Jump to content
hepphep

Pukki's extension is for £50k per week?

Recommended Posts

With our business model the money simply isn’t there. Non-renewals of key players - such as Pukki - and fire sales will be upon us again. Only new investment will change this.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, yellowrider120 said:

I would be amazed if we paid anyone £50k per week in the Chumpionship whilst the rest of the squad (presumably) have far less attractive relegation 'clauses' in their contracts (or so the club have always delighted to tell us). If this is true I would envisage a scenario whereby club and Pukki 'parted company'.

Of course that's the risk, and that's the reason why Liverpool aren't giving in to Salah's £400k a week demands: they know everyone else will want higher wages. 

But I don't think wages of £3m a year, or possibly an agreement where we give him £2m for two years with a promotion wage rise, are that excessive. And besides, the cost of replacing him would be several million pounds plus a £2m wage for his replacement. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Definitely keep for me. The key is finding a creative midfielder who can feed him the kind of chances he thrives upon. Of course we require a defensive mid but equally, we have to try and find someone who can do like Buendia did. That is Smith and Shakespeare's task.

We haven't looked anywhere near like our previous style of play under DF, a style which played to Teemu's strength. Either we do that or else we look at a different type of striker and playing style. I hope we go back to the former because not many teams could handle us in the Championship last time (nor in 2018).

Only need to look at Teemu's record. He is different class. Further, his hold up play is often very good and he rarely wastes a ball.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Definitely keep for me. The key is finding a creative midfielder who can feed him the kind of chances he thrives upon. Of course we require a defensive mid but equally, we have to try and find someone who can do like Buendia did. That is Smith and Shakespeare's task.

We haven't looked anywhere near like our previous style of play under DF, a style which played to Teemu's strength. Either we do that or else we look at a different type of striker and playing style. I hope we go back to the former because not many teams could handle us in the Championship last time (nor in 2018).

Only need to look at Teemu's record. He is different class. Further, his hold up play is often very good and he rarely wastes a ball.

 

I agree but...can we survive with this style in the EPL? Do we need big men and crosses (a la Holt, Morison, Wilbraham)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, YellowSubmarine said:

The figures mentioned are slightly incorrect, he’s actually on 60k p/w.
 

If the option is triggered he will remain on this money in the championship but other top earners will have there wages halved which would cause some unrest despite his goal scoring heroics. 
 

Pukki has interest from some PL clubs, the main one being Wolves and also foreign interest but he is content in Norfolk. 

Goalscoring is the hardest thing to do in professional football.While he is scoring the goals which could promote us again(if we really want to!!) or keep us in the top six,his team mates will benefit from win bonuses and wage rises if they do go up again. They would be mugs to complain!!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Badger said:

I agree but...can we survive with this style in the EPL? Do we need big men and crosses (a la Holt, Morison, Wilbraham)?

A very good question. I will answer though in regards to Teemu first.

On the plus side:- He seems to be able to get to double figures - twice (going to assume he does it this year) and even in poor teams (twice). On the negative side: We've not scored enough - neither last time nor this. We haven't had enough firepower you could say. Has he found a level?  - but nor has he had the quality of service.

On balance, he would surely do the business in the Championship but at an advancing age is he the solution should we get promoted again? Unlikely imo. Another striker (arguably two) is desperately needed. Perhaps Rowe looks a prospect. I'm not sure yet (still!) about Adam. I am about Sargent.

As for style in the EPL I had always hoped our passing style would have suited better. Yet, we have looked weak comparatively. A light touch. Under Lambert we were much tougher (Holt, Morrison etc) so you may have a point.

I hope we pull the stops out and bring in a quality striker (AND keep Teemu) for next season. For me, it is difficult to look ahead any more than one season.

Edited by sonyc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Highland Canary said:

With our business model the money simply isn’t there. Non-renewals of key players - such as Pukki - and fire sales will be upon us again. Only new investment will change this.

Oh yes, the lazy old "fire sale" prediction, haven't seen that for a while, probably since the end of the 19/20 season. What happened then? Well, we fleeced Newcastle for Jamal Lewis, got £25 million for Ben Godfrey-who knows whether that was a good deal or not-and got rid of some dead wood. No fire sale though.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sonyc said:

I hope we pull the stops out and bring in a quality striker (AND keep Teemu) for next season. For me, it is difficult to look ahead any more than one season.

I hope we keep him too, but what I was trying to suggest is that if the powers that be we need a change of style (e.g. big men up top + pace) they might decide that this style doesn't suit Teemu's strengths and that we need to start preparing for a different type of play. 

We wouldn't want to do what we did this year again. Go up playing 4231 and then switch to 433 when promoted. We lost all our identity as a team. Just a thought, I don't like to talk too much about tactics as I know some on here played at a far higher level than I ever did!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, hepphep said:

Read from one news site that The Athletic (cannot confirm this from Athletic due to paywall) has article claiming that club's option to extend Pukki's contract comes with £50k / week salary, even if we play Championship.

That sure makes decision bit harder than originally thought. 

So, if the claim is correct, do you think we should still keep Pukki? And do you think club will use the extension option?

This is how you keep Buendia, keep Pukki, Keep Toney and attract Eriksen.

You don’t buy and pay 22 x mediocre players and eat your budget that way. 

You cling to weapons, spend very occasionally on another if you get the rare chance to add one.

You do not cleave to single law of the Medes and the Persians. 

Parma 

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This highlights one of our problems, we really dont have any choice but to renew even at £60k. We cant risk going into next season without a proven goal scorer if we intend to get promoted. We wont be able to afford a player of Pukki's quality so we might as well spend the money on his wages.

However what we must definitely do is also find an heir to the throne who will take the pressure/reliance of Pukki for part of next season and even more importantly will grow to be our starter in the premier league. I'm afraid there is no way I can see either Sargent or Idah being that player so a very shrewd bit of transfer business is needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, rock bus said:

This highlights one of our problems, we really dont have any choice but to renew even at £60k. We cant risk going into next season without a proven goal scorer if we intend to get promoted. We wont be able to afford a player of Pukki's quality so we might as well spend the money on his wages.

However what we must definitely do is also find an heir to the throne who will take the pressure/reliance of Pukki for part of next season and even more importantly will grow to be our starter in the premier league. I'm afraid there is no way I can see either Sargent or Idah being that player so a very shrewd bit of transfer business is needed.

Absolutely. Unfortunately Brexit has made that search for an heir harder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, rock bus said:

This highlights one of our problems, we really dont have any choice but to renew even at £60k. We cant risk going into next season without a proven goal scorer if we intend to get promoted. We wont be able to afford a player of Pukki's quality so we might as well spend the money on his wages.

However what we must definitely do is also find an heir to the throne who will take the pressure/reliance of Pukki for part of next season and even more importantly will grow to be our starter in the premier league. I'm afraid there is no way I can see either Sargent or Idah being that player so a very shrewd bit of transfer business is needed.

I have put on my flak jacket and tin hat for this one but there is an alternative view. I cant see where we can 'intend to be promoted' next season - we have the same squad that failed so miserably this year and insufficient funds (as far as I can see) to improve the squad sufficiently to expect anything other than a period of building in the Champs for some time. In which case would we be better in generating a transfer fee for Pukki and investing in some potential talent and grow them for a few years. He isnt getting any younger, we dont play the way he needs for chances, his value will reduce.

Difficult one because he is a fantastic striker, footballer and professional. But..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, BurwellCanary said:

I have put on my flak jacket and tin hat for this one but there is an alternative view. I cant see where we can 'intend to be promoted' next season - we have the same squad that failed so miserably this year and insufficient funds (as far as I can see) to improve the squad sufficiently to expect anything other than a period of building in the Champs for some time. In which case would we be better in generating a transfer fee for Pukki and investing in some potential talent and grow them for a few years. He isnt getting any younger, we dont play the way he needs for chances, his value will reduce.

Difficult one because he is a fantastic striker, footballer and professional. But..........

It's a good point and a valid alternative solution (although I wonder what fee would we actually get for Pukki at 32 (?) with 1 year left on  his contract?) 

The concept of spending a couple years building up a new squad from our exiting young talent supplemented with some good discoveries - a new Buendia and the ever sought after CDM and then perhaps having a chance when eventually promoted is one that I'd be willing to back. My concern would be that if it didnt work we'd have lost the premier league money and could be languishing in the championship (and even potentially lower) as the limitations of our ownership sees us fall further down the financial football pyramid.

Similarly, years ago I was saying that the England team should sacrifice the next Euros or World cup and just play a group of young players with the aim of then having a  team that had developed together and could challenge for the subsequent tournament in 4 years time. It's an approach which has it's risks and even more importantly needs the commitment of the fans to it.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Highland Canary said:

With our business model the money simply isn’t there. Non-renewals of key players - such as Pukki - and fire sales will be upon us again. Only new investment will change this.

But you've got this wrong more times than I dare to count now? The firesales you keep predicting keep not happening...

As for the money not being available with our business model. We're literally paying him now, under this business model...

I...I just despair.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s a no brainier. Yes it’s a lot of money but it’s only a 1 year commitment which coincides with our parachute payments. We will not get a player of his capability for less than £3m in transfer fees and wages for next year.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, sonyc said:

Definitely keep for me. The key is finding a creative midfielder who can feed him the kind of chances he thrives upon. Of course we require a defensive mid but equally, we have to try and find someone who can do like Buendia did. That is Smith and Shakespeare's task.

We haven't looked anywhere near like our previous style of play under DF, a style which played to Teemu's strength. Either we do that or else we look at a different type of striker and playing style. I hope we go back to the former because not many teams could handle us in the Championship last time (nor in 2018).

Only need to look at Teemu's record. He is different class. Further, his hold up play is often very good and he rarely wastes a ball.

 

I agree we should keep him

Regarding the style of play that suits him there's an interesting graph of his actual goals vs his expected goals. Basically the blue bits he's playing well and red not so well

This season he was underperforming under Farke but overperforming under Smith - presumably the 442 with Idah really suits him

image.thumb.png.21370b9e02a9a9a62d211bc81ee032dd.png

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

£2.5m being stated like it's an additional cost, if it's to be believed, he's asking for £50k not an increase of £50k. He's not playing for free now. I'm almost certain there is room for whatever the % increase actually is. Twilight years but a proven performer, if he wants to stay the club would have no issue paying.

In the world of football it's peanuts, but still crazy money in the real world.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can see Teemu dropping to number 10 next season and playing a shade deeper. As others have said, his link-up play is very good and he could well be our Stiepermann replacement.

A front four of Idah, Sargent, Rashica and Pukki would cause a lot of trouble with their workrate, trickiness, size, and strength. Under Farke, we had to slowly keep the ball as if we were without it for long periods, the extra size and power of opposing teams would wear us down, so our keeping hold of it made them run instead. It also put a premium on fast, incisive passes that cut a defence up - Buendia and Vrancic's forte, whilst Cantwell and Stiepermann could also find one.

If we're playing with a genuine winger in Rashica, then we need more strength up top to keep the ball up there. That's where Idah and Sargent together come in. I thought those two were looking quite good together as both pose fairly similar problems, although Sargent's workrate is better and Idah looks faster but it did mean we were able to hold the ball up far more often, allowing the team to reorganise or get up the field.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

This is how you keep Buendia, keep Pukki, Keep Toney and attract Eriksen.

You don’t buy and pay 22 x mediocre players and eat your budget that way. 

You cling to weapons, spend very occasionally on another if you get the rare chance to add one.

You do not cleave to single law of the Medes and the Persians. 

Parma 

The putting of all of your eggs in one basket is perfectly valid, as Brentford is the current shining example of. However, it is not without risk. Buendia is hardly pulling up trees at Villa and there is no evidence to support the suggestion that he would have made a differrence if he had stayed. Burnley also adopted this approach and it doesn't look likely they will be poster boys of it this year. And there is always the possibility your weapon that you bet the farm on does his ACL in preseason and spends the season on the treatment table.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BigFish said:

The putting of all of your eggs in one basket is perfectly valid, as Brentford is the current shining example of. However, it is not without risk. Buendia is hardly pulling up trees at Villa and there is no evidence to support the suggestion that he would have made a differrence if he had stayed. Burnley also adopted this approach and it doesn't look likely they will be poster boys of it this year. And there is always the possibility your weapon that you bet the farm on does his ACL in preseason and spends the season on the treatment table.

We don’t have the money, so our risks must be more calculated. Football is the life we have chosen though. There are costs and costs. You can choose not to service your car and call it a saving. There are real-world examples that are not ‘rolling the dice on another new player that might not come off’. 

Buendia was a proven weapon at Norwich. Pukki is proven at Norwich. Toney is proven at Brentford.

Eriksen was top quality on short-term risk with high upside and public ambition-showing to existing Brentford players. Rather the opposite of the psychological effect on the remaining Norwich players upon pre-season sale of Buendia.

Read Darren Eadie’s article on Jonny Rowe for an insight into what players really think and feel. What they have to go through to make make it. How they clearly know who the difference-makers are. 

It is telling, true and revealing.

 Parma 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Parma Ham's gone mouldy said:

We don’t have the money, so our risks must be more calculated. Football is the life we have chosen though. There are costs and costs. You can choose not to service your car and call it a saving. There are real-world examples that are not ‘rolling the dice on another new player that might not come off’. 

Buendia was a proven weapon at Norwich. Pukki is proven at Norwich. Toney is proven at Brentford.

Eriksen was top quality on short-term risk with high upside and public ambition-showing to existing Brentford players. Rather the opposite of the psychological effect on the remaining Norwich players upon pre-season sale of Buendia.

Read Darren Eadie’s article on Jonny Rowe for an insight into what players really think and feel. What they have to go through to make make it. How they clearly know who the difference-makers are. 

It is telling, true and revealing.

 Parma 

Parma, there is an unspoken assumption in your argument. That if we had refused Buendia the move he wanted (and may even have been sort-of promised) he then would have knuckled down and given 100 per cent all season and been the proven difference-making weapon you are talking about. I have no idea, but there is an alternative scenario in which a distinctly p*ssed off player in effect downs tools and is bad for squad morale rather than good for it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, PurpleCanary said:

Parma, there is an unspoken assumption in your argument. That if we had refused Buendia the move he wanted (and may even have been sort-of promised) he then would have knuckled down and given 100 per cent all season and been the proven difference-making weapon you are talking about. I have no idea, but there is an alternative scenario in which a distinctly p*ssed off player in effect downs tools and is bad for squad morale rather than good for it.

Two goals and four assists would seem to indicate that Buendia is not quite the weapon that would have made the difference. Proven past performance is not necessarily an indication of future performance. As you point out PC, there are other factors in play. There is an attraction with a smaller, tighter, better squad (I seem to remember that Liverpool won the league while only using 13 player back in the day), but it does come with risk. Just imagine this board if we had kept Buendia and doubled his money, only spent chicken feed augmenting the squad and still went down

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would imagine it was probably part of a commitment to stay in the PL this time. Looks like it has worked out well! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, YellowSubmarine said:

Krul is the highest earner on 70k a week, Pukki second. Had Hugill had been registered in the PL squad he would have been earning 50k which was one of the reasons to get him out on loan and save on wages. 
 

Whilst some of these figures may seem high, they are for us but not for PL teams. A recent study said that the average PL players wages is between 70-80k per week, an example was Kouyate at Palace on 80k a week. Eye watering really. 

If Hugill was genuinely set to earn 50k per week under the guise of a ‘goal scoring forward’, then football, as a business, deserves to tank…….

Edited by unique

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24/03/2022 at 18:58, YellowSubmarine said:

Krul is the highest earner on 70k a week, Pukki second. Had Hugill had been registered in the PL squad he would have been earning 50k which was one of the reasons to get him out on loan and save on wages. 
 

Whilst some of these figures may seem high, they are for us but not for PL teams. A recent study said that the average PL players wages is between 70-80k per week, an example was Kouyate at Palace on 80k a week. Eye watering really. 

Source?

I would be amazed at that. If true it completely blows a hole in our much vaunted 'salary cap' as we (allegedly) refused to pay Josh King less than that!!  For £70k pw we could almost certainly have afforded Emmanuel Dennis (a proven goal scorer) for the £3.5M Watford paid surely??  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found the figures being talked about surprising. Dont know if this is at all accurate, but found this on player wages. Bear in mind it is not up to date so I think represents Championship wages. If Football Manager is at all based on reality, players will have a 30% (or similar) wage increase clause on promotion

 

https://footballleaguefc.com/norwich-city-2019-20-player-wages/

Edited by The Great Mass Debater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, BigFish said:

Two goals and four assists would seem to indicate that Buendia is not quite the weapon that would have made the difference. Proven past performance is not necessarily an indication of future performance. As you point out PC, there are other factors in play. There is an attraction with a smaller, tighter, better squad (I seem to remember that Liverpool won the league while only using 13 player back in the day), but it does come with risk. Just imagine this board if we had kept Buendia and doubled his money, only spent chicken feed augmenting the squad and still went down

And imagine if he'd had assist and goal stats like last time in the Prem. The creativity stats were impressive, but in terms of actual end product, as this level not so much

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

Parma, there is an unspoken assumption in your argument. That if we had refused Buendia the move he wanted (and may even have been sort-of promised) he then would have knuckled down and given 100 per cent all season and been the proven difference-making weapon you are talking about. I have no idea, but there is an alternative scenario in which a distinctly p*ssed off player in effect downs tools and is bad for squad morale rather than good for it.

   9 hours ago,  Parma Ham's gone mouldy said: 

We don’t have the money, so our risks must be more calculated. Football is the life we have chosen though. There are costs and costs. You can choose not to service your car and call it a saving. There are real-world examples that are not ‘rolling the dice on another new player that might not come off’. 

Buendia was a proven weapon at Norwich. Pukki is proven at Norwich. Toney is proven at Brentford.

Eriksen was top quality on short-term risk with high upside and public ambition-showing to existing Brentford players. Rather the opposite of the psychological effect on the remaining Norwich players upon pre-season sale of Buendia.

Read Darren Eadie’s article on Jonny Rowe for an insight into what players really think and feel. What they have to go through to make make it. How they clearly know who the difference-makers are. 

It is telling, true and revealing.

 Parma 
———————-

I’ll leave the last word to the loved, esteemed and present Daniel Farke:

’We chose to sell Buendia’

Parma 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, yellowrider120 said:

Source?

I would be amazed at that. If true it completely blows a hole in our much vaunted 'salary cap' as we (allegedly) refused to pay Josh King less than that!!  For £70k pw we could almost certainly have afforded Emmanuel Dennis (a proven goal scorer) for the £3.5M Watford paid surely??  

King was offered 40k a week and could leave for free if we where relegated. A significant drop from his 110k a week at Everton.  He’s moved to Watford on better wages, living in London and isn’t back up to Pukki. 
 

Whilst not a dig a you, fans don’t think of geography. Foreign players want to live in London and earn good money, not average money and live 2hrs away from everything. 

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

×
×
  • Create New...