:confused::confused::confused::confused:
IMO Manquillo should've gotten the one-year extension, Carroll should have signed for Gateshead.
Printable View
:confused::confused::confused::confused:
IMO Manquillo should've gotten the one-year extension, Carroll should have signed for Gateshead.
Bah. :mad:
Typical ashley signings, 4 years for Manquillo is a joke and now we are set to sign Mark Gillespie on a free transfer :?
The panic will set in now with the bed-wetters in the fan base. New contracts must mean no takeover. Even though it doesn't and won't.
They are.Quote:
Originally Posted by MidsMagpie
4 years seems mass over-kill for Manquillo, even if there was no take over happening.
Really can not understand the Carroll deal, but I can understand a little of the Manqillo one. If takeover goes through and we want to unload him at least we can get a fee now. If takeover does not go through he is probably best right back at the club. Still scratching head over the length of contract though. Four years ??
Carroll though is just a waste. I would not even offer Messi a deal if he played as infrequently as him
Who would have imagined 10 years ago we'd be speaking of Andy Carroll in this vein.Quote:
Originally Posted by HughieG
I must be missing something with Andy Carroll.Can't blame him as it is money for nothing. Doesn't bring anything to our squad except taking up a medical bed. Crazy decision however i expect superbruce to put a spin on it.
Isn’t Carroll on ‘earn as you play’ or whatever it’s called?
Yes, but i think he has a basic of £25k regardless of playing rising if he plays.