|
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Aug 1, 2014 7:06:23 GMT
I'd rather we kept him and got rid of Wilko and Shotton. Still think he has a job too do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 7:07:51 GMT
Could be the bit of pain that was rumoured...hope not as I would rather see the chaff leave first.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 7:10:00 GMT
Somebody has got to be moved on (which means someone has to want them before we get the shift palacios etc) if we want to comply with the Premier League FFP. We can only increase the wage bill by approx £2.4 million which is about 46K a week. I would imagine we are well above that with the signings we have made so far this summer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Claus_SCFC on Aug 1, 2014 7:15:04 GMT
Somebody has got to be moved on (which means someone has to want them before we get the shift palacios etc) if we want to comply with the Premier League FFP. We can only increase the wage bill by approx £2.4 million which is about 46K a week. I would imagine we are well above that with the signings we have made so far this summer. We ought to be able to sell Jerome and Shotton to someone, and we could pay off Palacios and Ness so that their wages were out of the equation. Butland will probably go out on loan. Any takers for Shea? |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 7:17:59 GMT
Got to agree Bardsley for Cameron would not really be progress there must be others we can shitff first even if we given them a helping hand out of the Door to shift their wages Cameron is part of the squad solution not part of the problem as witnessed by the fact he started last year ahead of so many .
BB
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 7:19:39 GMT
Somebody has got to be moved on (which means someone has to want them before we get the shift palacios etc) if we want to comply with the Premier League FFP. We can only increase the wage bill by approx £2.4 million which is about 46K a week. I would imagine we are well above that with the signings we have made so far this summer. We ought to be able to sell Jerome and Shotton to someone, and we could pay off Palacios and Ness so that their wages were out of the equation. Butland will probably go out on loan. Any takers for Shea? Paying off someone means we have paid there contract up, ie wages so your Palacios and Ness solution is out of the question as far as meeting the FFP regulations. |
|
|
|
Post by Danstoke82 on Aug 1, 2014 7:19:52 GMT
This is a tough one as Id rather we kept hold off Geoff, however, Im struggling to see where he will play right now.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Aug 1, 2014 7:20:55 GMT
Somebody has got to be moved on (which means someone has to want them before we get the shift palacios etc) if we want to comply with the Premier League FFP. We can only increase the wage bill by approx £2.4 million which is about 46K a week. I would imagine we are well above that with the signings we have made so far this summer. We ought to be able to sell Jerome and Shotton to someone, and we could pay off Palacios and Ness so that their wages were out of the equation. Butland will probably go out on loan. Any takers for Shea? Paying up a player's contract does not take their wages out of the equation as far as the Financial fair Play rules are concerned. The pay off counts as wages so it is included in the cap. In the same way, paying a player a signing on fee also counts towards the wage bill as the singing on fee counts as wages for both tax purposes and the Financial Fair Play rules. It may, of course make sense, for various reasons, to pay up the contracts of departing players and to pay signing on fees to incoming players, but neither operation helps get round the Financial Fair Play rules. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 7:21:32 GMT
Sheer stupidity to get rid of him IMO.
|
|
|
|
Post by Claus_SCFC on Aug 1, 2014 7:24:10 GMT
We ought to be able to sell Jerome and Shotton to someone, and we could pay off Palacios and Ness so that their wages were out of the equation. Butland will probably go out on loan. Any takers for Shea? Paying off someone means we have paid there contract up, ie wages so your Palacios and Ness solution is out of the question as far as meeting the FFP regulations. Maybe Denise could find a way to book the pay-off via a bet365 betting slip  |
|
|
|
Post by elsidibe on Aug 1, 2014 7:24:43 GMT
Geoff's handy to have as a utility player and, if he puts together one of those purple patches he had during part of last season then he might get some starts at RB. Maybe he wants guaranteed First XI though, in which case it would appear he will have to move on.
A shame from Stoke's point of view as there are players on far more money being far less useful.
|
|
|
|
Post by stokiejoe on Aug 1, 2014 7:30:03 GMT
I seem to fall into the sheer stupidity category as defined by Onlooker . We have Bardsley who is probably our preferred right back, Wilson is more adaptable than Cameron and covers the same or more positions, so I would let him go for the right offer. Can't see him being a regular starter or pushing out Whelan, Sidwell or Wilson. If we are to experiment with a midfield stopper, let's try Muni.
|
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Aug 1, 2014 7:32:17 GMT
Somebody has got to be moved on (which means someone has to want them before we get the shift palacios etc) if we want to comply with the Premier League FFP. We can only increase the wage bill by approx £2.4 million which is about 46K a week. I would imagine we are well above that with the signings we have made so far this summer. Tell that to QPR  I think your right but we do have players who are on far more who I'm pretty sure we could offload. Crouch or Walters for one. Let's not forget that we have lost a few off the wage bill too Kightly, Ethers, Pennant, Gudietti, Assaidi, Mo. I do think well lose others too. Yes we're stuck with Palacios but I think well lose Jerome, Shotton, Ness(loan), Shea(loan) and maybe Adam. Im hoping that if we do lose GCam MH looks at Wilson as backup as for me he offers more than Wilko and Shotton at RB. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 7:32:45 GMT
Maybe he's getting frustrated at being put out right and is insisting on a central roll
I like Geoff but, we have better options in the center
|
|
|
|
Post by foster on Aug 1, 2014 7:35:55 GMT
We ought to be able to sell Jerome and Shotton to someone, and we could pay off Palacios and Ness so that their wages were out of the equation. Butland will probably go out on loan. Any takers for Shea? Paying up a player's contract does not take their wages out of the equation as far as the Financial fair Play rules are concerned. The pay off counts as wages so it is included in the cap. In the same way, paying a player a signing on fee also counts towards the wage bill as the singing on fee counts as wages for both tax purposes and the Financial Fair Play rules. It may, of course make sense, for various reasons, to pay up the contracts of departing players and to pay signing on fees to incoming players, but neither operation helps get round the Financial Fair Play rules. Don't FFP rules only effect clubs playing in European competition? Isn't it only a problem once you qualify for either the CL or EL? |
|
|
|
Post by alster on Aug 1, 2014 7:36:06 GMT
You would not be desparate to get him out but he's a saleable asset who has no obvious role. Plenty of RB cover with Bardsley Wilson Muniesa Wilko Shotts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Aug 1, 2014 7:43:18 GMT
Paying up a player's contract does not take their wages out of the equation as far as the Financial fair Play rules are concerned. The pay off counts as wages so it is included in the cap. In the same way, paying a player a signing on fee also counts towards the wage bill as the singing on fee counts as wages for both tax purposes and the Financial Fair Play rules. It may, of course make sense, for various reasons, to pay up the contracts of departing players and to pay signing on fees to incoming players, but neither operation helps get round the Financial Fair Play rules. Don't FFP rules only effect clubs playing in European competition? Isn't it only a problem once you qualify for either the CL or EL? There are two sets of FFP rules - the UEFA rules and the Premier League rules. The UEFA rules affect European competitions. The Premier League rules were brought in when the last TV deal was signed to prevent all the increased money going out in wages. |
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Aug 1, 2014 7:44:36 GMT
I'd much prefer to keep him as he's a very valuable player to have around. But his route to games is boxed off at every turn.
Personally, I'm not convinced Bardsley is an upgrade on him - but, at 29, it's unfair to keep him as a squad man if there are plenty of decent clubs after him as a potential starter.
|
|
|
|
Post by foster on Aug 1, 2014 7:46:21 GMT
Don't FFP rules only effect clubs playing in European competition? Isn't it only a problem once you qualify for either the CL or EL? There are two sets of FFP rules - the UEFA rules and the Premier League rules. The UEFA rules affect European competitions. The Premier League rules were brought in when the last TV deal was signed to prevent all the increased money going out in wages. Okay. Is there any indication that we're even close to breaking these PL rules? Aside from assumptions on player salaries, agent fees, golden handshakes, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by Lakeland Potter on Aug 1, 2014 7:53:48 GMT
There are two sets of FFP rules - the UEFA rules and the Premier League rules. The UEFA rules affect European competitions. The Premier League rules were brought in when the last TV deal was signed to prevent all the increased money going out in wages. Okay. Is there any indication that we're even close to breaking these PL rules? Aside from assumptions on player salaries, agent fees, golden handshakes, etc. If we don't get rid of several players and their wages (including at least one big earner) then, at the moment, we will be way over the salary limit by the time the season is a few weeks old. Last season our total wage bill was allowed to rise by about 4 or 5 £million. I'm not sure what the figure is this season but I suspect it is similar and, if you look at Diouf and Bojan I expect they'll be right at the top of our wage structure. The fact is that, currently, our squad is bigger than last season and there are at least two top earners who have come in with only Jones of the top earners going out - and the loss of his wages is partially compensated for by the arrival of Wingie and his wages. If I had to take a guess I'd say we need to lose at least £4 million from the wage bill as things stand at the moment. |
|
|
|
Post by nik80 on Aug 1, 2014 7:59:11 GMT
It's gonna be a real struggle to keep everyone happy this season. Like the rest of the side from last season, Geoff Cameron didn't do anything really to warrant being dropped, it'd be great to keep hold of him.
|
|
|
|
Post by robwahlmann on Aug 1, 2014 8:06:06 GMT
Could he do the Whelan job? If we get £7-8M sell, but he still could be very useful to us I think! Do I want us to get rid?  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 8:09:00 GMT
Okay. Is there any indication that we're even close to breaking these PL rules? Aside from assumptions on player salaries, agent fees, golden handshakes, etc. If we don't get rid of several players and their wages (including at least one big earner) then, at the moment, we will be way over the salary limit by the time the season is a few weeks old. Last season our total wage bill was allowed to rise by about 4 or 5 £million. I'm not sure what the figure is this season but I suspect it is similar and, if you look at Diouf and Bojan I expect they'll be right at the top of our wage structure. The fact is that, currently, our squad is bigger than last season and there are at least two top earners who have come in with only Jones of the top earners going out - and the loss of his wages is partially compensated for by the arrival of Wingie and his wages. If I had to take a guess I'd say we need to lose at least £4 million from the wage bill as things stand at the moment. Excuse my 100% ignorance on this, but you seem the man to ask this kind of question. You're talking of our clubs big earners and wage bill and it's compliance with the Premier League rules and such like. Is it a blanket rule and set amount for every club in the league? As i'd assume it should be, therefore don't clubs like Man City, Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool & Spurs have players on much, much higher wages than ourselves? Meaning that they'd have to sell a few players to comply? Sorry if that's a daft question but i can't profess to know about all this FFP malarky. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2014 8:14:25 GMT
I think Adam should be the make weight personally. I like him don't get me wrong but he'll be a high earner and I'm not convinced he'll get that much game time, especially away from home and if Ireland stays fit...
|
|
|
|
Post by cobhamstokey on Aug 1, 2014 8:18:52 GMT
I look on it like this in its simplest terms
New players - Diouf, Bojan, Bardsley, Tex, Sidwell.
Must keep unless silly offer comes in - Bego, Ryan, Muni, Eric, NZonzi, Arno, Odom, Ireland, Glen, Jack.
Try to keep but if decent offer comes in not a disaster if they leave as we have good cover - Adam, Huth, Wilson, GCam, Crouch, Walters, Sorro.
Try to offload - Jerome, Ness, Shea, Palacios, Shotton, Wilko.
I think well be looking to shift/loan players from the bottom list and if we can't 1/2 from the 3rd.
|
|
|
|
Post by santy on Aug 1, 2014 8:19:28 GMT
If we don't get rid of several players and their wages (including at least one big earner) then, at the moment, we will be way over the salary limit by the time the season is a few weeks old. Last season our total wage bill was allowed to rise by about 4 or 5 £million. I'm not sure what the figure is this season but I suspect it is similar and, if you look at Diouf and Bojan I expect they'll be right at the top of our wage structure. The fact is that, currently, our squad is bigger than last season and there are at least two top earners who have come in with only Jones of the top earners going out - and the loss of his wages is partially compensated for by the arrival of Wingie and his wages. If I had to take a guess I'd say we need to lose at least £4 million from the wage bill as things stand at the moment. Excuse my 100% ignorance on this, but you seem the man to ask this kind of question. You're talking of our clubs big earners and wage bill and it's compliance with the Premier League rules and such like. Is it a blanket rule and set amount for every club in the league? As i'd assume it should be, therefore don't clubs like Man City, Man Utd, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool & Spurs have players on much, much higher wages than ourselves? Meaning that they'd have to sell a few players to comply? Sorry if that's a daft question but i can't profess to know about all this FFP malarky. If you made a profit the previous year then you can use whatever profits + the £4m annual increase. Any team that makes a loss can only increase their wage bill by £4m. The premier league were initially threatening harsher sanctions for breaking their FFP rules than UEFA were (points deductions, fines and possibly even having a say over future transfers) so I can understand why clubs like Stoke want to be extremely careful. The bigger clubs will get away with it, look at PSG and Man City on the UEFA front. A mid-table Premiership side would be the perfect target for the Premier League to show its being seen to act 'responsibly'. |
|
|
|
Post by lordb on Aug 1, 2014 8:19:33 GMT
I think Adam should be the make weight personally. I like him don't get me wrong but he'll be a high earner and I'm not convinced he'll get that much game time, especially away from home and if Ireland stays fit... If Ireland stays fit. That's my issue with him,he strikes me as being a bit flaky. Ideally we keep Ireland and Adam As for Geoff,great player to have but his stock his as high now as it's going to be. Either extend his contract or sell him now. |
|
