Summer 2010 Transfer Thread: B*llsh*t, Rumours & Wishes

[Merv]

But the alternative is.... to sell our better/best players because they are the ones who are deemed more sellable and attractive to buyers? Would that be the approach to cutting the wage bill? I think if we're sensible on the fees, we'll move most of those players I named on. Maybe not all, but most.

Selling Milner - do you think that is about trying to get him off the wage bill?

[Greg N'Ash]

But the alternative is.... to sell our better/best players because they are the ones who are deemed more sellable and attractive to buyers? Would that be the approach to cutting the wage bill? I think if we're sensible on the fees, we'll move most of those players I named on. Maybe not all, but most.

Selling Milner - do you think that is about trying to get him off the wage bill?

No. i think selling milner will free up some cash salary wise. some will go in the transfer pot and some will go to paying the salaries

[JJ-AV]

Imagine our team if we did get them four?

Friedel
Cuellar - Collins - Dunne - Warnock
Hleb - Ireland - Flamini - Ashley
Keane - Gabby

On paper looks immense, we'd play some nice stuff, have three real creative players and some established options (Petrov, Downing and Carew) to rotate on the bench.

[Merv]

Selling Milner - do you think that is about trying to get him off the wage bill?

No. i think selling milner will free up some cash salary wise. some will go in the transfer pot and some will go to paying the salaries

Obviously, yes: but again, selling Milner is not a deliberately engineered strategy to reduce the current salary bill. If sold, Milner's salary will go into the salaries pot/pool and the transfer fee will be allocated elsewhere. I'm pretty sure staff salaries and transfer funds will be accounted and budgeted for separately.

[Greg N'Ash]

Selling Milner - do you think that is about trying to get him off the wage bill?

No. i think selling milner will free up some cash salary wise. some will go in the transfer pot and some will go to paying the salaries

Obviously, yes: but again, selling Milner is not a deliberately engineered strategy to reduce the current salary bill. If sold, Milner's salary will go into the salaries pot/pool and the transfer fee will be allocated elsewhere. I'm pretty sure staff salaries and transfer funds will be accounted and budgeted for separately.

i'm pretty sure they can allocate incoming funds where they like. bottom line is milner's wage isn't massive. if we pick up say 25m for milner, and we're rumoured to want cash, i'm not expecting all that to go on transfer fee's. If we bought Keane, Ireland and Flamini then we'll have raised the wage bill not lowered it.

[Mazrim]

But the alternative is.... to sell our better/best players because they are the ones who are deemed more sellable and attractive to buyers? Would that be the approach to cutting the wage bill? I think if we're sensible on the fees, we'll move most of those players I named on. Maybe not all, but most.

Selling Milner - do you think that is about trying to get him off the wage bill?

No. i think selling milner will free up some cash salary wise. some will go in the transfer pot and some will go to paying the salaries

They obviously knew what they were going to be paying the players and considered it just about acceptable. Its not a suprise to them. They just want value for money and if the players arent good enough and arent contributing they need to go before new players come in and take over their wages.
I've heard nothing about cutbacks, just keeping it under control.

Of course, the plan is to increase turnover to make the wages a smaller percentage or to make increased wages managable. I think this will be the case last season as the turnover should be significantly higher that the season before. Should be.

I dont think there is or was any plan to sell Milner. Any spending forecasts would not have been based on selling him. Now, they will

[Mazrim]

If we bought Keane, Ireland and Flamini then we'll have raised the wage bill not lowered it.

Not if we've sold Sidwell, Beye, Shorey, Salifou, Milner, Heskey and Davies. And whoever else.

[Greg N'Ash]

But the alternative is.... to sell our better/best players because they are the ones who are deemed more sellable and attractive to buyers? Would that be the approach to cutting the wage bill? I think if we're sensible on the fees, we'll move most of those players I named on. Maybe not all, but most.

Selling Milner - do you think that is about trying to get him off the wage bill?

No. i think selling milner will free up some cash salary wise. some will go in the transfer pot and some will go to paying the salaries

They obviously knew what they were going to be paying the players and considered it just about acceptable. Its not a suprise to them. They just want value for money and if the players arent good enough and arent contributing they need to go before new players come in and take over their wages.
I've heard nothing about cutbacks, just keeping it under control.

Of course, the plan is to increase turnover to make the wages a smaller percentage or to make increased wages managable. I think this will be the case last season as the turnover should be significantly higher that the season before. Should be.

I dont think there is or was any plan to sell Milner. Any spending forecasts would not have been based on selling him. Now, they will

I agree there was no 'Sell Millner' plan, but he's the only big money offer on the table, and if MON wants to spend, and faced with reserve players who won't/can't move, Milner going is probably the only option that gives MON some manouvering space.

[Greg N'Ash]

If we bought Keane, Ireland and Flamini then we'll have raised the wage bill not lowered it.

Not if we've sold Sidwell, Beye, Shorey, Salifou, Milner, Heskey and Davies. And whoever else.

[WALTERS WARRIORS]

Imagine our team if we did get them four?

Friedel
Cuellar - Collins - Dunne - Warnock
Hleb - Ireland - Flamini - Ashley
Keane - Gabby

On paper looks immense, we'd play some nice stuff, have three real creative players and some established options (Petrov, Downing and Carew) to rotate on the bench.

Really like the look of that team backed up by the fonz up front ............

[Mossie Hennebry]

It's beginning to get ugly:

Manchester City will make a £24m second and final offer for James Milner within the next 48 hours as they seek to push through a deal for the England international.

The proposed deal is being conducted amid considerable acrimony with the winger's relationship with the Aston Villa manager, Martin O'Neill, threatening to unravel.

Milner is angry and upset with O'Neill for suggesting that he had expressed a desire to leave during a meeting about his future before the World Cup finals. He also strongly rejected the manager's claim that he was offered a new contract with the club. Villa, however, have stood by O'Neill's interpretation of events and his comments, made during a pre-season trip to Dublin, prompted Milner to try to telephone the manager last night to seek an explanation.

There was no indication Milner had managed to get in touch with O'Neill as the situation became increasingly fraught. Milner is due to report back to Villa for pre-season training on Monday after being given an extended break following the World Cup, although the events of the past 24 hours mean that it is almost inconceivable he will join up with his team-mates at the club's Bodymoor Heath training ground.

Instead it now appears a matter of when and not if he becomes a Manchester City player. Although all the indications are that City's £24m bid will not be accepted – Villa's asking price is closer to £30m – negotiations are expected to continue with a view to a swift conclusion now it has been established Milner has no future in the Midlands. Villa are set to push for Stephen Ireland, the City midfielder who has been told he can leave the club this summer, as a makeweight in a deal.

In many ways O'Neill's remarks are likely to accelerate the process. Having previously suggested the club would do all they could to keep Milner, who was outstanding last season and won the PFA Young Player of the Year award, O'Neill has publicly conceded defeat, claiming the 24-year-old had made it clear in a meeting at the end of May that he was not interested in discussing a new deal on improved terms and that he wished to leave. Milner and his representative strongly dispute this was the case and believe O'Neill has portrayed him an unfair light.

"The state of affairs is really straightforward," O'Neill said. "James and his agent came to see us before the World Cup and intimated they would like to go. If that is the case then Manchester City made the offer, which we told them about. There is a difference of valuation at this moment between the buying club and the selling club. That may well be resolved and if that is the case then absolutely fine."

"I think James's agent has told our chief executive he wouldn't be signing a new contract," O'Neill continued. "Obviously that puts a different slant on things, like everything else. Although I haven't spoken to James since that day, he has played in the World Cup and the rest really is pretty well straightforward. If a fee is agreed, at the end of the day, the player can leave. Manchester City have put a valuation on the player. It doesn't match our valuation but we will see. I am probably sure if that is the state of affairs, particularly if the player is keen to go, I am sure it will get resolved."

How things pan out between Milner and O'Neill between now and then will be of just as much interest. The Villa manager has spent much of the previous 12 months waxing lyrical about the development of the player he signed for £12m from Newcastle United in 2008, and Milner was just as effusive in his praise of O'Neill for the part he played in his promotion to the senior England team. Yet O'Neill's latest comments have left Milner so disappointed that their previously close relationship could now be fractured beyond repair.

[Mazrim]

greg, you dont really know what offers are on the table and I dont see why we cant sell the fringe players. You keep rattling that cage but I dont see why. As if players have never took pay cuts to move.

They do get signing fees and longer contracts at their new clubs to balance it out. Plus they'll actually play football which I presume has some importance to them.

[Risso]

Imagine our team if we did get them four?

Friedel
Cuellar - Collins - Dunne - Warnock
Hleb - Ireland - Flamini - Ashley
Keane - Gabby

On paper looks immense, we'd play some nice stuff, have three real creative players and some established options (Petrov, Downing and Carew) to rotate on the bench.

D'oh!  You've only got and put a central defender at right back!

[JJ-AV]

It's annoying, £27million is apparently our asking price and they're going to £24million?

We're backed into a corner a bit, it's nothing to them. Just pay up.

[Greg N'Ash]

greg, you dont really know what offers are on the table and I dont see why we cant sell the fringe players. You keep rattling that cage but I dont see why. As if players have never took pay cuts to move.

They do get signing fees and longer contracts at their new clubs to balance it out. Plus they'll actually play football which I presume has some importance to them.

We'll see. As i said the other day, its a risk for the manager to buy someone new on the chance or hope a player will leave, If i was on heskey's wages for two years, i wouldn't be exactly rushing to the exit. Likewise if i had twelve months till a big free transfer move, i may run down my contract like possibly NRC.