How much would you pay for Rhodes?

[ron obvious 1,711]

Wednesday fans are (of course) valuing him at £10m - £15m, which I certainly wouldn''t want to see happen, but it''s a tricky one. If he helped fire us into the Premiership, do we think he could do a job there? I''m not sure, so would value him as a good Champs striker, worth ...

It''s far too early to make any decent valuation, but I''m thinking (if he is consistently at his present standard) £5m - £6m.

What you cannot fault is his attitude; Marshall said that, during the QPR warm-up, Rhodes was coaching Cantwell on positioning. He genuinely seems to love being here & being part of the setup.

[Mike 68]

I wouldn''t as I don''t run a football team and he''d be a bit lost selling records...

[TIL 1010 5,246]

His ability to be in the right place at the right time is second to none and he has a goal poachers instinct but he lacks a yard of pace and does not look at full fitness. A good championship striker but i personally do not think he is good enough for The Premiership. If he has a good season for us we cannot meet Sheff Wed''s current valuation and his wages would have to take a severe cut before we could sign him permanently.

[Nuff Said 5,966]

Rhodes? Where we''re going we don''t need Rhodes.

Couldn''t resist, sorry!

[KiwiScot 1,684]

Its not out of the realms we would pay money for someone even when we are trying to be cheap. 10-15m seems fair for a player if he scores enough goals. I reckon it all depends on say, the team success and Pukki''s success inwhich if we finish high enough we might consider Rhodes for a push for promotion next season or decline because Pukki does so well and get a cheaper option. Pukki however could move onto another club if he does well and hey, then its a good idea to pay a bit more to stop us losing both our main strikers. Also Rhodes experience is useful in a young squad involving youth development.

In short, I''d buy him for 10m if he is scoring goals to have as a valuable squad player.

[king canary 8,758]

If we were in the Premier League? Nothing, I just don''t think he''s cut out to make the step up.

At this level? Depends if he has a good season here. Yes he scored a hat-trick yesterday but it was a cup game against lower league opposition. Lets see him actually trouble double figures in the league again before we start talking £10m fees.

[Guest]

We haven''t got £10M to spare.

[TIL 1010 5,246]

[quote user="KiwiScot"]

Its not out of the realms we would pay money for someone even when we are trying to be cheap. 10-15m seems fair for a player if he scores enough goals. I reckon it all depends on say, the team success and Pukki''s success inwhich if we finish high enough we might consider Rhodes for a push for promotion next season or decline because Pukki does so well and get a cheaper option. Pukki however could move onto another club if he does well and hey, then its a good idea to pay a bit more to stop us losing both our main strikers. Also Rhodes experience is useful in a young squad involving youth development.

In short, I''d buy him for 10m if he is scoring goals to have as a valuable squad player.

[/quote]

I have got to say Kiwi that i am surprised you think we still live in the financial world of buying £10 million footballers. That ship sailed over the horizon when the self funding no debt model turned up.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

Have we ever signed a 10m footballer?

We have Pukki and Rhodes though...

[king canary 8,758]

Depends how you define it- Maddison turned out to be a £25m footballer despite costing us about £3m.

I think we paid around £10m for Klose when he joined.

[Nuff Said 5,966]

How long is left on his contract with Wednesday? If it''s one year after this season, they will be in the situation we had with Naismith - better to get someone paying something than him sitting on the bench costing the full whack. I can''t see there being lots of demand for him from other teams unless he suddenly starts scoring more often, so they might consider a lower offer to free up his wages.

[pete 371]

3 wins against moderate opposition and we are already planning for promotion. If it did happen we couldn''t afford to pay silly money which Wednesday would want if JR gets us there.

[ricardo 8,034]

I''d have him on a free.

Ten million is laughable.

[nutty nigel 7,902]

I thought Naismith and Klose were both 8.5m Kingo. And I reckon that was inflated January prices. If those days are behind us count me in the "I''m glad" camp. As you rightly say our most valuable player was signed for 3m.

Jordan Rhodes is contracted to Sheff Wed until 2020. He will be 29 in the summer and looking for one last payday contract. I can''t see it being here but the fee wouldn''t be the obstacle. 

[king canary 8,758]

The issue isn''t really the amount we paid for them- just poor scouting.

Southampton turned a £10m odd investment in Virgil Van Dyke into £70m. If we do make a top flight return we''ll have to get comfortable with paying £10-20m for players as it can''t be avoided there.

[Big Vince 423]

How much would anyone pay for the boy, or how much Norwich City would pay for him?

If the latter, would it ever get to that point? The undeclared mission statement of the Suffolk Socialists is to become a feeder club from L1, so would the boy want to drop down a league? I think not.

[TIL 1010 5,246]

So are you saying kc that if we got promoted this season the self funding no debt mantra would be thrown out if as you claim we cannot avoid £10-20m on players ?

[nutty nigel 7,902]

I would say the most relavent fact about our self funding club and Jordan Rhodes is that he''s playing for us.

[BobLoz3 609]

[quote user="Big Vince"]How much would anyone pay for the boy, or how much Norwich City would pay for him?

If the latter, would it ever get to that point? The undeclared mission statement of the Suffolk Socialists is to become a feeder club from L1, so would the boy want to drop down a league? I think not.[/quote]

Just feck off, Vince. You''re a complete nutter!

[KiwiScot 1,684]

[quote user="TIL 1010"][quote user="KiwiScot"]

In short, I''d buy him for 10m if he is scoring goals to have as a valuable squad player.

[/quote]

I have got to say Kiwi that i am surprised you think we still live in the financial world of buying £10 million footballers. That ship sailed over the horizon when the self funding no debt model turned up.

[/quote]

I forgot Norwich don''t spend much on players, but exceptions can be made. If say he can score over 20 league goals and the wages deal is right adding into that we are shedding old high wage player contracts every season and getting the bulk of the squad cheap with the odd high end player sale. Why not? Why not for me would probably be any player that good, but probably get interest from teams who can pay more, but for a top end championship striker 10m sounds alright.

I''d buy him, but I don''t think Norwich will unless he is cheap.

[PurpleCanary 6,386]

[quote user="TIL 1010"]So are you saying kc that if we got promoted this season the self funding no debt mantra would be thrown out if as you claim we cannot avoid £10-20m on players ? [/quote]No matter which division we are in the key element of the self-funding model is wages.

[Guest]

No matter which division we are in the key element of the self-funding model is wages.

But surely the two go together. If you splash out on one maybe two players, even if they are worth it, won''t that affect wages?

[BroadstairsR 2,273]

I suppose it depends upon just how much Wednesday either want him back (unlikely) or off their wages.

I see similarities there with our Naismith dilemna. An expensive, highly paid misfit, not fitting particularly well into the club, who has become a bit of a liability.

We ended up desperate to give Naisy away. Perhaps the Owls feel the same about JR.

The two other imponderables are created by both the player''s wage demands and our own achievements this season.

If the terms are right, I would suggest that he would be a decent fixture for another Championship onslaught. If the best of all possible worlds materialises then, even though there are doubts about his PL ability, he will never be goal less in an environment where each strike is precious.

Everything about his attitude seems spot on, which helps no end.

[hogesar 10,766]

Not sure if Til is purposefully missing the point but if we were promoted our income would be tens of millions higher, enabling us to sign players of a higher fee whilst remaining ''self funding''

[king canary 8,758]

Yes Til, what Hogesar said.

Thought that would be pretty obvious to be honest.

[Duncan Edwards 2,424]

Of course.

I think the point is that we might be able to spend more on a transfer fee if the wage commitments weren’t as high. That obviously puts us in a tricky position when it comes to negotiation.

If we were in a theoretical position to allot a £25m expenditure on a striker, that has to be looked at as the full package. So, what? 10m fee and then a three year deal at 100k? Not going to happen - if we pay one guy 100k then it has a knock on effect with regard the wages of every other player - we’re not signing Messi or Ronaldo. However we might be able to spend 15m on a player and give them a three year deal at 40k (still massively unlikely we’d want that sort of commitment without divisional clauses) as this would have a smaller knock on with the rest of the wage bill.

Anyway, it’s pie in the sky. When we did try and sign those sort of players (Koulubaly, VVD etc) we were either a bit unlucky or torpedoed by our wage limitations. We did stay up with such limitations but we had a group of players that once they aged we couldn’t replace and arguably still haven’t...Holt/Hoolahan etc

The model we are running isn’t through choice, it’s through necessity. Wouldn’t be surprised if there aren’t others following suit soon. Let’s hope we’ve got the jump on them.

[Tetteys Jig 851]

Well seeing as we would have to basically take on his 40k a week contract for another year I think the fee can have £2m knocked off. He is also 29 going in 30 so likely to have no resale value. £5m seems fair if he has a good year like Waghorn/Murphy sort of money

[TIL 1010 5,246]

There is no point to make because when we got promoted in 2015 our income from player sales that summer far outstripped our expenditure even though would had hit the £100 million jackpot. You think it will be different next time round ?

[ron obvious 1,711]

Don''t forget though Hogesar, our massive increase in income might be rather short lived! That''s what makes signing ''proven'' players such a problem.

For me, the added problem with Rhodes is his capability at Premiership level, even if he recaptured his form of a few years ago. So I wouldn''t want to pay £10m + for him. And of course, as PC says, it''s the wages ...

[nutty nigel 7,902]

What 100m jackpot?