[Albion] Would you be happy with the Albion paying a player a £100,000 a week?

[zefarelly]

Hard work and talent doesn't get many people £100k a year.

and we already have players apparently on £50k a week, thewy haven't scored 15-20 goals between them.

clearly we can't afford to be where we want to be, and are shooting above our weight. long may it continue.

I'd rather go down than go bust.

 

[Icy Gull]

I voted no but feel a bit of a hypocrite because I have no problem with us spending 20 million plus and having a squad rammed with foreigners.

I would have voted No to £20 million and lots of foreigners (remember the outrage on here years ago when Chelsea (?) played a match with no English players in it) when we were at Gillingham,.

It could become the norm to be paying 100k if we ever make it as a top 10 team

 

[The Optimist]

If as a club and a business we can realistically afford it and Tony is happy to pay it then absolutely yes.

No point comparing football to the real world. £50,000 a week is already beyond the realms of belief to nearly every fan and I understand from here we're already paying nearly that to a number of players and Dunk is probably on even more than that now so really what difference does it make if it goes up to £100,000?

I agree with this. £100k when already paying over £50k isn't that big of a leap, and why pay two ok strikers £50k each rather than one brilliant one £100k. Also if we're happy to pay transfer fees of up to £20m why is £5.2m a year in wages excessive?

Is there any chance that Dunk is already earning £100k a week after his recent new contract?

 

[chaileyjem]

Of course they do but like any other business you have to invest to keep up with the competition, ...The only thing I can think of is we have some finance issues because things aren’t adding up. ...we might as well through in the towel.

Not sure why you need to reiterate that. We all, as fans know, Bloom has invested and continues to do so. Hundreds of millions and its kept us in the division.
The finance issues aren't a surprise - there is less TV money and fan income due to Covid - and Albion have always been cautious compared to others in their attempt to be a sustainable long term fixture in the EPL.
Throw in the towel ? - there's a case to be made for getting through the season or January without any further signings but i doubt anyone behind closed doors is making it and you're right - it would be a massive risk. But lets face it - its hypothetical NSC chatter and isn't going to happen.

 

[RM-Taylor]

No one has mentioned that we’re apparently paying Lallana £90k a week and that Dunk is on the same due to his “match highest earner clause”

Seems crazy the amount of money to most people but this is the Premier League now and it’s money. Long gone are the days of scrapping by paying Lee Steele £300 per week.

 

[bobbysmith01]

Not for me as it creates issues in the changing room when players earn a lot more than others. Plus we can't afford it. Makes me laugh that some fans think we should spend money and get more debt, but moan when the club put the price up, can't have one without the other.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

Pay the going rate for the division, or at least the lower end of it. Anything less runs the risk of becoming progressively further adrift of the peleton. And ok it's easy to spend someone else's money yada yada, but that someone else needs to protect their investment by doing whatever it takes to stay at the top table, which is where they want to be

 

[Hugo Rune]

You didn't read the thread properly, having paid 25p to get into my first game 47 and half years ago, I find it abhorrent that, especially in the current situation, we are even talking about this

But you stared the thread?

I’ve not seen other discussion’s on paying players £100k+, I just don’t think it is a possibility. We seemed to have been linked with young strikers such as Nunez and Brewster who’d cost us less than half that amount.

In answer to your hypothetical question though, I’d be very concerned about paying a player more than £3m per year when I don’t think we have to for a club of our level. We don’t have the income to sustain anything more than that (although I accept that Dunk could be an exception).

 

[bobbysmith01]

No one has mentioned that we’re apparently paying Lallana £90k a week and that Dunk is on the same due to his “match highest earner clause”

Seems crazy the amount of money to most people but this is the Premier League now and it’s money. Long gone are the days of scrapping by paying Lee Steele £300 per week.

Don't think we are paying anything like that, he got a signing on fee and a wage 'within the club wage structure'.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dazzer6666]

Doubt we’re that far off paying that to one or two already. Dunk has had a pay rise every season, and whilst Lallana might not be on 100k/week, the signing on fee he’ll almost certainly have got in lieu of a transfer fee might have taken his effective cost to something like that anyway

 

[One Teddy Maybank]

Don't think we are paying anything like that, he got a signing on fee and a wage 'within the club wage structure'.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes - I think considerably less, but with signing on fee etc....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HAILSHAM SEAGULL]

Don't think we are paying anything like that, he got a signing on fee and a wage 'within the club wage structure'.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Different to what I heard, both players.

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

Yes.

You have to invest money to make money. As with anything it's a risk but the more you spend the higher % that what you spend it on will make you a better side.

The loss of revenue from relegation dwarves the cost of that players wages.

 

[RM-Taylor]

Don't think we are paying anything like that, he got a signing on fee and a wage 'within the club wage structure'.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Dunk was on £70k a week last season and had an increase of 25% or slightly more to his last signed contract. You’d be amazed to think what some of our players are on given our history but it’s just the modern state and way things are now.

 

[big nuts]

Unfortunately that’s potentially how this hunt for a proven striker is going to pan out.

With the Covid pandemic and the resulting dire upcoming economic situation it doesn’t sit comfortably with me, but this is the level of football we find ourselves in, the only way to get off the hamster wheel now is relegation and none of us want that.

I’m old so can’t work out how to put a poll up, could a youngster do the honours please?

I’ve heard Dunk has already broken the £100k barrier.

 

[NorthLainer]

Said no, in the belief that it's not sustainable for us at present - given the current situation, and the fact that once one person gets this, you'll have demands for others wage to go up, resulting in wage inflation. If I thought it was sustainable for us I'd have no problem with it. I'd rather have a sustainable Albion, at potentially a lower level, than no Albion at all, but maybe that's just the effect our history has on me.

 

[Lenny Rider]

No one has mentioned that we’re apparently paying Lallana £90k a week and that Dunk is on the same due to his “match highest earner clause”

Seems crazy the amount of money to most people but this is the Premier League now and it’s money. Long gone are the days of scrapping by paying Lee Steele £300 per week.

I was led to believe, Lallana was on 60 a week and Dunk 70.

 

[supaseagull]

If we take the unsubstantiated rumours around Origi into consideration vs that if we’d signed Ollie Watkins on the same basis as Villa have...

Origi
Transfer fee £15m
Wages over 3 years (£100k pw) £15.6m
Total £30.6 mil

Watkins
Transfer fee £30m
Wages based on (£50k pw) £7.8m
Total £37.8m

So there’s not really a lot in it.

The gamble is higher for villa as Watkins may not be up to the EPL, whereas Origi has a track record albeit mostly as a substitute.

Know which one I’d go for if I was Bloom


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BNthree]

Really would like a third option on the poll as I'm not "happy with" the thought of paying so much but understand the way the PL is might necessitate it. Maybe an option of "begrudgingly".

 

[GT49er]

Voted no. I just don't think it's acceptable to pay anyone that much. No-one needs £100K a week, nor frankly does anyone 'deserve' it. From a time when in my early years the gap between the richest and the poorest in this country was at its lowest ever to a time now when footballers earn - or should that be 'earn' - more in a week than the Prime Minister does in a year (and I know the present PM is despised on here, but that's irrelevant) I can only see it as the opposite of progress.
Yes, I know many will come back with arguments along the lines of 'going rate' and 'market value', but I don't care. I'm an armchair fan these days, I admit, but will remain a fan all my life. Should we start paying £100K a week though, that connection I feel between me and the club I love would inevitably be diminished.