Jake Cooper

[shorehamoldboy]

its a tricky one this isnt it do we keep everybody on similar wage structure to keep team spirit or do we push the boat out and pay higher salaries for better quality players personally in the modern game i think were gonna have to pay these players higher salaries if weve any chance of getting to the prem its got to happen if we get there anyway and im not talking here of paying stupid salaries as the pigs have done their paying the price for that tactic now and could be in big trouble this season but increases on our wage ceiling to give us a chance of competing with other clubs at this level

[Carpe_diem]

its a tricky one this isnt it do we keep everybody on similar wage structure to keep team spirit or do we push the boat out and pay higher salaries for better quality players personally in the modern game i think were gonna have to pay these players higher salaries if weve any chance of getting to the prem its got to happen if we get there anyway and im not talking here of paying stupid salaries as the pigs have done their paying the price for that tactic now and could be in big trouble this season but increases on our wage ceiling to give us a chance of competing with other clubs at this level

IF the team spirit thing was working, and we were playing well and winning, then it would be a no-brainer. As it is, we're getting literally no benefit from it. It's actually working against us, as we're denying ourselves the chance to sign better players because of stupid, pointless principles.

[shorehamoldboy]

dont think its a case of paying players 30 to 40k a week because we just cant do that but our structure needs to be upped to give us some chance of competing for better players otherwise were just gonna carry on bringing loan players in and hoping their clubs pay most of their salaries

[CHIPBUTTYBLADE]

Has Wilder got his head in the sand or is he having it pushed into the sand over this set in stone wages structure.

[Carpe_diem]

Has Wilder got his head in the sand or is he having it pushed into the sand over this set in stone wages structure.

We've been told that Wilder is in sole charge of budgets, both transfers and wages.

[herbert]

My view is that we should be willing to go a bit above but not way above what the current highest earner is on.

The players should understand the reality that we'd have to pay bigger wages to get good players to the club - players who can help the current players achieve their aims. It's a choice between that or more of the same.

Then you have to ask the question about whether the players deserve such loyalty from the manager in ensuring wage parity, when in reality they'd all be off in a shot as soon as a better offer came along.

Increasing the wage ceiling is also a long term inevitability so if new signings were seen to be on more money, the current players should know that there's scope for their own contracts to improve in the future, as long as they perform.

Finally, wage parity is assumed to be key in maintaining team spirit. Well, I'm not sure I see too much of that right now.

[Carpe_diem]

I'm guessing the owners dispute explains why Brooks went as his transfer was openly discussed in Court. The Court was told we needed an injection of cash to keep the Club afloat for the first 6 months of the season. Unless someone was trying to pull the wool over the Judges eyes and that is not a sensible tactic we have to assume from the facts stated that Brooks was sold to finance the Club. He may have asked to leave and that may have made it easier to sell him on but no-one has presented a case to say SUFC was in a healthy financial position so we didn't need to sell.

Not good PR to say we had to sell him to keep the Club afloat so we went with the he wanted to go strap line.

By stating Brooks asked to leave so we let him go we open the door for the likes of JOC and Fleck to cry foul if they are refused a move.

We may not have touched the Brooks money yet be we are talking about a down payment of £4m and some of that will be used for running costs and potentially a portion held over for the JTW.

Whilever the owners dispute rumbles on we will be at risk of losing our star players as we continue to look to finance the running of the Club. If JOC has asked for a move and we are holding out for £15m then we are at least trying to negotiate a good return on the player bearing in mind there will be a sell on fee payable to Brentford as well.

If any of this conjecture is true, it makes Tufty a liar as he's said that he has sole control of budgets and who stays and goes.

[bulmer1889]

I asked the question of who had final say on fri at the fans forum McCabe grabbed the Mike to answer the question and proceeded to not answer the question Garrett asked if I was happy with the answer and I said not really and they moved on all they wanted fri was the feelgood factor before the,season started

In a twitter convo I had with Danny hall he said what waghorn was asking for was well within the boundary of what he called silly money he also said it depends what you call silly money but by the sounds of that it's way above what we're paying anyone else

[shorehamoldboy]

we must have known what waghorn wanted when we put the bid in for him surely if it was unreasonable for us to pay the amount he was asking why did we not just withdraw our offer ? weve been here before im afraid bidding for players we know weve no chance of getting not saying thats always the case but its a scenario thats happened too many times at the lane

[bulmer1889]

Well we wouldn't be allowed to speak to him before we had a bid accepted as that would be regarded as an illegal approacH and tbh he was one of the few I thought we would be able to afford wage wise you can't do owt else but blame agents for this they will send some clubs under before too long