|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 28, 2015 16:13:53 GMT
Possibly but a 2 year deal should be enough. See the two Glen's. In the vast majority of cases, true. In an ideal world I'd say Stoke's offer to Walters was fair and correct; but I'd also say that Walters isn't asking for anything unreasonable and we should probably match an offer made by Norwich, if the alternative is losing a player everyone wants to keep. Pound for pound I doubt there are many who give better value than Walters in our squad. His replacement, even if he's a squad filler, might cost us a whole lot more and give a whole lot less. I think though as a club you have stick to your guns. We've offered him the correct length of contract presumably and we have to stick to it.
|
|
|
Post by slother on Oct 28, 2015 16:49:13 GMT
What if in two years' time the club has progressed and someone next level like, I dunno, Benteke (for the sake of argument) were available? Only problem is we can't afford his wages because we've got a crocked Jon Walters sitting there collecting £50k a week even though he's lost his energy around the pitch.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 28, 2015 17:01:35 GMT
What if in two years' time the club has progressed and someone next level like, I dunno, Benteke (for the sake of argument) were available? Only problem is we can't afford his wages because we've got a crocked Jon Walters sitting there collecting £50k a week even though he's lost his energy around the pitch. It's a tricky situation, there's no doubting that. On the flip side, what if we lose Walters in January, don't get his replacement right and have a player on the same wages (and longer contract) contributing less than Jon over the next 2 1/2 seasons. I think he'll want to play football for the next 2 1/2 seasons, he's that kind of man, if he's past it for Stoke he can be loaned out in his final year - worst case scenario we lose a relatively small amount of cash subsidising a loan for a season.
|
|
|
Post by Squeekster on Oct 28, 2015 17:08:34 GMT
What if in two years' time the club has progressed and someone next level like, I dunno, Benteke (for the sake of argument) were available? Only problem is we can't afford his wages because we've got a crocked Jon Walters sitting there collecting £50k a week even though he's lost his energy around the pitch. Assuming we stay in the Prem then money should not be an issue with one lot of wages and again I really think Walters is worth the contract.
|
|
|
Walters
Oct 28, 2015 17:13:58 GMT
via mobile
Post by StatesideStokie on Oct 28, 2015 17:13:58 GMT
What if in two years' time the club has progressed and someone next level like, I dunno, Benteke (for the sake of argument) were available? Only problem is we can't afford his wages because we've got a crocked Jon Walters sitting there collecting £50k a week even though he's lost his energy around the pitch. I can think of plenty of other players that would be a far greater risk in terms of injury. Walters has already seen off the likes of Kenwyn Jones, Kitson, Tuncay, Owen, Crouch, Pennant and probably a few other im forgetting...all of whom were seen as an upgrade and on the evidence of what we've seen this season he's been more effective than Shaquiri. I dont really get the notion that giving him another two seasons beyond this one is a huge risk. Lets just match what he's been offered by Norwich and be done with it.
|
|
|
Post by foxysgloves on Oct 28, 2015 17:21:43 GMT
What if in two years' time the club has progressed and someone next level like, I dunno, Benteke (for the sake of argument) were available? Only problem is we can't afford his wages because we've got a crocked Jon Walters sitting there collecting £50k a week even though he's lost his energy around the pitch. Yeah....great game....let's just say that SJW continues to get better and scores an average of 15 goals a season over the next 3 seasons which see us finish in the top half every season and win a major trophy. I like this game!!!!
|
|
|
Post by slother on Oct 28, 2015 19:22:38 GMT
What if in two years' time the club has progressed and someone next level like, I dunno, Benteke (for the sake of argument) were available? Only problem is we can't afford his wages because we've got a crocked Jon Walters sitting there collecting £50k a week even though he's lost his energy around the pitch. Yeah....great game....let's just say that SJW continues to get better and scores an average of 15 goals a season over the next 3 seasons which see us finish in the top half every season and win a major trophy. I like this game!!!! You can count on one hand the number of strikers who have improved past the age of 32.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 28, 2015 19:31:39 GMT
Doesn't the fact that he has other irons in the fire strengthen his bargaining position. It proves him as a very effective Premier league asset that the club will have to move a bit on if they want to keep him. It does. But the club has to decide if the price is worth paying. I trust the club to make that decision, Mark. As we know though after our arguments ad-infinitum, I have rather less faith in them properly planning for his release and a like for like replacement than you do! Which ever way you paint it, he's a massive player for us - in the N'Zonzi mould in terms of influence and he will take some replacing. Far more than an extra year may cost.
|
|
|
Walters
Oct 28, 2015 19:32:40 GMT
via mobile
Post by foxysgloves on Oct 28, 2015 19:32:40 GMT
Yeah....great game....let's just say that SJW continues to get better and scores an average of 15 goals a season over the next 3 seasons which see us finish in the top half every season and win a major trophy. I like this game!!!! You can count on one hand the number of strikers who have improved past the age of 32. You'd need about twenty hands to count the amount of times SJW has been written off....only to prove the doubters wrong.
|
|
|
Post by slother on Oct 28, 2015 19:44:58 GMT
You can count on one hand the number of strikers who have improved past the age of 32. You'd need about twenty hands to count the amount of times SJW has been written off....only to prove the doubters wrong. You're right. Let's give him a 20 year contract and I'll stop embarrassing myself for your amusement.
|
|
|
Post by march4 on Oct 28, 2015 20:07:59 GMT
The auction for SJW's services has just gone up another notch.
We are just another club after his services and every time he puts in a great performance it will cost us more money to win the auction.
How many Prem clubs were in the auction on deadline day; 3? The only reason he didn't leave it seems was our failure to sign Jediniak.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 28, 2015 21:11:41 GMT
The only reason he didn't leave it seems was our failure to sign Jediniak. Its a frightening thought if that had transpired isn't it.
|
|
|
Post by foxysgloves on Oct 28, 2015 22:26:34 GMT
You'd need about twenty hands to count the amount of times SJW has been written off....only to prove the doubters wrong. You're right. Let's give him a 20 year contract and I'll stop embarrassing myself for your amusement. That's ridiculous. Ten years is plenty. Arf!
|
|
|
Post by stantheman on Oct 28, 2015 23:28:31 GMT
How difficult would it be to replace him? How much would a replacement cost?
The answer to those questions is; Very difficult A fook load of cash.
Better the silver haired devil you know, so sign him up asap or a bloke in a baseball cap down the road will in the Summer
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 8:20:00 GMT
The point here is that Stoke risk losing a player they want to keep, due to their self imposed rule of not offering a player over 30 more than 2 years.
- Crouch was given a 2 year contract from 34 to 36 years old.
- Stoke wouldn't give Walters a no strings attached 3 year contract from 31 to 34 years old, instead making the 3rd year reliant on an appearance trigger.
We might well offer Walters a 2 year contract until 2018 at the end of this season (the same as offering him a 3 year deal last summer) but it might be too late by then.
I repeat what I said earlier. If Shawcross has solved his back problem then we can expect him to be a Premier League player until he's 35. Do we fanny about with 2 year offers with him, as his contract is due to expire when he's 30.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 11:54:00 GMT
I thought walters was poor first half and not having much joy when balls were being played too him. Terry and cahill seemed to have him in their pocket, and then came the second half he scored a fantastic goal and all of a sudden he was like a different player. He was getting to balls before terry and cahill and became the target man he was meant to be.
|
|
|
Post by skemstokie on Oct 29, 2015 11:58:40 GMT
What if in two years' time the club has progressed and someone next level like, I dunno, Benteke (for the sake of argument) were available? Only problem is we can't afford his wages because we've got a crocked Jon Walters sitting there collecting £50k a week even though he's lost his energy around the pitch. It's a tricky situation, there's no doubting that. On the flip side, what if we lose Walters in January, don't get his replacement right and have a player on the same wages (and longer contract) contributing less than Jon over the next 2 1/2 seasons. I think he'll want to play football for the next 2 1/2 seasons, he's that kind of man, if he's past it for Stoke he can be loaned out in his final year - worst case scenario we lose a relatively small amount of cash subsidising a loan for a season. The loan option for last year could be the ideal compromise if it could be part of a longer contract and invoked at the club`s discretion .
|
|
|
Post by skemstokie on Oct 29, 2015 11:59:24 GMT
What if in two years' time the club has progressed and someone next level like, I dunno, Benteke (for the sake of argument) were available? Only problem is we can't afford his wages because we've got a crocked Jon Walters sitting there collecting £50k a week even though he's lost his energy around the pitch. It's a tricky situation, there's no doubting that. On the flip side, what if we lose Walters in January, don't get his replacement right and have a player on the same wages (and longer contract) contributing less than Jon over the next 2 1/2 seasons. I think he'll want to play football for the next 2 1/2 seasons, he's that kind of man, if he's past it for Stoke he can be loaned out in his final year - worst case scenario we lose a relatively small amount of cash subsidising a loan for a season.
|
|
|
Post by rosco on Oct 29, 2015 12:12:44 GMT
Absolute no brainer.
2 years or 3 years - whatever - sign him.
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Oct 29, 2015 14:57:27 GMT
wall.stokecityfc.com/Event/Stoke_City_FCMH on Jon Walters contract situation...
There is a danger that we could lose Jon, but that isn't what I want and it isn't what he wants. There is scope to sit back down at the table I would have thought. Jon is capable of making an impact as he is right now. We would love to come to a satisfactory conclusion. I am hopeful that we will get to a point where we can sit down and sort something out.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2015 15:13:47 GMT
wall.stokecityfc.com/Event/Stoke_City_FCMH on Jon Walters contract situation...
There is a danger that we could lose Jon, but that isn't what I want and it isn't what he wants. There is scope to sit back down at the table I would have thought. Jon is capable of making an impact as he is right now. We would love to come to a satisfactory conclusion. I am hopeful that we will get to a point where we can sit down and sort something out. Everyone wants the same outcome. Lets just hope everyone doesn't end up backed into a corner they can't escape from.
|
|
|
Post by mrcoke on Oct 29, 2015 19:43:50 GMT
With Arni playing well but not getting many goals, Shaqiri not yet at the races, and Jon scoring a brilliant goal (again) this week, he's in the driving seat for a 2 year deal, so why should he weaken his resolve at the moment?
I think the club should change their tune and give him a 2 year deal with performance related conditions.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 29, 2015 23:15:35 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Gifton on Oct 29, 2015 23:21:52 GMT
i don't log on here enough and i'm not gonna lie, in the few minutes i was on here i couldn't be arsed to read the previous posts. We should be singing for Jon every week. He might not be Ronaldo or Messi but he is up there with the best at what he does. He deserves two years with an option. What a signing, and I really didn't like him first season. Mr Stoke City in many ways!
sign him up, sign him up, sign him up.......
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 29, 2015 23:26:28 GMT
Not sure it does. The club have been stung with these decisions before and one got played a big part in the previous managers demise. I think as a club you have to stick to these things. 2 years and no more irrespective of what the manager says.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Oct 30, 2015 1:09:42 GMT
Not sure it does. The club have been stung with these decisions before and one got played a big part in the previous managers demise. I think as a club you have to stick to these things. 2 years and no more irrespective of what the manager says. I'm not sure who you mean though. Mysterious and sometimes anonymous and unfathomable extensions to minor players are thankfully a thing of the past. This on the other hand, is a massive contract issue with a massive player being played out in public. Not sure we've been here for ages, if at all, in the post 2008 era have we?
|
|
|
Post by banksisgod on Oct 30, 2015 1:52:05 GMT
Were we not prepared to offer two years to a 35 year old Ivica Olic? Jon's game has never been built around pace; he is likely to retain all of the attributes that he currently brings to the side. Indeed, like Glenn, he appears to be getting better with age. By all accounts, he is a significant influence in the dressing room and training ground as well. All of this would be very difficult, and expensive to replace.
On the face of it, a club policy of only offering contracts of a certain length to players of a certain age is entirely sensible. However, when the situation demands, the club should be able to brake its own rules. This has to be one such situation.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 30, 2015 8:11:11 GMT
Not sure it does. The club have been stung with these decisions before and one got played a big part in the previous managers demise. I think as a club you have to stick to these things. 2 years and no more irrespective of what the manager says. I'm not sure who you mean though. Mysterious and sometimes anonymous and unfathomable extensions to minor players are thankfully a thing of the past. This on the other hand, is a massive contract issue with a massive player being played out in public. Not sure we've been here for ages, if at all, in the post 2008 era have we? Whelan bitched recently. Crouch imo got an unfathomable extension. And I'd ask questions over the Adam, Cameron, Wingie contracts too. Walters deserves no more than what we're offering. I think the club are doing this right and sticking to their guns.
|
|
|
Walters
Oct 30, 2015 8:22:55 GMT
via mobile
Post by upthefud on Oct 30, 2015 8:22:55 GMT
Give him a three year deal and let's end this saga.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Oct 30, 2015 8:24:50 GMT
Give him a three year deal and let's end this saga. So give a contract to a bloke until he'll virtually be 36................nah!
|
|