handworth52 Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 Rhodes was on 60k at middlesborough that was widely reported , took a pay cut coming here ,though a longer contract . im guessing 40k a week but some think he is on less here . we paid 8 million for him and appx 40k a week wages . Norwich wouldn't get a proven goalscorer (yes in the past) without paying a loan fee and his full wages, remember the deal was agreed very early too. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonny Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 10 hours ago, darra said: Norwich have "first refusal" to sign him. If we want him back we have to pay back the loan fee and wages paid to him. Fee is still being negotiated by the clubs with Norwich wanting to pay less than first agreed I assume you’re getting this from Daz, who originally said Rhodes would definitely be sold in January. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
handworth52 Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 6 hours ago, alanharper said: So Norwich loan an £8m striker for a season, but if we have the audacity to actually want our own player back we have to pay his last year's wages plus the loan fee back meaning that Norwich had him completely free for a year at our expense? And not only that but they're also trying to diddle us on the agreed fee (in the highly unlikely event that they want to sign him permanently after he contributed virtually nothing to their season)? The first and last sentences actually do sound possible, but let's just take a minute to think about how ridiculously implausible that middle sentence is... im 99% sure that Rhodes was just a loan without any transfer at end of it ,im sure steve bruce said that a couple of weeks ago . he will be coming back but go elsewhere who knows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
striker Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 Reports were that a substantial loan fee and 100% wage contribution were agreed. With that kind of investment, I'd be surprised if Norwich don't have some contractual option to buy. Bruce intimated this in "waiting to see what Norwich wanted to do" presumably whether they want to exercise that the option to buy. Suspect there may be some negotiation in hand regarding a fee, likely to be undisclosed. Personally, if we can cover the outstanding amortized portion of his transfer fee and get his wage off the books, think we will do well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matthefish2002 Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 6 hours ago, The Captain said: If Rhodes is on anything north of £20,000 per week at Wednesday, then that is all the proof you need that the individuals acting on behalf of Sheffield Wednesday, that were responsible for that particular contract, are not fit for purpose. The collection of dozy transfer flops like Rhodes that we accrued in the 2016/17 transfer windows, mean that we’re running up huge debts and the rumours that Hillsborough stadium, the club’s home for generations, could be sold in order to facilitate this feckless governance, are not going away. It stinks. Let’s hope the individuals responsible are now gone for good. I don't know Jordan Rhodes exact wages but when we did sign him he had the reputation of best striker outside the top division for last few season so I would be surprised if not one of the top earners at Wednesday. I don't actually blame Wednesday for Rhodes by himself being a flop here, mistakes in the transfer market are always going to happen. But I do blame who ever was in charge of decisions for the amount of big money transfers we got wrong. We were like a kid in candy store! More I think about it I really, really don't believe we signed Rhodes as a 'gift to there fans'. Be mental if we did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanharper Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 55 minutes ago, Sonny said: So implausible that there is no middle sentence? Suggest you look again at the post I was quoting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonny Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 10 minutes ago, alanharper said: Suggest you look again at the post I was quoting... Gotcha... had to read yours seven times to check I wasn’t going mad. It does seem rather implausible, and daft that that if they can renegotiate then why couldn’t we tell them to swivel on paying back a loan fee/wages. Although I’d much rather they buy him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beholder Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 Rhodes signing is an example of a chairman being in charge of incomings rather than a manager with a plan. I don't believe any manager who knew what he was doing would have spunked the budget on Jordan Rhodes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dutch McLovin Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 Rumour has it that Rhodes move will be made permanent shortly. God knows why or how but this would be a great move for us whatever his wage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeffjohnsonmyhero Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 £500 a week is too much for him ,Be honest does he put everything on the line when playing for us ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LiamAP22D Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 13 hours ago, Mrs Blenkinsops shed said: I've been told the same thing Source Blackburn and Boro. I heard he was on 35k a week and Blackburn and 5k a goal. then boro signed him on 60k a week Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darra Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 9 hours ago, alanharper said: So Norwich loan an £8m striker for a season, but if we have the audacity to actually want our own player back we have to pay his last year's wages plus the loan fee back meaning that Norwich had him completely free for a year at our expense? And not only that but they're also trying to diddle us on the agreed fee (in the highly unlikely event that they want to sign him permanently after he contributed virtually nothing to their season)? The first and last sentences actually do sound possible, but let's just take a minute to think about how ridiculously implausible that middle sentence is... Thats the loan agreement as told to me. Ask yourself, if as is true they haven't played him why didn't they send him back, why have they kept him all season? Not all loan deals are the same. We've had deals in the past where part of the deal is that the loanee must play all games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darra Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 3 hours ago, southportdc said: Even if this mental clause is true, presumably it would only operate if we wanted to overrule Norwich's right to sign him. If they turn down the chance to do so, as presumably they will, then we'll get him back for nowt. Yes the loan was for the season with no recall clause for either club without "compensation" being due. A fee was agreed and as I've said Norwich want to renegotiate. If he were to return my understanding is he could with neither club being asked to repay fees etc as the loan has now finished. Again my uunderstanding is he wants to stay at Norwich and they want to sign him but negotiations are ongoing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howards back Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 I would be surprised if Norwich signed him. He hardly started in the championship so what chance would he get in the premiership? Norwich will be looking for better players than Rhodes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darra Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 2 hours ago, handworth52 said: im 99% sure that Rhodes was just a loan without any transfer at end of it ,im sure steve bruce said that a couple of weeks ago . he will be coming back but go elsewhere who knows. Last comment I heard from Bruce was that he didn't know what the situation was with Rhodes and would need to ask the chairman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesdaywizard Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 11 minutes ago, brazilowl said: I would be surprised if Norwich signed him. He hardly started in the championship so what chance would he get in the premiership? Norwich will be looking for better players than Rhodes. I agree, I'd be surprised if they kept him. But if the fee is, say, £5m then it's a flash in the pan with the PL money that they're about to pull in and if they feel that he's a good piece of their puzzle, or he's made influential friends, then they might keep him around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alanharper Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 18 minutes ago, darra said: Thats the loan agreement as told to me. Ask yourself, if as is true they haven't played him why didn't they send him back, why have they kept him all season? Not all loan deals are the same. We've had deals in the past where part of the deal is that the loanee must play all games If they pay a loan fee for the season then it usually can't be terminated, and he's been in their squad pretty much every week but has barely been used. Not started a game since October and only used for more than 20 minutes twice since then. It's quite likely that they have first option to buy, and possibly even agreed a fee. But it wasn't a loan deal with an obligation to buy, because those deals are confirmed and public knowledge from the start (and the transfer takes place in the next transfer window which would have been January). If they want him, they need to stump up the agreed fee, if they don't and we reject whatever lower sum they're offering he comes back to us. You said " If we want him back we have to pay back the loan fee and wages paid to him." Which means that in theory had Rhodes suddenly "done a Pukki", rediscovered his goalscoring form from 5-6 years ago, and virtually singlehandedly got Norwich promoted, they could then just turn round now and say actually we don't want him to play for us in the PL now that we're loaded, so we're sending him back to you and by the way you've got to give us the loan fee and his year's wages back so we've had him free for a year and you've paid for our promotion. That's really not very likely to be true, is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Key Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 "Rhodes salary this cant be true." Tip of the day: There are many, many things that can't be true; it's probably best not to start threads on all of them though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BARMYARMY2010 Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 15 hours ago, RichieB said: There was a guy who was quite high up at Wednesday that said none of our players earned more than £35k a week at a forum. Think he said he was the owner or summat. But yet,we still have fans insisting he earns more than that because "they've been told or i've heard".............................its quite baffling really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Hooper Posted May 10, 2019 Share Posted May 10, 2019 15 hours ago, Shot down in flames. said: So my dads boss was sat in our kitchen earlier he isn’t an owl or a pig, not sure who he supports if I am honest, is very high up at a large company that operates across Europe, he regularly gets top level hospitality at football up and down the country, directors box seats, was at Norwich a couple of weeks ago and talking to one of there directors, said that they were paying half his wages and Wednesday the other half as the deal, reckoned Norwich are paying him 36k a week as are we surely he can’t be on 72k but the way things were back then it is plausible. If it is true (personally I doubt it) no wonder we are in a pickle! He's on more than half the Spurs squad. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now