Trees and Lingard

So the Trees have signed Lingard on £200K a week!

Makes the Rams signing of Earnshaw back in 2007 look a tad under ambitious!!

Its a one year contract, so if they don't stay up no hangover cost, he could provide the catalyst in midfield if there is quality around him but he could also get injured and play very few games - that money could ahve paid for two possibly 3 good quality players, a gamble IMO.

For Lingard, £50K a week is more important than playing for team that realistically could be top 6 this season and maybe have a crack at a cup? Or does he relish the challenge of keeping the Trees up?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

So the Trees have signed Lingard on £200K a week!

Makes the Rams signing of Earnshaw back in 2007 look a tad under ambitious!!

Its a one year contract, so if they don't stay up no hangover cost, he could provide the catalyst in midfield if there is quality around him but he could also get injured and play very few games - that money could ahve paid for two possibly 3 good quality players, a gamble IMO.

For Lingard, £50K a week is more important than playing for team that realistically could be top 6 this season and maybe have a crack at a cup? Or does he relish the challenge of keeping the Trees up?

---

£200k per week! Really? Madness.

I mean it’s Forest so I’m not hugely interested but if Lingard is worth that where does it all end?

I was never that impressed with him at Derby...he flattered to deceive at MUFC...and seemed to be making progress at West Ham but, as you say, what a risk! Seven clubs in eleven years. Speaks volumes.

Great deal for Lingard but for Forest? We’ll see, but I’d be reluctant to sign anyone who’s already looking for a way out if things go pear shaped.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

So the Trees have signed Lingard on £200K a week!

Makes the Rams signing of Earnshaw back in 2007 look a tad under ambitious!!

Its a one year contract, so if they don't stay up no hangover cost, he could provide the catalyst in midfield if there is quality around him but he could also get injured and play very few games - that money could ahve paid for two possibly 3 good quality players, a gamble IMO.

For Lingard, £50K a week is more important than playing for team that realistically could be top 6 this season and maybe have a crack at a cup? Or does he relish the challenge of keeping the Trees up?

---

Again, where did you see this Proof?

You often moan anout folks reading things in the "press" and believing them. XD

I have been told its actually £80k a week and bonus's. But no where near your 200k.
But even if it was, you need to look at the maths.
Wolves want 30M for Gibbs White + wages , so at 50 k a week and 1/3 rd of TF.= £12 . 6 m
Lingaard on free at 200k a week - £10.4 M

Ones a current England international, the other has had a half decent season on loan at SUFC, but can't get in the Wolves first team.

MMMMMMMMMMMMMM,

Well there are various quotes in various media, one quoted Moyes as saying we offered a maximum of £145K a week, but Forest offered more at £200k and we weren't prepared to break the West Ham wage structure.

If its 80K a week the he has taken a drop from his manure wages which were in excess of £120K a week, so cannot see that being true.

Today media reports ranging from SKy to the BBC etc. are quoting £115K per week plus add ons - which given these are appearance fees, goal bonus etc etc. the final weekly wage could well be in the region of £200k.

I didn't necessarily say it was a wrong move, as you say a free transfer (though given the agent will still want a fee they are never free), can mean more wages. However, if he crocks himself badly within the first couple of weeks or indeed just doesn't sparkle as hoped then the gamble will ahve been an expensive one. Also what will smashing the wage structure do for other players?

In the short term maybe nothing, but once a club has paid that for a player, others who perform well will start demanding the same or will leave.

Getting crocked shouldn't matter as his wages OUGHT to be insured and there is no residual transfer value to need to cover. He may come good for them, but the odds would be against I reckon.

Typical Forest, picking up Derby rejects on free transfers....

Can I add, and break the swear filter by saying, I couldn’t give a ****?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Geoff Parkstone

Getting crocked shouldn't matter as his wages OUGHT to be insured and there is no residual transfer value to need to cover. He may come good for them, but the odds would be against I reckon.

Typical Forest, picking up Derby rejects on free transfers....

---

But he isn't free, he's costing us £200 k a week isn't he? XD

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andy_Faber

Can I add, and break the swear filter by saying, I couldn’t give a ****?

---

Well you have, but surely a more mature approach would be to simply ignore the thread?

Its of interest in how our biggest rivals approach being in the premier league - the approach seems rather different from the way we were picking up "gems" like Eddie Lewis!!

Is there insurance which pays out if a player is out injured for a season GP? There is if they have a career threatening injury, but if they miss say half a season not sure that exists and for how many players?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

Is there insurance which pays out if a player is out injured for a season GP? There is if they have a career threatening injury, but if they miss say half a season not sure that exists and for how many players?

---

Not my area but I was wondering the same thing. In recent years I don’t recall the long term injuries to the likes of Hughes, Keogh (slightly different I accept), Marriott and Davies as being seen as anything less than quite catastrophic. Don’t remember talk of financial compensation...although I think there may have been something with George Thorne.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swaledale

Well you have, but surely a more mature approach would be to simply ignore the thread?

Its of interest in how our biggest rivals approach being in the premier league - the approach seems rather different from the way we were picking up "gems" like Eddie Lewis!!

Is there insurance which pays out if a player is out injured for a season GP? There is if they have a career threatening injury, but if they miss say half a season not sure that exists and for how many players?

---

yes there is although obviously the sum insured and injury history would be risk assessed and underwritten/priced accordingly and deductibles in the form of minimum injury periods applied. Doesn't of course mean Forest would take it out though

You can (or at least used to be able to) get loss of earnings cover as a player as well - used to see it a lot for tennis players or golfers who are more akin to "self employed" whereas a footballer is an employee

Long back in the day one of my clients used to provide the player injury insurance for all the NBA teams - now those were some eye opening numbers, even 20 years ago !