How Long Does Rhodes Have Left On His Contract?

[AucklandRover]

On a serious note does anyone really think Mr Rhodes will be playing for rovers come August ?

I think he will go to a smaller premiership club and not Burnley maybe Leicester / stoke / Norwich ?

You Clarets keep saying this, but you steer clear of the actual mechanics of such a deal. For example (leaving aside FFP effects, which nobody can predict), what is the minimum YOU think Rovers would accept for Rhodes? Surely it wouldn't be less than we originally paid for him. How would that make sense, given that he has maintained his goal-scoring record?
On the other hand, some Rovers fans (including me) think that weaknesses in his all-round play would mean ten million pounds would be a high-risk deal for a PL club. Nevertheless, crazy bids ARE often made by desperate managers, so we MIGHT see a bid of that magnitude, which would be too good to turn down. That makes it win-win for Rovers, as far as I can see.
Why on earth

[blueandwhitehalves1]

Bang on Auckland. Anyone who actually does the logic on the Rhodes situation should come to the conclusion that there is little chance of him leaving this summer. In fact nothing has changed since last summer. I said 18 months ago when he first started being touted for a move that nothing would happen until summer 2015. Thats the earliest his dwindling contract might start coming into play.

[bluenick]

Can I just throw a spanner into the FFP debate. Should the TV money not be shared out evenly across each league? What I am saying is that for an example Liverpool have been on the Sky matches the most times this season & over the years! Does this not make an uneven playing field giving such teams an advantage? The people who bring in fair play have got to be fair have they not?

[blueandwhitehalves1]

FFP is a disaster for football at the highest level. All it does is protect the status quo and keeps the finishing positions each season in the same tedious, boring, almost identical positions to the previous season.

Get rid of rich benefactors at the highest level and all thats left is how many gloryhunters a team has. Gloryhunters being the main source of revenue for the likes of Man U and Arsenal with their sponsorship deals and merchandise sales. So teams that have the most financially bully the others and finish at the top each year, and get even more gloryhunters, guaranteeing they'll finish at the top the year after, etc etc.

I can understand the logic behind FFP, to stop clubs overspending and getting into debt, but there should be some room for common sense when the owner is clearly keeping a club stable out of his own pocket.

[alfinyalcabo]

"I can understand the logic behind FFP, to stop clubs overspending and getting into debt, but there should be some room for common sense when the owner is clearly keeping a club stable out of his own pocket."

Hmmm. That sounds a bit like pot kettle BW..

[champs95]

FFP is a disaster for football at the highest level. All it does is protect the status quo and keeps the finishing positions each season in the same tedious, boring, almost identical positions to the previous season.

Get rid of rich benefactors at the highest level and all thats left is how many gloryhunters a team has. Gloryhunters being the main source of revenue for the likes of Man U and Arsenal with their sponsorship deals and merchandise sales. So teams that have the most financially bully the others and finish at the top each year, and get even more gloryhunters, guaranteeing they'll finish at the top the year after, etc etc.

I can understand the logic behind FFP, to stop clubs overspending and getting into debt, but there should be some room for common sense when the owner is clearly keeping a club stable out of his own pocket.

It made me laugh. All this talk, and City (may or may not) get a paltry fine of 50m

[champs95]

[quote="alfinyalcabo"

Hmmm. That sounds a bit like pot kettle BW..[/quote]

So if Burnley got a chance to be invested by a rich benefactor, you'd be opposed to that Alf?
fair enough ...

[lotty1]

Have you paid for Rhodes yet ?

These stupid transfer fees would be wiped out over night IF ALL CLUBS had to pay transfer fees in one foul swoop rather than over 1/2/3+ seasons .

With respect 36K per week for Rhodes and others reportedly on similar . Are you happy with that and do you really think it's sustainable ?

Football needs to get back to some sort of reality but it seems modern day football isn't in the real world .

[champs95]

Lotty.

We paid our final payment last season. Manchester United still owed Rovers a huge amount for Jones. When one of the richest clubs in world football settled their payment, we in turn made our final payment on Rhodes.

Re his wage. Nicola Zigic earns 96k a week. At Brum. A club in turmoil. To retain one of the best goalscorers in the Champ, it was what it was.
Can it be sustained? If he got up next season, probably yes.

[Howie5o]

FFP is a disaster for football at the highest level. All it does is protect the status quo and keeps the finishing positions each season in the same tedious, boring, almost identical positions to the previous season.

Get rid of rich benefactors at the highest level and all thats left is how many gloryhunters a team has. Gloryhunters being the main source of revenue for the likes of Man U and Arsenal with their sponsorship deals and merchandise sales. So teams that have the most financially bully the others and finish at the top each year, and get even more gloryhunters, guaranteeing they'll finish at the top the year after, etc etc.

I can understand the logic behind FFP, to stop clubs overspending and getting into debt, but there should be some room for common sense when the owner is clearly keeping a club stable out of his own pocket.

It made me laugh. All this talk, and