Is the former Reading and Chelsea man hoping somebody else might come in at the last moment to save him? Anybody else wondering if another Eider situation is unfolding before us?
Or maybe Sidwell is conscious of who we play next and is in no hurry to line up opposite Joey Barton?
At £250,000 he sounds a snip, but his salary might be another matter. Apparently Villa's wage bill is £7m higher than Tottenham's! Sidwell would have been on a tasty retainer at Chelsea and presumably demanded to be kept in the lifestyle to which he had grown accustomed when he moved to the Midlands. Villa aren't offloading him to pocket a quarter of a million, they want him out to offload an ongoing financial burden.
Remember Ljungberg? And Dyer? And McCarthy? Let's hope Sidwell isn't another in an unfortunate series of money down the drain signings! A 3 year contract on £50,000 a week would cost us £7,800,000. Add in a fee of £250,000 and that would make Sidwell an £8million man! Suddenly he don't sound so cheap does he?
10 comments:
i get your jist but if you add wages and a transfer fee together no player is worth it. faubert is a 20 million quid signing if you add his reported 5 year 60k deal and transfer fee together and lets not get started on dyers 4 year deal. point is everyone at west ham apart from the young lads would have cost well over 10 million each over the duration of their contract. try it with any player and see for yourself. so sell faubert and we have enough funds to buy sidwell, pay his wages and have several million left over. i can see a few big earners leaving to put us in a healthier situation. what do you reckon about the fact 3 of our 4 current first choice defenders are out of contract in the next 6 month and ben haim is off back to pompey. illunga, tompkins, da costa and...faubert/spector would be a disaster. full backs that cant defend and 2 young lads that have potential but need an established cb to be at their best. point is do you reckon we should retain ben haim, pompey will be deperate to get rid and he can play all across the back
Well Faubert was a bloody awful signing wasn't he?
We should definitely retain Ben Haim!
I think we should tell Sidwell to bugger off. We are clearly not a first choice, and I immediately thought of Eidur.
Let him go if he wants to. Look what happened to Gudjonson. Had to escape to stoke and has failed to start a game for them. Now wanted by Swansea on loan!
Use Ben Haim's wages on Sidwell!!!!!
Villa fans don't seem to rate him at all. May be he would be a good one to miss out on.
John,
To be honest mate, Villa fans wanted to hold on to to Barry! Maybe we should take Sidwell in that case!
Sky are saying it's dependent on us selling Behrami. Hence it's only correct of Sidwell to keep his options open in case we don't manage to offload Behrami.
Surprised though. Why can't they not put up £250,000? We're losing precious time. They can get Sidwell in and have him available whilst having the whole of Jan to sell Behrami.
Or alternatively, we only need Sidwell if Behrami goes. Why waste any money bringing in a player you don't need. It's the wages that are the issue. Interestingly, Grant has said he is in the dark about what is going on and suggested he has no say in it. Kind of blows out of the water your suggestion that G&S have backed Grant more than Zola doesn't it? Seems Grant has no more say, and perhaps less say, than Zola was allowed in the signing of, say, McBenni!
Really? But then it proves the fact that Grant is even more of a yes man/obedient than Zola. YOU dissed Zola on this....for accepting things without challenge. Grant is worse in that case! You're stuck again HF.
And my statement that Grant has more support was not only in reference to transfer dealings. It was in reference to a more general support. He is their man, they support him like they did not Zola. Have you heard them undermine him in public like they did with Zola? No. then that is support too.
Quite the reverse, Grant has not claimed to be in control as Zola did, has not endorsed the Board as Zola always did and sounded a tad pissed off to me. Zola and Duxbury were up each other's arses in a major way, and Nani was a part of the great love in. They shafted the fans by never telling us how it actually was and pretending that the manager was making all the footballing decisions. Zola "wanted" to work with a smaller squad. Zola was involved in ALL the decisions relating to incomings and outgoings. Grant has said it how it is. "I am not involved in this. I don't know what is going on." He has the balls to say it how it is rather than be a smiling puppet fronting the rape of our club.
Post a Comment