Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×
Sign in to follow this  
Bradwell canary

Wages at NCFC

Recommended Posts

It seems that someone has to hugely at blame for the stupid wages being paid in the past.

Nick Mashiter states that Mulumbu was on £40K

Lafferty £35K, and by all accounts Naismith is on £50K. But Ruddy is in the similar bracket.

I find this unbelievable . Its a wonder we are not already broke.

Furthermore none of them could even be considered 1st team regulars

No wonder Webber has axed them all.

BUT WHO GAVE OUT SUCH CONTRACTS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Those wages don''t sound massively out of line with other clubs in the Premier League.

Mulumbu was a free transfer, so he would receive a larger wage to reflect the fact Norwich paid no fee. £50k for Naismith probably matched his wage at Everton.

Lafferty''s is high, but it was for the season Norwich were in the Prem and probably represented him getting a large % bump up on promotion from the Championship.

If Norwich unpaid on wages then they would miss out on players. At least Mulumbu was only on a two year deal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The BT Sport Era.

Although it is the massive rise in non-domestic TV rights that have prompted the latest spike in money and therefore wages.

The next deal will be even bigger considering the weak pound and overseas players will demand bigger wages to match what they can earn in Euros (or dollars, yuan or yen etc). And when overseas players start to earn more, then domestic players will also want a pay rise to match.

The richer the league gets, the more they spend in wages.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And this is why, I''m not renewing my season ticket not because I''ve gone off Norwich City, but the wages for very average players are ridiculous.

I can invest my money better elsewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are those wages after the reduction when getting relegated ? It''s no wonder the wage bill needs reducing but I''m sure we could sell players like Naismith for a fee rather than just letting him go. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The figures Mashiter mentioned were while Norwich was in the Prem - so would have all been subject to 20% - 25% reductions on relegation.

I can''t see who could afford a fee and meet Naismith''s wage demands to be honest. He''ll either be at Norwich for another 2 years, spend 2 years out on loan with Norwich subsidising part his wages or be transferred with no fee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The thing is that there seems to be a thought that is almost taken as fact that we are overpaying players when in all likelihood we aren''t doing anything of the sort. The figures are pretty mind-boggling given how much an ''ordinary'' person earns, but contracts will be negotiated using the current circumstances, - i.e. If we are PL they will reflect that - and if we want to attract decent players we have to pay the going rate for that point in time. There is a legacy issue that is thankfully being sorted, but is is pretty-much what the parachute payments are for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lafferty bought by Adams following relegation to Championship not whilst City in PL. Ridiculous if true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It was under McNally who at the time was practically infallible in many supporters eyes - again, you pay the prevailing rate at the time. Looking back on things now that were perfectly reasonable at the time is not particularly fair, but I guess will always be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wasn''t Mbokani on something ridiculous like £80k a week with £40k of it being paid by his Russian club?

We were the victim of the circumstances, we wanted / needed the players in the Prem but they''d only come if their massively inflated personal terms are agreed.

I''ve lost count of the number of times we''ve ''lost out'' to a player, but I suspect many of those were because we wouldn''t pay their huge wage demands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just goes to show getting to the promised land isn''t all that,it''s all very well being given 100-200 million but if 90% of it is set aside for wages there''s a price to pay.If only players would play for 10 grand a week max we could have built on Carrow road and increasing capacity to help the fans who are what football is about after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×