Why ? We set the terms, in agreement with Ale. Pre the WC this was a great deal for us, no-one could have predicted how this would work out. He could have refused the new contract and left now for much less. Our long term strategy is strengthened (allowing players to move when it’s right for...
He’s gone there to triple his wages and secure a big wedge for his old man. Anything else is irrelevant BS. I wish him well, been great for us and never acted like a **** over leaving, unlike some others.
The bookies have decided they’ll do better because they have the finances to significantly improve their squad and pay much higher wages than most other teams to be able to do so.
Incorrect. Could have not signed a new contract and gone for half what we’re getting - or done nothing at the WC and not be worth what we’re getting regardless of his contract.
Exactly……and the ‘release’ clause (or whatever it is) may very well be much below what he could now be worth in a true open market, as he signed the new contract before the WC when he wasn’t a global WC-winning superstar. He could have easily not signed a new contract before the WC and left us...
No, but we'd have perhaps been looking at something like Trossard-type money at best for him. I suspect the new contract was a form of compromise, hence the 'low' release number (if that's what it is). Mac could easily have told the club pre-WC that he wasn't interested in signing a new contract...
How and why would you fight it ? Doing so would destroy our whole ethos around player recruitment, reward and development and our aim of long term financial sustainability. We aren’t going to stop players going to ‘top’ clubs who will pay 2-3 (or more) times what our wage structure allows. What...