• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Christian Eriksen

Finney Is Back said:
I get what you are saying (especially that you never know in football) but I'm mostly with BoL here....

Eriksen on a free transfer will command wages that take into account the fact he is on a free transfer. If we look at Eriksen's worth and what has been paid to other players then I don't think it is a stretch to assume that he will earn £400,000 a week next year (and maybe even more than that). Once he is on that £400+k a week, it becomes very difficult for another team to pay a transfer fee for him and take on those wages.

I don't think anyone taking on Eriksen will be doing so in order to try to make a profit, I think they'll be doing so because they would like to bring in one of the most creative players in the Premier League. It also might be very difficult for a club to bench a player for a year or two and then expect somebody to buy that player off of them for a decent transfer fee and pay them the same wages.
Click to expand...

Id rather not assume figures, and have made a point of not doing so.

I have also, explicitly (and about 3 times now), stated that I do not think any club will be taking Eriksen with the explicit intent to sell him on at profit.

Only ever that if they ended up selling him on, they would profit - so its a no lose or risk free move to make.

I agree with you that he is quality, and that any club taking him will be doing so because of that and not as if he were a car to trade.

The wages thing, Im sure you know better than I do - clubs will supplement a players wages if they need to to get him off the books.

It happened all the way back when Robbie Keane joined, its certainly not something new.

If Eriksen is on £400k, at Madrid, and they decide he isnt working out - they sell him to Bayern for £50m. Bayern take him on a 3 year deal but will only pay £200k, meaning Madrid need to stump up that extra £200k for the contract. Thats £30m(ish). They are still £20m up on this rather assumptive deal.

Reality is, IMHO, he would sell for more in the first place, already swinging the deal further in Madrids favour...
 
glasgowspur said:
Football is a fickle thing and a lot can happen in a year, a new coach, president, 'must have' player, a returning hero.
He risks being left behind, having limited playing time and going to a club his heart isn't in, and on his history with us and not being focused that's not a good place.
Ramsey has struck it lucky with juve, so far but let's see how it pans out, but I'd suggest that's not the norm.
Click to expand...

I’d suggest it is the norm
Can you give some “negative” examples?
 
AdamB said:
Logic suggests that, though if there really are just the 3 clubs which he'd want to move to as reported and none move for him now, then there has to be some doubt that any of those 3 might come in next year even if he is available on a free.

Therefore a decent offer from us close to kane's wages with a release clause for those 3 teams has to be attractive for both. Turning that down could cost Eriksen £6m (being roughly 50 weeks * the £120k increase to take him from £80 to £200k) with no guarantee that he'll get the move he wants next summer
Click to expand...

Wouldnt logic dictate sitting on it for a while and getting him for free is better than trying to deal with Levy and coughing up £50m+?

Also, if you take him at his word, the case is that he is done here, wants a new challenge and lifestyle. For me thats like telling the Mrs you want to see other people, you dont get to go back to how it was before if you later change your mind, the division is made.

In terms of the whole 3 club thing, honestly, it never made sense to me.

A.Madrid were linked in the summer, and they were the only ones where I felt it was a fit. I think he could be outstanding for/with them.

I do not think the same of Barca or Real, or Juve (but a little less sure there).

His trying to agitate for a move just doesnt fit with how I see him, neither does his alleged preferred destinations.

All very odd to be honest.

That those clubs have barely shown an interest must really be messing with him.
 
clubs like Juve and A. Madrid I completely understand why they would wait and try and get him on a free, but Barca, Madrid, City, if they wanted him, wouldn't care about 50m quid, it's an irrelevant amount of money to them
 
I can understand people finding it disrespectful to publicly declare your desire to leave the club on the eve of the biggest game in its (recent) history.

In much the same way people took exception to Rose bricking all over the club on the eve of the season.

I dont think Eriksen was explicitly disrespectful in what he said, but I do think it was a bricky and unnecessary thing to do - particularly at that time.

None of which is to say there is anything wrong with fulfilling a contract.
 
nayimfromthehalfwayline said:
I can understand people finding it disrespectful to publicly declare your desire to leave the club on the eve of the biggest game in its (recent) history.

In much the same way people took exception to Rose bricking all over the club on the eve of the season.

I dont think Eriksen was explicitly disrespectful in what he said, but I do think it was a bricky and unnecessary thing to do - particularly at that time.

None of which is to say there is anything wrong with fulfilling a contract.
Click to expand...

He went public the week after the CL Final didn't he, not before? (I think he had an internal conversation in the lead-up).
(Notwithstanding speaking publicly at all in those terms is not necessarily going to be well received).
 
galeforce said:
clubs like Juve and A. Madrid I completely understand why they would wait and try and get him on a free, but Barca, Madrid, City, if they wanted him, wouldn't care about 50m quid, it's an irrelevant amount of money to them
Click to expand...
Dont care how big a club you are, £50m is not an irrelevant amount of money - real Madrid have only paid £50m + six times in their history for example, Emirates Marketing Project five times. Eriksen isnt a marquee signing (rightly or wrongly) and even for a Barca/ Real who dont seem to have the blank cheque book they once appeared to it would make sense for them to wait until they can grab him for free.....
 
Glenda's Legs said:
He went public the week after the CL Final didn't he, not before? (I think he had an internal conversation in the lead-up).
(Notwithstanding speaking publicly at all in those terms is not necessarily going to be well received).
Click to expand...

Entirely possible, sometimes my recollection of dates isnt great. I thought it was just before but could easily have been just after.

Either way it leaves a bad taste, doesnt it?
 
It would look like a climb-down for RM to pay for him after what was said in the summer. If he walks in on a free, not so much, which is why I think that's what'll happen now. Disappointing though; I thought he would do right by the club in the end. We'll see what happens if he's still here in 2 weeks, but that new contract is looking less and less likely IMO.
 
AdamB said:
Logic suggests that, though if there really are just the 3 clubs which he'd want to move to as reported and none move for him now, then there has to be some doubt that any of those 3 might come in next year even if he is available on a free.
Click to expand...

No doubt whatsoever, Juventus are the free transfer experts, they are waiting for next summer to get their hands on him
 
mudshark said:
It would look like a climb-down for RM to pay for him after what was said in the summer. If he walks in on a free, not so much, which is why I think that's what'll happen now. Disappointing though; I thought he would do right by the club in the end. We'll see what happens if he's still here in 2 weeks, but that new contract is looking less and less likely IMO.
Click to expand...

I have been saying all summer he would not be signing a new contract, and why should he? He has no loyalty to us, just as the club has no loyalty to Wanyama or Nkoudou
 
mudshark said:
It would look like a climb-down for RM to pay for him after what was said in the summer. If he walks in on a free, not so much, which is why I think that's what'll happen now. Disappointing though; I thought he would do right by the club in the end. We'll see what happens if he's still here in 2 weeks, but that new contract is looking less and less likely IMO.
Click to expand...

We've had our opportunity to sell him and didn't exercise it. Granted he limited our options by having specific clubs in mind.
My only niggle will be if he leaves for a club that's not a step up, but he has always said he would leave so I wish him well and thank him for his efforts.
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Barkley left for £12M didn’t he?

Sturridge hasn’t failed in his moves has he?

And neither moved as seasoned pros!
Click to expand...
True about a fee for Barkley, I forgot about that.
Has sturrdge not effectively been shunted into a corner for a while and now allowed to leave for free and to a lower level club, is that a success?
Barkley is mid twenties with 180 PL games under his, sturidge is 29 with over 200 PL games (actually older and more games than Eriksen) so if none of them are seasoned pros I'm not sure what is.
 
metalgear said:
how can eriksen be disrespectful when he has fulfilled the terms of his contract?
Click to expand...

It has aways surprised me when fans accuse a player to be disrepectful when it comes to contracts. Infact, the only ones that are disrespectful in that sence is the fans. In principal, the fans require the player to repect the contact only when it is good for the club. On all other cases, the player is expected to leave as soon as possible, so the club can maximize the profit.
 
glasgowspur said:
True about a fee for Barkley, I forgot about that.
Has sturrdge not effectively been shunted into a corner for a while and now allowed to leave for free and to a lower level club, is that a success?
Barkley is mid twenties with 180 PL games under his, sturidge is 29 with over 200 PL games (actually older and more games than Eriksen) so if none of them are seasoned pros I'm not sure what is.
Click to expand...

What i meant was when Barkley signed he was 22 wasn’t he and for a few

Similarly i thought you meant when Sturridge went to pool

I’d argue playing for a top 4 side in the prem which was a step up for Barkley is a positive

And Sturbridge was first choice for a period at pool
 
Bedfordspurs said:
What i meant was when Barkley signed he was 22 wasn’t he and for a few

Similarly i thought you meant when Sturridge went to pool

I’d argue playing for a top 4 side in the prem which was a step up for Barkley is a positive

And Sturbridge was first choice for a period at pool
Click to expand...

As a club its a step up for Barkley, but as I remember it he struggled for game time initially, not sure how he's doing now.

For very different reasons than Eriksen obviously, but sturidge has basically stuck himself Inn a back water by not being available, which considering a few years ago he was a hot prospect.
A year out and a perceived flaky attitude and he may not get the move he wants, is all I'm saying really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back