Paterson will explore options

[Clerry Jambo]

 

Hearts will hold fresh talks with injured full-back Callum Paterson to see if he is willing to extend his contract. The player and his representatives have agreed to delay discussions until after surgery on his knee, which is due to take place early next week. Tynecastle officials want to give Paterson time to digest the news that he will miss nine to ten months of football after suffering cruciate and medial ligament damage to his left knee. All concerned will assess results of the operation and then look at whether a new deal is feasible. Talks have been pencilled in to take place over the next few weeks. Paterson, 22, had refused to extend his existing contract, which expires in June, because he wants to continue his career in England. He is willing to discuss the prospect of remaining with his formative club after injury struck against Kilmarnock two weeks ago. Hearts are keen to protect their investment in the 22-year-old, who came through their youth academy, is currently their joint-top goalscorer and a full Scotland internationalist. They would have been due between ?400,000 and ?450,000 in training compensation if he left this summer on freedom of contract. Craig Levein, the club?s director of football, stated prior to the injury that Paterson wouldn?t be sold in the January transfer window for less than a seven-figure sum. However, clubs like Wigan Athletic and Derby County, who had been eager to take him south, will now wait until he recovers fully from the knee operation. That gives Hearts a chance to extend Paterson?s stay in Edinburgh in a move which would benefit both club and player. One complication is that, under FIFA rules, Hearts? training compensation fee only applies until the end of the season in which Paterson turns 23 ? which is next season. Therefore, any new long-term deal would mean he could leave for absolutely nothing when it ends.

Read more at: http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/callum-paterson-set-to-explore-hearts-contract-options-1-4337215

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/callum-paterson-set-to-explore-hearts-contract-options-1-4337215

[Clerry Jambo]

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/sport/football/hearts/new-hearts-contract-makes-sense-for-callum-paterson-1-4337134

[Flogel98]

Tough one. I'd maybe hedge on a 2 year extension subject to the op going ok but what do I know.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Haken]

Depending on the outcome of the op, a couple of years contract with a clause that can be triggered by an offer acceptable to the club.

[lost in space]

Surely best then that Hearts offer a contract until only 31 December this year - with the hope of getting a fee then.

It would be daft surely to give him a contract until June 2018 - since according to article, Hearts would get hee-haw then.

[Clark Griswold]

The sensible thing to do is sign for another year to 2018, with an option of a further year.

[Say What Again]

Has to be at least a two year deal or nothing.

 

Absolutely no point in giving him a one year deal, during which he can get himself back playing and prove his fitness to potential suitors, then walk away for nowt.

[DxB Hearts]

This. He's good but I'd rather we brought in a RB that's going to be here for the next 2 or 3 years and offering him a 1 year deal would block that.

[CollyWolly]

The sensible thing to do is sign for another year to 2018, with an option of a further year.

From Hearts point of view, there seems little point in a relatively short extension which still sees the likely outcome for us as Paterson leaving for a training fee only. We'd be as well letting his contract expire in the summer if we're going to do that.

 

I'd say the club have to look out for themselves ahead of a player who will probably still have leaving at the top of his priorities when he recovers. I'd be looking for him to sign the 3 year deal already on the table, or frankly, do one.

[Geoff Kilpatrick]

Hopefully this thread doesn't descend into a daft fallout! A two year deal with a minimum fee clause makes sense for all parties here.

[CollyWolly]

Hopefully this thread doesn't descend into a daft fallout! A two year deal with a minimum fee clause makes sense for all parties here.

It doesn't. It means we get just over a year playing time from that 2 years and he walks for nothing in 2 years. Plus there is no guarantee of full recovery at this stage.

[Winston Ingram]

Leaving for nothing offset by fact we would have use of him as a player for extra season, of course. 

[stirlingshirejambo]

Has to be at least a two year deal or nothing.

 

Absolutely no point in giving him a one year deal, during which he can get himself back playing and prove his fitness to potential suitors, then walk away for nowt.

But he wouldn't walk away for nowt after a year as we would be due training compensation

[BangkokHearts]

Must be a two year deal surely?

 

Must be mutually beneficial to both parties.

[CollyWolly]

Leaving for nothing offset by fact we would have use of him as a player for extra season, of course.

Costing us the best part of ?600,000 to have him for one season of full fitness (if we even get that) That's ?12,000 a week !!!

[CollyWolly]

But he wouldn't walk away for nowt after a year as we would be due training compensation

We are due compensation if we run his contract out and he signs for another club before the end of season 17/18. I don't see why we should keep him for one year, more than half of which he wont be 100% fit for.

[Beast Boy]

Just why John Colquhoun never advised him to sign his last extension offer to cover him and us from these sort of situations, I will never know.

[The Treasurer]

It's a tough one but I'd say that the club has the upper hand in negotiations at this point.

[DH1986]

Ideally......

 

A 2 year deal with a year option and a release clause of ?1million which can only be activated after the initial 2 years.

[Clark Griswold]

From Hearts point of view, there seems little point in a relatively short extension which still sees the likely outcome for us as Paterson leaving for a training fee only. We'd be as well letting his contract expire in the summer if we're going to do that.

 

I'd say the club have to look out for themselves ahead of a player who will probably still have leaving at the top of his priorities when he recovers. I'd be looking for him to sign the 3 year deal already on the table, or frankly, do one.

 

I guess it depends what this sentence actually means:

 

"Hearts? training compensation fee only applies until the end of the season in which Paterson turns 23 ? which is next season. Therefore, any new long-term deal would mean he could leave for absolutely nothing when it ends."

 

Does this mean if he leaves the in close season next summer, we get nothing? is there a hard end-date? 

[CollyWolly]

Just why John Colquhoun never advised him to sign his last extension offer to cover him and us from these sort of situations, I will never know.

Maybe because John Colquhoun, shocking as it may be to some, doesn't have Hearts at the top of his priority list. John Colquhoun, bless him, earns far more from a 'Bosman' signing than he would do for a paid transfer. Callum Paterson, bless him too, gets a much better personal deal, and probably a signing on fee he wouldn't otherwise get, to move on a 'Bosman' than he would for a paid transfer

[CollyWolly]

I guess it depends what this sentence actually means:

 

"Hearts? training compensation fee only applies until the end of the season in which Paterson turns 23 ? which is next season. Therefore, any new long-term deal would mean he could leave for absolutely nothing when it ends."

 

Does this mean if he leaves the in close season next summer, we get nothing? is there a hard end-date?

Good point. Dunno the answer.

[CollyWolly]

It's a tough one but I'd say that the club has the upper hand in negotiations at this point.

Undoubtedly. And I hope we capitalise on that. Would love to keep the player, have him play for a while longer and make us a bundle of money some day. If that's not likely we are as well walking away now and taking the training fee when he signs for someone else.

[Clark Griswold]

In any case, he'd be pretty daft not to accept any extension, as someone said above, the club holds the cards ATM.

[Beast Boy]

Maybe because John Colquhoun, shocking as it may be to some, doesn't have Hearts at the top of his priority list. John Colquhoun, bless him, earns far more from a 'Bosman' signing than he would do for a paid transfer. Callum Paterson, bless him too, gets a much better personal deal, and probably a signing on fee he wouldn't otherwise get, to move on a 'Bosman' than he would for a paid transfer

Hum, thanks for that CW. I was quite aware of all that, but y'know. Cheers anyway.

 

My point, is that by advising CP to sign a new contract back when it was offered, he would have ensured that if CP got an injury, one like his current one, then he would be covered in terms of treatment and wages while he recovered, and would still get his move south. Seems like a daft move to advise your client to risk both of these things simply for a wee lump sum, when his next move will see his wages hike north anyway.

[Spencer]

Ultimately this will tell us much about what we're dealing with

[Gav M]

Hum, thanks for that CW. I was quite aware of all that, but y'know. Cheers anyway.

 

My point, is that by advising CP to sign a new contract back when it was offered, he would have ensured that if CP got an injury, one like his current one, then he would be covered in terms of treatment and wages while he recovered, and would still get his move south. Seems like a daft move to advise your client to risk both of these things simply for a wee lump sum, when his next move will see his wages hike north anyway.

It may have been that this eventuality was discussed between cp and jc, but they decided, either between them or cp himself did, that he'd rather run down his contract and guarantee that he could leave asap. I can't imagine any agent would not go over all options and eventualities, can't imagine they would last if they didn't. At the end of the day the decision is cp's, jc can only advise. We have no idea what advice was given and how the decision was made.

[1971fozzy]

Has to be at least a two year deal or nothing.

 

Absolutely no point in giving him a one year deal, during which he can get himself back playing and prove his fitness to potential suitors, then walk away for nowt.

100%

[CollyWolly]

Hum, thanks for that CW. I was quite aware of all that, but y'know. Cheers anyway.

 

My point, is that by advising CP to sign a new contract back when it was offered, he would have ensured that if CP got an injury, one like his current one, then he would be covered in terms of treatment and wages while he recovered, and would still get his move south. Seems like a daft move to advise your client to risk both of these things simply for a wee lump sum, when his next move will see his wages hike north anyway.

He will have insurance through the SPFA which covers his treatment, whether we are providing that or someone else is. I believe that insurance is compulsory. Not sure where he stands on wages if his contract runs out. Certainly wont be us that's paying him.

 

I cant think of dafter agent advice than what you propose. Paterson 'John, I want a move' Colquhoun 'Best sign a new contract then'

[Hilary Briss]

If we are looking after his rehab - you would think it would be fair / make sense that he signs a 2 year deal with a release clause.

 

That way we can get him back to full fitness and playing again and if he wants to leave in a year we can get decent money for him.

 

That would be best scenario from our point of view and would be the decent thing to do from Calum.

[IveSeenTheLight]

In any case, he'd be pretty daft not to accept any extension, as someone said above, the club holds the cards ATM.

 

Just playing devils advocate here, but do they hold the cards.

Isn't the development fee only applicable for players under contract or have been offered a reasonable contract.

I think the club needs to make the offer at least 60 days before the contract end, so they do have time to see the surgery results.

 

Do you think Hearts would make CP an offer commensurate with the value they place on him? i.e. would a nee contract align him with the top earners at Tynecastle?

[hmfc_liam06]

But he wouldn't walk away for nowt after a year as we would be due training compensation

 

We're only due compensation up until he's 23. 

 

If he signed a 2 year deal and walked away at the end of it, we'd be due nothing.

[Spencer]

If we are looking after his rehab - you would think it would be fair / make sense that he signs a 2 year deal with a release clause.

 

That way we can get him back to full fitness and playing again and if he wants to leave in a year we can get decent money for him.

 

That would be best scenario from our point of view and would be the decent thing to do from Calum.

This seems perfectly fair and reasonable and hopefully is what transpires

 

Some on here appear to wish Paterson to have every option available to him, even if that means we get nothing.

 

Very strange outlook

[IveSeenTheLight]

If we are looking after his rehab - you would think it would be fair / make sense that he signs a 2 year deal with a release clause.

 

That way we can get him back to full fitness and playing again and if he wants to leave in a year we can get decent money for him.

 

That would be best scenario from our point of view and would be the decent thing to do from Calum.

 

I agree that would be the best scenario, however I would anticipate the release clause to be very low to make CP genuinely consider signing.

A release clause of ?200k - ?250k would more than cover his wages over the year rather than nothing at the end of the year on a 1 year deal.

 

I very much doubt he'd sign a 2 year deal so that Hearts get seven figures next summer

[Spencer]

We're only due compensation up until he's 23.

 

If he signed a 2 year deal and walked away at the end of it, we'd be due nothing.

There's no way Paterson us signing a two year deal and seeing it out. In such a scenario he'd almost certainly move in summer of 2018 with a year remaining.

 

Like I said above - this will tell us a lot about the type of person we're dealing with

[Spencer]

I agree that would be the best scenario, however I would anticipate the release clause to be very low to make CP genuinely consider signing.

A release clause of ?200k - ?250k would more than cover his wages over the year rather than nothing at the end of the year on a 1 year deal.

 

I very much doubt he'd sign a 2 year deal so that Hearts get seven figures next summer

I think the player and his representation need to be aware that they no longer hold all of the bargaining power in any possible negotiations

[Jambo 4 Ever]

Just why John Colquhoun never advised him to sign his last extension offer to cover him and us from these sort of situations, I will never know.

He no longer has Hearts interests at top of his priorities it seems

[Ibrahim Tall]

Hopefully this thread doesn't descend into a daft fallout! A two year deal with a minimum fee clause makes sense for all parties here.

Not really, he's going to be crocked or unfit until next Christmas assuming there's no set backs and it's unlikely anyone will make a bid that January for that reason. Meaning we'll enter the summer transfer window in the same situation again knowing he can sign a pre-contract in a few months except this time we'll get **** all in compensation.

 

If he re-signs it needs to be 3 years minimum, with a release clause it would still be in his interest.

[Bazzas right boot]

Not really, he's going to be crocked or unfit until next Christmas assuming there's no set backs and it's unlikely anyone will make a bid that January for that reason. Meaning we'll enter the summer transfer window in the same situation again knowing he can sign a pre-contract in a few months except this time we'll get **** all in compensation.

 

If he re-signs it needs to be 3 years minimum, with a release clause it would still be in his interest.

I agree, harsh, but true. A 2.5 year deal would also work the same way.

1 year deal-pointless, we basically pay Paterson to get fit then leave.

2 year-paterson get his short term future looked after, likley no benefit for us, although we will get a player for a bit longer than above.

3 year-end as above but we have a better chance of a fee and if he still leaves, we get a player who is fit for longer time win-win.

[OTT]

Not really, he's going to be crocked or unfit until next Christmas assuming there's no set backs and it's unlikely anyone will make a bid that January for that reason. Meaning we'll enter the summer transfer window in the same situation again knowing he can sign a pre-contract in a few months except this time we'll get **** all in compensation.

 

If he re-signs it needs to be 3 years minimum, with a release clause it would still be in his interest.

 

I very much am in the 3 year camp too. I hate release clauses though, when they magically get met you can only guess someones agent leaked it. I'd rather we discussed it with him and when a bid comes in involve Callum every step of the way. (Will appear transparent from the players POV and gives a better chance of maximising his value).

 

I agree that would be the best scenario, however I would anticipate the release clause to be very low to make CP genuinely consider signing.

A release clause of ?200k - ?250k would more than cover his wages over the year rather than nothing at the end of the year on a 1 year deal.

 

I very much doubt he'd sign a 2 year deal so that Hearts get seven figures next summer

 

?200-250k ? You're generally not a bad poster but jesus christ. A quarter of a million release clause on a Scotland international? All that ensures is we get no more than that.

[DH1986]

So is it now a fact that JC didn't advise CP to sign an extension ?

 

You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink it.....

[Hashimoto]

Not really, he's going to be crocked or unfit until next Christmas assuming there's no set backs and it's unlikely anyone will make a bid that January for that reason. Meaning we'll enter the summer transfer window in the same situation again knowing he can sign a pre-contract in a few months except this time we'll get **** all in compensation.

 

If he re-signs it needs to be 3 years minimum, with a release clause it would still be in his interest.

This....Bottom line is that Callum is intent on leaving Hearts at the soonest opportunity. The club cannot win in this situation as no one will pay cash for a player that has some serious question marks over  his long term fitness. Callum was injured playing for Hearts, therefore only right that we manage his rehab. However the prospect is bleak if we believe that the club is going to benefit financially.

[RS86]

3 year contract, ?1.2m buyout

[Doc Rob]

I agree that would be the best scenario, however I would anticipate the release clause to be very low to make CP genuinely consider signing.

A release clause of ?200k - ?250k would more than cover his wages over the year rather than nothing at the end of the year on a 1 year deal.

 

I very much doubt he'd sign a 2 year deal so that Hearts get seven figures next summer

I fully expect the club will present him with a take-it-or-leave-it offer. They certainly won't be offering a bumper contract that makes him a top earner. Why on earth would they? Paterson won't play any football until the middle of next season, nobody else is going to sign him until he is fully fit, and his only other option is to be without a club or a paycheck for a minimum of 4-5 months.

 

Paterson won't be pleased with the offer he gets. And he will still sign it because it's he best one he's going to get.

[Bazzas right boot]

This....Bottom line is that Callum is intent on leaving Hearts at the soonest opportunity. The club cannot win in this situation as no one will pay cash for a player that has some serious question marks over his long term fitness. Callum was injured playing for Hearts, therefore only right that we manage his rehab. However the prospect is bleak if we believe that the club is going to benefit financially.

Yip, we manage his rehab for the next 5 months.

 

If he accepts our contract offer, we then manage it through.

 

If he rejects our offer as he wants different terms, we are under no obligation whatsoever to meet his demands.

 

The correct thing is to offer a contract, all we can do, if he rejects it, it's on the lads head. We can walk away knowing we tried to do the right thing.

 

No room for sentiment in business.

[wavydavy]

Just why John Colquhoun never advised him to sign his last extension offer to cover him and us from these sort of situations, I will never know.

 

Maybe too big an incentive from his next club on offer to both player and agent!!!!

[soonbe110]

It doesn't. It means we get just over a year playing time from that 2 years and he walks for nothing in 2 years. Plus there is no guarantee of full recovery at this stage.

2 year extension takes us to summer 2019. Assuming he is fit again in October 17 we get nearly two seasons from him during which time there is a minimum fee of say ?1m. I think that's fair on both parties. Calum gets the security whilst recovering and proving himself again, Club get almost two more years from him and or a suitable fee if he leaves inside the period. Let's be honest his injury looks like it may have cost the Club ?1m and Callum a chunk if not all of his career. That's football. Re the dev fee the only way we can now realistically get that is if he signs up with another club before summer 2018. If he only returns in October and doesn't have a club I think it's unlikely that any club will take him on knowing they have to pay us a development fee of circa ?400k for what would be a high risk especially when they can sign him in summer 2018 with no dev fee. Injury couldn't have come so a worse time financially fifth both player and Club.

[OTT]

Kinda seems like Patersons in this situation out of greed, 6 months or development fee = Lower transfer fee & higher signing on fee with more options. The risk is that if you get injured seriously then you're between a rock and a hard place. Paterson could have done what Cummings did and sign an extension which guarantees him an income regardless of what happens as well as recovery if he gets injured*. Theres also the value maximisation factor from the clubs perspective and being seen to be doing the right thing anyway.

 

I think another factor to consider is that although less money on the transfer fee opens up his options if a club really wants him then they will pay whatever is required to secure him and that pretty much means he's walking into the first team (No manager in the EFL championship could get away with paying ?1.5-2m for a squad player surely?). A bigger club might simply take a punt on him because he has potential and is cheap - Scott Allan. 

 

I think our policy should be not to allow promising players to enter their last year with us. Offer an extension at 18 months and sell if refused.

 

* Added bonus of signing an extension when you are playing your best I.e wages should increase relative to form

[CollyWolly]

3 year contract, ?1.2m buyout

This. In a nut-shell. Take it or leave it CP.

[CollyWolly]

2 year extension takes us to summer 2019. Assuming he is fit again in October 17 we get nearly two seasons from him during which time there is a minimum fee of say ?1m. I think that's fair on both parties. Calum gets the security whilst recovering and proving himself again, Club get almost two more years from him and or a suitable fee if he leaves inside the period. Let's be honest his injury looks like it may have cost the Club ?1m and Callum a chunk if not all of his career. That's football. Re the dev fee the only way we can now realistically get that is if he signs up with another club before summer 2018. If he only returns in October and doesn't have a club I think it's unlikely that any club will take him on knowing they have to pay us a development fee of circa ?400k for what would be a high risk especially when they can sign him in summer 2018 with no dev fee. Injury couldn't have come so a worse time financially fifth both player and Club.

We're assuming he will be match fit in October 2017. I think that's highly unlikely. We'll be very lucky to see him starting games by the end of the year.

 

At this precise moment, his injury has cost us nothing but his services for 5 months. No concrete offer was on the table that anyone knows about or has talked about or has confirmed. The concrete money on the table is therefore the development fee. That hasn't changed and hasn't been lost.......yet.

 

2 year deal doesn't give us enough chance to get a decent fee for him. The fee he is worth. Has to be 3 years with a release clause IMO. 3 years is the deal he refused from what I gather. Tell him that 3 year deal is still on the table. He is in no position to knock it back now. And if he does, we walk away from it.