Re: Otamendi
Posted:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 3:41 pmby Mikhail Chigorin
Hutch's Shoulder wrote:johnny crossan wrote:Sideshow Bob wrote:basically we just gave a 5 year contract to a player who will turns 30 soon. not sure that’s great business tbh, even though I like him as a player.
we'll get a return on that 2 year extension when he signs for Madrid after Virgil arrives.
It also spreads the remaining depreciation of his contract over a longer period, reducing his costs per year in the accounts.
I think I'm with Bob on this one.
It might be great from an accounting aspect but, in reality, if he starts going downhill in the next two or three years and can't merit a place in the team, we've got a player who could be drawing his wage for a couple of years, without actually needing to play.
The same argument also applies to signing Sanchez, although the weakness in this argument is that David Silva looks as though he could play for decades yet (well, not quite) and Fernandhino seems to get ever better as the years accumulate on his shoulders.
Re: Otamendi
Posted:
Tue Dec 26, 2017 8:22 pmby Dubciteh
Mikhail Chigorin wrote:Hutch's Shoulder wrote:johnny crossan wrote:Sideshow Bob wrote:basically we just gave a 5 year contract to a player who will turns 30 soon. not sure that’s great business tbh, even though I like him as a player.
we'll get a return on that 2 year extension when he signs for Madrid after Virgil arrives.
It also spreads the remaining depreciation of his contract over a longer period, reducing his costs per year in the accounts.
I think I'm with Bob on this one.
It might be great from an accounting aspect but, in reality, if he starts going downhill in the next two or three years and can't merit a place in the team, we've got a player who could be drawing his wage for a couple of years, without actually needing to play.
The same argument also applies to signing Sanchez, although the weakness in this argument is that David Silva looks as though he could play for decades yet (well, not quite) and Fernandhino seems to get ever better as the years accumulate on his shoulders.
We got stung with nasri like this, im sceptical. 3 months of decent play wont make up for two years of shit and a new contract.
Re: Otamendi
Posted:
Wed Dec 27, 2017 12:16 pmby phips
Mikhail Chigorin wrote:Hutch's Shoulder wrote:johnny crossan wrote:Sideshow Bob wrote:basically we just gave a 5 year contract to a player who will turns 30 soon. not sure that’s great business tbh, even though I like him as a player.
we'll get a return on that 2 year extension when he signs for Madrid after Virgil arrives.
It also spreads the remaining depreciation of his contract over a longer period, reducing his costs per year in the accounts.
I think I'm with Bob on this one.
It might be great from an accounting aspect but, in reality, if he starts going downhill in the next two or three years and can't merit a place in the team, we've got a player who could be drawing his wage for a couple of years, without actually needing to play.
thats exactly what i said
Re: Otamendi
Posted:
Wed Dec 27, 2017 2:17 pmby Foreverinbluedreams
Mikhail Chigorin wrote:Hutch's Shoulder wrote:johnny crossan wrote:Sideshow Bob wrote:basically we just gave a 5 year contract to a player who will turns 30 soon. not sure that’s great business tbh, even though I like him as a player.
we'll get a return on that 2 year extension when he signs for Madrid after Virgil arrives.
It also spreads the remaining depreciation of his contract over a longer period, reducing his costs per year in the accounts.
I think I'm with Bob on this one.
It might be great from an accounting aspect but, in reality, if he starts going downhill in the next two or three years and can't merit a place in the team, we've got a player who could be drawing his wage for a couple of years, without actually needing to play.
The same argument also applies to signing Sanchez, although the weakness in this argument is that David Silva looks as though he could play for decades yet (well, not quite) and Fernandhino seems to get ever better as the years accumulate on his shoulders.
If my aunt had balls....
I think he's earned this, his attitude is spot on, doesn't strike as the type to draw a wage for doing nothing, he'll push for a move if he finds himself sidelined on an ongoing basis.
Re: Otamendi
Posted:
Wed Dec 27, 2017 5:18 pmby Mikhail Chigorin
phips wrote:Mikhail Chigorin wrote:Hutch's Shoulder wrote:johnny crossan wrote:Sideshow Bob wrote:basically we just gave a 5 year contract to a player who will turns 30 soon. not sure that’s great business tbh, even though I like him as a player.
we'll get a return on that 2 year extension when he signs for Madrid after Virgil arrives.
It also spreads the remaining depreciation of his contract over a longer period, reducing his costs per year in the accounts.
I think I'm with Bob on this one.
It might be great from an accounting aspect but, in reality, if he starts going downhill in the next two or three years and can't merit a place in the team, we've got a player who could be drawing his wage for a couple of years, without actually needing to play.
thats exactly what i said
Apologies for stealing your clothing chum.
Re: Otamendi
Posted:
Mon Jul 15, 2019 3:58 pmby PrezIke
Thought he'd be staying with Vinny gone and maybe no Maguire, but I think he knows he'll never be first choice under Pep due to his weaknesses.
Said this a while back but been a great servant to the club and really stepped up 2 seasons ago during the Centurion season where he got rid of those mind scratching mistakes against most sides and became reliably one of our best defenders. When Laporte arrived the writing was on the wall and Pep always wants a left footed CB for those long balls to switch it to the other flank. Also, Stones was one of "the chosen" so Pep was always going to be more invested in developing him.
Was against Liverpool I believe I recall where you could still see he couldn't quite hack it against the press, even if he is a decent passer for a centre half, he's no Laporte or Stones (when he's on).
No way we are in for Maguire at the fees quoted.
Some mysterious CB we aren't thinking of (I read Ahsan's claim on Twitter) is probably lurking, and Bournemouth will be sweating about losing Ake a lot more now. However, I can't see us going in with Ake and Garcia as the backups as that leaves us very thin on size and strength at the position for the season which spells trouble against the British "2nd balls" style that Pep talks about 24/7 as a concern.
Just saw this part:
