Jump to content

Andreas Weimann


Adam2003

Recommended Posts

If a contract is accepted at first offer, I suspect the offer was too high!

I don't think any of the contract talks are at stalemate yet. Our club is not a bottomless pit of money so I don't blame it for not being held to ransom, i.e. deciding what a player is worth and not exceeding it. The club will offer lower and move to a middle ground - the period we are in, I guess. At the same time, I don't blame players and agents waiting to see what other clubs are offering.

I would really like Andi to stay but if he has an offer of say £45k/week, should we really be trying to match or improve on it? Andi would be snapped up by half a dozen clubs at £25k per week, but we'd have no trouble matching that. I only hope there isn't a manager out there who takes a shine to Andi and persuades his club to offer £40k+/week.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Contracts should be performance based IMO

£25k p/w basic

£10k per goal

£10k per assist

£2k per point gained for matches contributed to

2 goals and an assist in a win, for example would get him £61k

No goals or assists and a loss, would get him £25k

Every player should be on similarly structured deals. If we're successful, we pay more wages, if we're not, we don't. Nobody gets paid for not pulling their weight, nobody bleeds the club, players only get what they're proving themselves to be worth

I'm sure most contract do have some bonus' related, but doing a standard contract like that would cause problems.. Would defenders get a clean bonus rather than goal? What happened if the defender had a perfect game, but the keeper drops an absolute clanger thus conceding a goal stopping the defender getting a clean sheet. Would strikers like weimann track back as much knowing that they would not be in a goal scoring position? Would it stop players passing as they would go for goal themselves?

Anyway back on topic, I like Weimann but £40k is a ridiculous amount for one decent season.. Would we then have to double again next season if he scored 15-18 goals. The club shouldn't be held to ransom and Lambert seems the type who won't be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Contracts should be performance based IMO

 

£25k p/w basic

£10k per goal

£10k per assist

£2k per point gained for matches contributed to

 

2 goals and an assist in a win, for example would get him £61k

No goals or assists and a loss, would get him £25k

 

Every player should be on similarly structured deals. If we're successful, we pay more wages, if we're not, we don't. Nobody gets paid for not pulling their weight, nobody bleeds the club, players only get what they're proving themselves to be worth

 

Main flaw with this approach is it discourages players from playing as a team. They will play selfishly to try to get the money and get into arguments on the pitch. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Premier league average will be £30k a week this year - there are more kids and back ups than there are superstars - I think if you're starting games in this league, you have to be looking at £30k a week minimum - with a twelve goal season behind him from a wide position, someone will offer him £40k, I'd be confident of it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We and he need to be careful. Him staying at Villa is clearly the best outcome for him and us. He has been impressive but he's not good enough to be starting at a club that is much better than us, he knows that at Villa he'll be getting games. He's a good fit in our current system and he's got momentum at Villa, he should be careful not to throw that all away for a few extra grand a week and equally we need to offer him a competitive salary.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Contracts should be performance based IMO

 

£25k p/w basic

£10k per goal

£10k per assist

£2k per point gained for matches contributed to

 

2 goals and an assist in a win, for example would get him £61k

No goals or assists and a loss, would get him £25k

 

Every player should be on similarly structured deals. If we're successful, we pay more wages, if we're not, we don't. Nobody gets paid for not pulling their weight, nobody bleeds the club, players only get what they're proving themselves to be worth

 

Main flaw with this approach is it discourages players from playing as a team. They will play selfishly to try to get the money and get into arguments on the pitch. 

 

I dunno, an assist is worth the same as a goal, so they wouldn't be greedy beacuse of it, and they get less if they drop points than they do if they win, so they'd be doing what they can to help the team win. Maybe the actual percentages for the performance bonuses are off, but I think that's how contracts should be. 25k a week is more than enough for them to live comfortably on, the rest is just gravy, and it's up to their performances to dictate how much extra they'd earn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I think Weimann is in the £40k bracket. Which I think will make this a challenging negotiating period.

Andi Weimann is not a £40k a week player yet. He might be soon, but he's not there yet by any stretch

We have actually no idea what he wants, but on what basis is he "not a £40k week player" if that is the number? Have you an extensive knowledge of what the going rate is for a 21 year old with 12 goals last season in the premier league/cup or is it just your unqualified opinion?

IF he leaves it will be because some other club thinks he is worth more than we do. IMHO as a 21 year old he has had a very good season and 12 goals is not to be sniffed at. He may not be our main striker and we have to keep players like Wiemann if we are to build for the future.

IF we cannot paying the going rate this will be a recurring problem in the future with other players.

 

If you pay Weimann 40k, you'll have to pay Benteke 100k... where does it end?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree we mustn't be held to ransom but we've just had the best season I can remember for a long time of goals being scored by 3 or 4 different strikers, and we have afew different threads now that seem to be saying "he can go we can do better".

I'm not saying give them whatever they want, but I think if we let players like Benteke and Weimann go now instead of building around them, then next season we will effectively just be starting Lambert's transition all over again, 12 months on. Big steps backwards after seemingly moving on a bit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to think we would be aiming for a top ten finish next season. Considering the new TV money, I don't think 40K is that much for a first team player who's only 21 (who will likely get better) at a mid table club. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to put my slant on it...... I think Newcastle are the threat here, can easily see them offering £40k+ to lure him away as they finished just below us for one so to weaken us whilst strengthening themselves is a good idea of course... also even if he stays it has the potential effect of forcing us to pay more to keep him thus meaning we have less to spend elsewhere.

 

Also lets not forget strikers do generally get paid more anyhow so whilst the average may well be 30k/40k surely that will be higher when comparing only strikers?

Edited by danceoftheshamen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dunno, an assist is worth the same as a goal, so they wouldn't be greedy beacuse of it, and they get less if they drop points than they do if they win, so they'd be doing what they can to help the team win. Maybe the actual percentages for the performance bonuses are off, but I think that's how contracts should be. 25k a week is more than enough for them to live comfortably on, the rest is just gravy, and it's up to their performances to dictate how much extra they'd earn

 

 

 

You don't get anything for an assist of an assist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Contracts should be performance based IMO

 

£25k p/w basic

£10k per goal

£10k per assist

£2k per point gained for matches contributed to

 

2 goals and an assist in a win, for example would get him £61k

No goals or assists and a loss, would get him £25k

 

Every player should be on similarly structured deals. If we're successful, we pay more wages, if we're not, we don't. Nobody gets paid for not pulling their weight, nobody bleeds the club, players only get what they're proving themselves to be worth

 

Main flaw with this approach is it discourages players from playing as a team. They will play selfishly to try to get the money and get into arguments on the pitch. 

 

In rugby there are no try bonuses to discourage people going for a try when some one is in a better position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just to put my slant on it...... I think Newcastle are the threat here, can easily see them offering £40k+ to lure him away as they finished just below us for one so to weaken us whilst strengthening themselves is a good idea of course... also even if he stays it has the potential effect of forcing us to pay more to keep him thus meaning we have less to spend elsewhere.

 

Also lets not forget strikers do generally get paid more anyhow so whilst the average may well be 30k/40k surely that will be higher when comparing only strikers?

 

You also have to bear in mind the net cost to Aston Villa to get him to sign a new contract through the duration of the contract (a couple of million perhaps?), the amount it could cost us to replace him with a player of similar calibre (it wouldn't be cheap) and the potential loss we'd make on a transfer fee in relation to his true market value, because of his expiring contract. 

 

It makes more sense to pay him well than it does to let him go. Of course he's not the sort of player we want to be breaking our wage structure for, but he's certainly in a strong position to negotiate a good contract, which he arguably deserves. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From a bargaining point of view, he's got an awful lot of things in his corner. We've got to stop letting players get into a position where they've got less than 18 months left n their deals, we're awful at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion the answer could be, for the entire squad, an average basic wage, but have high appearance fees, that way players who play get rewarded while the ones who don't don't. You're only going to stay in the team if you are performing. Also the summer months would be offset by end of the season bonuses.

Edited by Folski
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In my opinion the answer could be, for the entire squad, could be an average basic wage, but have high appearance fees, that way players who play get rewarded while the ones who don't don't. You're only going to stay in the team if you are performing. Also the summer months would be offset by end of the season bonuses.

 

For an example, say we offered Ireland a deal of £45k a week, £35k appearance fee, 7.5k goal & assist bonus, seems a lot better than the £70k a week straight up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â