George Hirst

[Mickey Martin]

George Hirst will be yet another one to move over to the lane and make it.....

[Lord Snooty]

 

The interesting thing is not the lack of respect to the fans. Or club. That doesn't really bother me. 

 

It's the bigging up of a player (acquaintance  or not) of your employers biggest rival.  When the moment in question is an embarrassing for one of your work colleagues. 

That's the bit I don't get.

 

If twitter had been around in the day I wonder what would have happened if a youth player had tweeted a like on a picture of big Nige Pearson getting megged. Truth is...it wouldn't have happened. 

 

Still.  Kids these days. They're obsessed with megs. 

Facebook is full of videos with 500,000 views of a megging. 

I think some of them would rather be remembered as a legendary megging GIF than actually win a league title these days.

 

Celebrities. Blah blah. 

 

By Christ. 

2 hours sleep I must have had in the last 24.

Time to turn in.

 

Everything about football is doing me in at the moment. 

 

 

 

 

[Socialist_Owl]

3 hours ago, scram said:

 

 

He's not being held to ransom - thats ridiculous

 

He's been in negotiations and can't reach agreement - happens all the time in football

 

Because of the impasse we need to move on and focus on the players who are going to be here - not inhibit their cahnces at the expense of a player who is leaving

 

I don't get why so many people seem to have difficulty with that

Stellar handling of our prized wunderkind.  Alienate him and his team legend dad to the point where he lose him for nowt.

 

And for what?  Where is the disconnect between club and player coming from! ?  Could we not maximize our value on Hirst if unloading is the only option?

 

 

[Lord Snooty]

6 minutes ago, Socialist_Owl said:

Stellar handling of our prized wunderkind.  Alienate him and his team legend dad to the point where he lose him for nowt.

 

And for what?  Where is the disconnect between club and player coming from! ?  Could we not maximize our value on Hirst if unloading is the only option?

 

 

But what's the alternative?

Put him on a big contract on a huge wage and stick him in the first eleven?

 

Fernandos bicycle would be back out of the shed before the ink was dry.

 

Fletcher, Hooper Rhodes, Fernando on the bench on their massive contracts?

Big name players, big personalities £100k a week in wages sat there depreciating in value  on the bench with the  monk on. Agents agitating.  

It'd be a fortnight before the agents were saying "At his age my client needs first team football.

It would be a right old can of worms.

Team morale?

Managers standing in the dressing room with the senior players?

 

What if he didn't do anything? Which in this side isn't unthinkable. Didn't score any goals. What if we lost games? Dropped down the table.

Back into the kids team but on first team money?

 

And what of the other young players?

How come he's on triple what I'm on, he's no nearer the first team than I am? 

 

All supposition. I don't know.

None of us do. 

 

It's all an absolute shitstorm. 

 

But I know one thing...

In 100 years you me and George Hirst will all be long dead and Sheffield Wednesday will still be here. 

 

 

[Athelwulf]

I bet McScrooge was rubbing his hands when Brooks had a good game on TV. Ker-ching. 

[Internationowl]

5 hours ago, Socialist_Owl said:

Stellar handling of our prized wunderkind.  Alienate him and his team legend dad to the point where he lose him for nowt.

 

And for what?  Where is the disconnect between club and player coming from! ?  Could we not maximize our value on Hirst if unloading is the only option?

 

 

I agree with what you've put here. A socialist talking about maximising market value though..?

[scram]

We won't lose him for nothing

 

And there surely is a point where we cannot go beyond

 

As i said - it's an impasse - nothing new or unusual

 

We don't know the details - apart from those posting to say they do know but can't say...i understand they can't divulge details but what is the point of posting to say they can't say anything?

 

The issue will be what GH thinks he can get elsewhere - and what we have offered

 

It's likely he will have a figure in mind and we have a limit to where we can go with development players

 

And while premier league clubs can afford to gamble with a few million here and there - we can't. He may have a future value we cannot quantify - that is the nature of potential

 

Football history is absolutely littered with "the next big thing" who never made it anywhere

 

And currently GH has absolutely no quantifiable mileage in the game

[billyblack]

6 hours ago, Socialist_Owl said:

Stellar handling of our prized wunderkind.  Alienate him and his team legend dad to the point where he lose him for nowt.

 

And for what?  Where is the disconnect between club and player coming from! ?  Could we not maximize our value on Hirst if unloading is the only option?

 

 

you would have thought so wouldnt you....

[billyblack]

4 minutes ago, scram said:

We won't lose him for nothing

 

And there surely is a point where we cannot go beyond

 

As i said - it's an impasse - nothing new or unusual

 

We don't know the details - apart from those posting to say they do know but can't say...i understand they can't divulge details but what is the point of posting to say they can't say anything?

 

The issue will be what GH thinks he can get elsewhere - and what we have offered

 

It's likely he will have a figure in mind and we have a limit to where we can go with development players

 

And while premier league clubs can afford to gamble with a few million here and there - we can't. He may have a future value we cannot quantify - that is the nature of potential

 

Football history is absolutely littered with "the next big thing" who never made it anywhere

 

And currently GH has absolutely no quantifiable mileage in the game

if we offered (and it is an if) 10k a week for example for 2 years, thats just over  million for the term. loan him out and get the loan club to pay 3 or 4k a week towards his wages. over 2 years thats costing us 750k. at the end of the first season on loan we will have a better idea how he is doing. he would still be worth something. these numbers dont look that big to me but then its not my money. look at the money we have spent elsewhere

[scram]

1 hour ago, billyblack said:

if we offered (and it is an if) 10k a week for example for 2 years, thats just over  million for the term. loan him out and get the loan club to pay 3 or 4k a week towards his wages. over 2 years thats costing us 750k. at the end of the first season on loan we will have a better idea how he is doing. he would still be worth something. these numbers dont look that big to me but then its not my money. look at the money we have spent elsewhere

 

 

The problem is that the set you frame of reference for the development player who are negotiating contracts

 

Chelsea started to get into trouble over this so they became more sensible

 

For eg Nathaniel Chalobah had a very good season in the championship at 17 - so Chelsea wanted to protect his value and offered him a new deal at around £30k pw.

 

So then Dom Solanke (who at that point was the supposed Golden Goose in their academy) then said he wanted £50k pw because he was the best player - even though he didn't have anything like the experience Chalobah had gained - but the game had changed with Chalobah's wage deal

 

And it remains a problem and raises the bar

 

It's bad enough at 1st team level - it's ridiculpous for it to be happening at academy level

 

So, just what is this "derisory" offer?

 

Is it derisory in relation to what we view as sensible and fair - or is it derisory in terms of what Chelsea pay their young players?

 

Because there will be a helluva chasm between those 2 figures...

[Lythamowl]

send young george on loan to bramall lane

 

they clearly can develop young talent.......

[BIG D]

He’s got to want to play though. 

[just visiting]

1 hour ago, billyblack said:

if we offered (and it is an if) 10k a week for example for 2 years, thats just over  million for the term. loan him out and get the loan club to pay 3 or 4k a week towards his wages. over 2 years thats costing us 750k. at the end of the first season on loan we will have a better idea how he is doing. he would still be worth something. these numbers dont look that big to me but then its not my money. look at the money we have spent elsewhere

Before his move to SUFC, James Hanson was only on £5k per week at Bradford and he was one of  League One's top goalscorers not a rookie just learning his trade.

 

Which lower league club did you have in mind that would be willing to pay £3-4k per week on an 18 year old with little or no senior football under his belt? 

[billyblack]

9 minutes ago, scram said:

 

 

The problem is that the set you frame of reference for the development player who are negotiating contracts

 

Chelsea started to get into trouble over this so they became more sensible

 

For eg Nathaniel Chalobah had a very good season in the championship at 17 - so Chelsea wanted to protect his value and offered him a new deal at around £30k pw.

 

So then Dom Solanke (who at that point was the supposed Golden Goose in their academy) then said he wanted £50k pw because he was the best player - even though he didn't have anything like the experience Chalobah had gained - but the game had changed with Chalobah's wage deal

 

And it remains a problem and raises the bar

 

It's bad enough at 1st team level - it's ridiculpous for it to be happening at academy level

 

So, just what is this "derisory" offer?

 

Is it derisory in relation to what we view as sensible and fair - or is it derisory in terms of what Chelsea pay their young players?

 

Because there will be a helluva chasm between those 2 figures...

i get all that mate. setting a precedence can be a problem.

 

if the club are rigid on this and its entirely ok for them to be, then in my opinion we should be maximising his worth and we should have loaned him in the summer. unless of course we think so what, he is leaving anyway. just let him do nowt and then get whatever the tribunal say. all a pretty sad state of affairs

[marshy]

Surely the impass over a contract does not stop the manager from selecting him in the squad. That what I don't get? We got torn apart yesterday by his England team mate. Give the lad a chance ffs. Worst case he fails. Best case his value shoots through the roof. 

[billyblack]

2 minutes ago, just visiting said:

Before his move to SUFC, James Hanson was only on £5k per week at Bradford and he was one of  League One's top goalscorers not a rookie just learning his trade.

 

Which lower league club did you have in mind that would be willing to pay £3-4k per week on an 18 year old with little or no senior football under his belt? 

if he is as good as he thinks he is he should get 25 goals easily in div 1. 3 or 4k a week for 25 goals im sure most clubs would pay. however even of we got nothing towarda his wages and it cost us 500k a year, in a years or two years time he would still be worth something. should get at least a milion for him if not more so what have we lost?

[Guest BULGARIA]

3 hours ago, Internationowl said:

I agree with what you've put here. A socialist talking about maximising market value though..?

 

Socialist is an anagram of "frustrated capitalist"

[Internationowl]

1 minute ago, BULGARIA said:

 

Socialist is an anagram of "frustrated capitalist"

Maybe he just enjoys a glass of bubbly from time to time?

[Kopparberg]

All this silly money flying about in global football is a major problem. 

 

It's now filtering down the younger lads - now lads with potential can ask for X amount and make a bizarre argument for it. 

 

People know DC has money and hands out nice contracts, so everyone is going to want a piece of the pie. 

 

If GH wants to play for Wednesday he'll stay and live on Wadsley Park Village - if his head has been turned already then he'll leave for a big house in Chester or whatever. Players have all the power. 

 

He'll be getting offers from elsewhere so will probably be interested by them.

 

There isn't many fairytales in football anymore, like the son of a Wednesday legend following in his dad's footsteps and scoring lots of goals.

 

Football today is all about getting 14 year old kids from Africa over in a private plane, buying them a flat in London and giving them a load of money in case they turn out to be the next Mbappe. 

 

 

 

[Dick_Turpin]

49 minutes ago, scram said:

 

 

The problem is that the set you frame of reference for the development player who are negotiating contracts

 

Chelsea started to get into trouble over this so they became more sensible

 

For eg Nathaniel Chalobah had a very good season in the championship at 17 - so Chelsea wanted to protect his value and offered him a new deal at around £30k pw.

 

So then Dom Solanke (who at that point was the supposed Golden Goose in their academy) then said he wanted £50k pw because he was the best player - even though he didn't have anything like the experience Chalobah had gained - but the game had changed with Chalobah's wage deal

 

And it remains a problem and raises the bar

 

It's bad enough at 1st team level - it's ridiculpous for it to be happening at academy level

 

So, just what is this "derisory" offer?

 

Is it derisory in relation to what we view as sensible and fair - or is it derisory in terms of what Chelsea pay their young players?

 

Because there will be a helluva chasm between those 2 figures...

I don't have a problem with us not offering what he wants if we feel it's extortionate.

 

But if our response is then to freeze him out I worry that could look petty and doesn't exactly make us attractive to other young players.

 

I understand we may not want to continue developing a player for other clubs but it isn't going to help his value increase if he sits on his arse for the rest of the year.