John Stones transfer saga

[chicoazul]

Why? So the agent and every other agent in the land can pull the same trick every 12 months?

Status of the club comes into play - you've signed a five year contract with Everton; he should be expected to honour more than 20% of that without discussing it further surely?

Morality in football is long gone, only brinksmanship remains. Do what we can to keep the player or regret it.

He's the best young defender we've seen and we have a seriously talented young squad with potential to realise. Stones going will be fretted by us for a long time. Use all available means to keep him.

 

[D410]

Because clearly Chelsea pay higher wages than we can afford and after having 2 bids rejected Stones and his agents have shown no desire to force through a move. If it was about his income they'd have either initiated contract negiotions already with Everton or tried to force the move through to Chelsea.

It's common football practice as well you know Sir.

Wrong again. The onus is on EFC to acknowledge the market value of there players contracts and ensure they are offering the right value to the player. Stones market value has gone through the roof therefore the contract he was signed on is not fit for purposes based on his current value to a buyers mkt. Good clubs protects there most prize fin assets by being of the front foot unless of course the club was hedging the bets and the player is still actually for sale based on a valuation the board feel overrules the manager and player.

As you well know

 

[Bungle]

I honestly wonder how some people get through every day life

 

[Woolly Blue]

Have the chat now then, make it clear we will sit down and review his remuneration after the Transfer Window closes with some ballpark figures.

I'd be surprised if some sort of informal chat hadn't taken place, but that's different to sitting down with him and his agent to agree a new contract now.

Contract negotiations take time, on both sides.

 

[mkrudden]

Dunno why but for the first time I think he might be go.
I can't see Chelsea not paying whatever it takes.

 

[Gotagotmug]

Spot on and is reflected on this site by all those posting every day in the Transfer Thread.

When you stay into the abyss, the abyss asks back "What's his speed stats tho lad?"

 

[kenada_blue]

[Poor language removed] is this guy? The "yet to be completely convinced by him" I think is on Chelsea's end.

Oh. Well then. We should give him over for a tenner.

Clearly José don't know a player when he sees one. He's insane.

 

[Dithering Dougie]

You're second guessing a lot there sir.

Offering him a better contract to reflect his worth is a definite positive. On principle yes it would pain somewhat but if it meant one more thing that could tip the player into staying then we would be foolish not to consider it.

It's common practice in employment to offer more wages when someone has a better offer if the company want to retain the employee.

Now come on Sir you know fine well Chelsea can and will be able to pay John Stones more money than we could offer, you will also have seen this scenario being played out countless times before with other players at other clubs. If this was simply about how much John Stones can earn we'd not stand a chance and he would have handed in a transfer request weeks ago, or his agent would have made his position known through the media and they'd have forced a move by now.

The fact that none of this has happened strongly indicates Stones isn't solely driven by how much he earns at the moment and offering an improved contract isn't likely to sway him to stay one way or the other Sir.

 

[BoysInBlue]

'Yet to be completely convinced by him' is an ace get out in a supposedly defiant 'I wasn't wrong but I might be' tweet.

It's the S*n, people shouldn't expect anything else.

He's full of crap and he's already backtracking. At least Matt Law is being fed stuff by the horses mouth. This chancer know f all.

 

[Tubey]

Morality in football is long gone, only brinksmanship remains. Do what we can to keep the player or regret it.

He's the best young defender we've seen and we have a seriously talented young squad with potential to realise. Stones going will be fretted by us for a long time. Use all available means to keep him.

We have though - a five year contract and saying "no" repeatedly to clubs wanting him.

What are we supposed to do, offer him £200k a week to 'compensate' for no Champs League footy?

We can't offer him the money Chelsea can regardless of what we do, so it comes down to two things - us offering him sensible contracts at sensible intervals, or clubs meeting our valuation of the player during the contract he's in.

 

[chicoazul]

Now come on Sir you know fine well Chelsea can and will be able to pay John Stones more money than we could offer, you will also have seen this scenario being played out countless times before with other players at other clubs. If this was simply about how much John Stones can earn we'd not stand a chance and he would have handed in a transfer request weeks ago, or his agent would have made his position known through the media and they'd have forced a move by now.

The fact that none of this has happened strongly indicates Stones isn't solely driven by how much he earns at the moment and offering an improved contract isn't likely to sway him to stay one way or the other Sir.

I think you're being naive sir.

 

[Foot Long Hot Dog]

@D410 - how do you know that the club haven't had a discussion with his agent about a new deal? You're just seeking a stick to beat the club with (as per) they've knocked back £30m ffs, most would suggest that they might even deserve some credit for standing firm in the wake of an organised and contrived media lead pursuit of one of our young stars. Give it a rest ffs.

 

[chicoazul]

We have though - a five year contract and saying "no" repeatedly to clubs wanting him.

What are we supposed to do, offer him £200k a week to 'compensate' for no Champs League footy?

We can't offer him the money Chelsea can regardless of what we do, so it comes down to two things - us offering him sensible contracts at sensible intervals, or clubs meeting our valuation of the player during the contract he's in.

No not that much you big silly, simmer down.

 

[Bungle]

@D410 - how do you know that the club haven't had a discussion with his agent about a new deal? You're just seeking a stick to beat the club with (as per) they've knocked back £30m ffs, most would suggest that they might even deserve some credit for standing firm in the wake of an organised and contrived media lead pursuit of one of our young stars. Give it a rest ffs.

He'll be with you shortly mate, he's currently rimming Bizzaro and tugging Davek off

 

[tonka1878]

Do people actually think he's not for sale?

£34m and he's off unfortunately. Stones wants to go and the club will have to sell.

Tell you that did he?