Not the king of our castle

[barclayboy1902 6]

Reports saying Norwich have walked away from Josh King after his 60k pw wage demands, now I belive that to be too much to pay someone to play back up, but what realistically could we pay for proven first team quality, got to be in the region of 40k per week.? 

[Rich T The Biscuit 694]

6 minutes ago, barclayboy1902 said:

Reports saying Norwich have walked away from Josh King after his 60k pw wage demands, now I belive that to be too much to pay someone to play back up, but what realistically could we pay for proven first team quality, got to be in the region of 40k per week.? 

Not sure we'll even pay that much.

There's a reason why we fish in the Championship, PL reserves or unknown pond.

[cambridgeshire canary 7,932]

From what I have heard (with a grain of salt) it's not just the wages but concern over his attitude.

[lake district canary 4,878]

We want the right characters who recognise what we are about and who want to be part of it - and if wages are the problem for possible recruits, then stuff them, we'll go elsewhere.  I would rather we go with what we've got than give time to money chasers. 

[Capt. Pants 5,152]

It's going to be a long summer if we are going to talk potential players down from £60k to £40k every time.

King is no great loss, but there's no way we can go with what we got, which is currently a weaker squad than we had last season.

 

[All the Germans 1,246]

9 minutes ago, Capt. Pants said:

King is no great loss, but there's no way we can go with what we got, which is currently a weaker squad than we had last season.

 

... and there's no way we will...

[Son Ova Gunn 165]

Read somewhere that £65k is the premiership average. If that’s the average wage for an average player and we won’t go above £40k then we are going to fire a lot of blanks this summer trying to find any known quantities so it’s taking a punt on potentials again no matter how big the warchest is. Slim down the squad and up the wages is Burnley’s answer and it’s done them ok. King asking for 65k certainly doesn’t make him a money mercenary as some will no doubt make out, am sure he will comfortably find a home on that if there isn’t other factors involved (ie attitude etc)

Edited June 8, 2021 by Son Ova Gunn

[Dr Greenthumb 801]

34 minutes ago, cambridgeshire canary said:

From what I have heard (with a grain of salt) it's not just the wages but concern over his attitude.

Injury prone and generally not that good anymore 

[Indy_Bones 444]

I love the idea that ANYONE asking for 65k a week isn't a money mercenary!

The claims about short careers are a BS argument as if you earn 25k a year and work for 40 years, that's a million, 65k a week gets you the same in just 4 MONTHS!

They could play for just a season at that rate and earn 3 times more than the average wage earner gets in a 40 year career ffs!

Edited June 8, 2021 by Indy_Bones

[hogesar 10,949]

65k sounds alot especially in this climate and his recent form. 

[Son Ova Gunn 165]

46 minutes ago, Indy_Bones said:

I love the idea that ANYONE asking for 65k a week isn't a money mercenary!

The claims about short careers are a BS argument as if you earn 25k a year and work for 40 years, that's a million, 65k a week gets you the same in just 4 MONTHS!

They could play for just a season at that rate and earn 3 times more than the average wage earner gets in a 40 year career ffs!

Whether footballers earn too much is a separate  issue happy to debate on another thread but would probably be a one sided conversation as I agree. Money mercenary in this respect is more about those players who’s sole focus is the fat pay cheque and nothing more, don’t give a damn about club team or even personal progression, just looking for the one more big money contract their not prepared to earn. If this thread is about whether King is right to look for 60k I think he probably is (if 65k is average but sounds high and the internet lies) and will probably get it somewhere, by all accounts he impressed everyone at Everton apart from the manager. I think anyone we have heard of and excited by is going to be asking for similar

Edited June 8, 2021 by Son Ova Gunn

[norfolkngood 1,179]

i would not go for Josh King but  a free agent so no fee involved 

Clubs look at a total outlay 

so signing a player on 50k/60 k on a free is around the same outlay over 4 years as a player that costs around the 5 /6 million mark on 40k a week

 

 

 

[Son Ova Gunn 165]

3 minutes ago, norfolkngood said:

i would not go for Josh King but  a free agent so no fee involved 

Clubs look at a total outlay 

so signing a player on 50k/60 k on a free is around the same outlay over 4 years as a player that costs around the 5 /6 million mark on 40k a week

 

 

 

Exactly, and if that fits within a clubs pay structure then it looks to be a fairly decent addition money wise for a club that does fancy him.. as apparently we did if we’re talking money with him

Edited June 8, 2021 by Son Ova Gunn

[lake district canary 4,878]

7 minutes ago, norfolkngood said:

i would not go for Josh King but  a free agent so no fee involved 

Clubs look at a total outlay 

so signing a player on 50k/60 k on a free is around the same outlay over 4 years as a player that costs around the 5 /6 million mark on 40k a week.

That may make some kind of sense for the club, but it still means he will be getting more money per week than the rest of the players - and that is the main issue - one player getting way more than the others is not a good recipe for a happy squad.

[norfolkngood 1,179]

2 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

That may make some kind of sense for the club, but it still means he will be getting more money per week than the rest of the players - and that is the main issue - one player getting way more than the others is not a good recipe for a happy squad.

i Agree LDC but i bet Hucks was on a Quite a bit more money than anyone else 

But i Agree a player earning way more money is not a good thing but it could happen if the Player is Worth it 

 

[Branston Pickle 4,169]

7 minutes ago, norfolkngood said:

i Agree LDC but i bet Hucks was on a Quite a bit more money than anyone else 

But i Agree a player earning way more money is not a good thing but it could happen if the Player is Worth it 

 

Absolutely, but King surely isn’t that player; Hucks clearly was.  Let’s hope we find another Hucks from somewhere!

[Dean Coneys boots 1,550]

Pay below average wages for the division and you get below average players. 

[Son Ova Gunn 165]

34 minutes ago, lake district canary said:

That may make some kind of sense for the club, but it still means he will be getting more money per week than the rest of the players - and that is the main issue - one player getting way more than the others is not a good recipe for a happy squad.

Totally in agreement with that, a wage structure is there not just for the club to control its finances but to ensure squad harmony, I’m just concerned our structure may not be have developed far enough for what we are hoping it will do and we shall see a few more similar stories. I supposed one way around it would be the signing in bonus.. 40k a week and £2m signing bonus but I suppose it would come out and have the same disharmony effect.

[Canary dwarf 221]

he's hardly Mr prolific , and at 40 to 60 k a week no thank you

[Kenny Foggo 1,205]

Which why all the names of players we would like is ridiculous. You more likely won't of heard of any of our purchases we bring in and they won't have too flight experience.

[lake district canary 4,878]

11 minutes ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Which why all the names of players we would like is ridiculous. You more likely won't of heard of any of our purchases we bring in and they won't have too flight experience.

But you will get in players who are attracted by the project, the management and the way the club is run.  Much more important in my view than trying to attract with big wages.  And if a player will only come here because we will pay big wages, or won't come because we won't pay big money, then we don't want them anyway.

Anyhow, we've nearly always managed to get good players by some way other than paying big money for them, going back to Martin Peters, McDougall, Boyer etc and more recently Hucks and Dion Dublin.  In fact when we have paid big transfer prices and big wages, it has usually not worked out.  We are an attractive club to the right kind of players - Hucks found that out because he had a loan here, others find out through talking to other players.  Right now our stock is very high in terms of being an attractive club - and if players like King want to price themselves out of a good move, more fool them.

Edited June 8, 2021 by lake district canary

[Capt. Pants 5,152]

Getting players in who are attracted to the 'project' is all very well when you are in the Championship but for one season we just need to push the boat out and get players who are likely to deliver now. We need to learn from our previous experience in the Premier League and that humiliating relegation. If it doesn't work out we sell them, we still have a wealth of young players who can step up the following season.

Happy to have a balance of 'project' and 'mercenary' players. If other players don't like it then it's up to them to raise their game and justify a better contract, and after all the better players we have the more chance they have of retaining their Premier League salaries!

Don't think King is that man though.

[Paint Me Yellow 200]

Lets not forget we're a family club with family values for family fans.

I hope after the BK8 fiasco we do our due diligence this time around and ask all potential new recruits if they've ever been filmed deep throating a meat-based product before. I mean it's better to be safe than sorry, right?

And yes, this should apply to all new non-playing staff as well.

[keelansgrandad 6,680]

2 minutes ago, Paint Me Yellow said:

Lets not forget we're a family club with family values for family fans.

I hope after the BK8 fiasco we do our due diligence this time around and ask all potential new recruits if they've ever been filmed deep throating a meat-based product before. I mean it's better to be safe than sorry, right?

And yes, this should apply to all new non-playing staff as well.

I think it would serve more purpose to ask posters first.

[Ken Hairy 4,335]

Good, he's utter ****e. 

[Son Ova Gunn 165]

40 minutes ago, Paint Me Yellow said:

Lets not forget we're a family club with family values for family fans.

I hope after the BK8 fiasco we do our due diligence this time around and ask all potential new recruits if they've ever been filmed deep throating a meat-based product before. I mean it's better to be safe than sorry, right?

And yes, this should apply to all new non-playing staff as well.

 

38 minutes ago, keelansgrandad said:

I think it would serve more purpose to ask posters first.

I once ate a double whopper way too fast... ok more than once but I was younger and didn’t know any better.

so it would appear the guy the club potentially earmarked as competition for Pukki is generally considered somewhere between not good enough and sh*te, and we need someone better, more prolific but for at least a third less in wage demands. Probably the first time in my life I haven’t wanted to be a scout for NCFC

[cambridgeshire canary 7,932]

45 minutes ago, Ken Hairy said:

Good, he's utter ****e. 

Blue and white wearing ****e too no less! 😉

[CarrowCanario 2]

Can't understand why we were allegedly in for him in the first place, not a great addition player and a poor attitude.

[Commonsense 829]

11 hours ago, Son Ova Gunn said:

Read somewhere that £65k is the premiership average. If that’s the average wage for an average player and we won’t go above £40k then we are going to fire a lot of blanks this summer trying to find any known quantities so it’s taking a punt on potentials again no matter how big the warchest is. Slim down the squad and up the wages is Burnley’s answer and it’s done them ok. King asking for 65k certainly doesn’t make him a money mercenary as some will no doubt make out, am sure he will comfortably find a home on that if there isn’t other factors involved (ie attitude etc)

Maybe he can join Naismith and sit on his backside doing nothing whilst being paid a fortune. We don’t need mercenaries like that.

[Commonsense 829]

11 hours ago, Son Ova Gunn said:

Read somewhere that £65k is the premiership average. If that’s the average wage for an average player and we won’t go above £40k then we are going to fire a lot of blanks this summer trying to find any known quantities so it’s taking a punt on potentials again no matter how big the warchest is. Slim down the squad and up the wages is Burnley’s answer and it’s done them ok. King asking for 65k certainly doesn’t make him a money mercenary as some will no doubt make out, am sure he will comfortably find a home on that if there isn’t other factors involved (ie attitude etc)

This very much depends on what you mean by average. Is it the mean, which will be heavily distorted by the top players at City, United etc. or the median?