McGinn rejoins Aberdeen

[Bowmans_Boot]

6 minutes ago, JamboAl said:

Cannot help yourself.

Facts. 

[merseyjambo]

8 hours ago, soonbe110 said:

CL didn’t say one out then one in. He said he thought players would have to leave before he could bring players in. If Noring Sammon Stockton Hughes Randall Smith-Brown Martin Buaben were all to leave in Jan there’s a tidy chunk of wages available to spend on another two or three Lafferty/Berra quality players. McGinn would fit the bill. 

 

Do you live in a CL world of make believe or something.

 

Of those players mentioned we are paying next to nothing for Randall and Smith-Brown

 

Norling and Stockton are unlikely to be on huge wages.

 

That then leaves Sammon, Hughes, Martin and Buaben. Hughes will be in his last 6 months of playing football. No one is going to want an injury prone 38 year old who will retire at end of season and would require a pay off. Sammon, still has 18 months left on his contract, not ripping it up at Partick. Should have used as a makeweight in approach for Cadden in my opinion. He will only go if someone wants to sign him which at present seems unlikely. Even if we are prepared to let him go for nothing we are still likely to have to give him some sort of pay off to compensate for his undoubted drop in salary in order for us to get him of our books. Martin should never have been signed but still has two and a half years on his contract. Will be on more money here than he’s likely to get elsewhere at this point in his career. Again unlikely to to leave to go elsewhere without having to make some sort of payoff. That leaves Prince. As per Sammon and Martin, we want rid he’s going to be asking for some sort of pay off to get him off our books. 

 

The cost of getting them off wage bill is going to be something we can’t afford at present due to costs already incurred for paying off guys like Oshinawa and Kitchen as well as our flop of a coaching experiment.

 

The only way we will be able to bring anyone in is if we can sell someone and saleable assets are not something that we have in abundance. 

 

Short sightedness and and poor judgement in the transfer market are what has put us in a bit of a financial bind with regard to bringing in new players now.

 

Even if we could get the money, the kind of wages McGinn will be looking for is not worth bringing him in on as it would only be a short term fix. 

[merseyjambo]

10 hours ago, JamboAl said:

I agree with your last statement but some players, when they are away down the pecking order, could be happy to have their contracts ripped up.  With many of them being foreigners they may prefer a gig back home on a smaller wage than sitting on a bench at Tynecastle on a cold winter's day

 

For some of these players like Nowak and Grzelak, while they’re unlikely to be on big money, it’s still more than they’ll get in Polish second or third division. Hardly an incentive for them to move

[JamboAl]

49 minutes ago, merseyjambo said:

 

For some of these players like Nowak and Grzelak, while they’re unlikely to be on big money, it’s still more than they’ll get in Polish second or third division. Hardly an incentive for them to move

Money isn't always the be all end all.

Berra came back to Hearts for a smaller wage ( I would imagine) and I'd guess Danny Wilson did the same so why don't you think foreign players might not be attracted by a return to their homeland?

[merseyjambo]

4 hours ago, JamboAl said:

Money isn't always the be all end all.

Berra came back to Hearts for a smaller wage ( I would imagine) and I'd guess Danny Wilson did the same so why don't you think foreign players might not be attracted by a return to their homeland?

 

Berra was on a free transfer not part way through a contract. Danny Wilson was released by a club who paid off the rest of his contract who were cash rich so there was no problem there.

 

For every day Joes like you and me, moving job for a reduced salary isnt ideal but may be considered if we thought it was moving to a better job with longer term prospects and better salary, yes they may be prepared to take a hit. Footballers only have short careers so need to maximise their income. 

 

Do you believe that either of those players are likely to get the offer of a better contract than they’re on at present????

[Bazzas right boot]

On 12/11/2017 at 08:57, buzzbomb1958 said:

Levin would play him at left back ,he'd be wasted at Hearts

I'd take that bet.

[JamboAl]

3 hours ago, merseyjambo said:

 

Berra was on a free transfer not part way through a contract. Danny Wilson was released by a club who paid off the rest of his contract who were cash rich so there was no problem there.

 

For every day Joes like you and me, moving job for a reduced salary isnt ideal but may be considered if we thought it was moving to a better job with longer term prospects and better salary, yes they may be prepared to take a hit. Footballers only have short careers so need to maximise their income. 

 

Do you believe that either of those players are likely to get the offer of a better contract than they’re on at present????

Ipswich had a year's option on Berra which ultimately they did not exercise because he wanted back home.  He signed for us in the full knowledge he would be earning less.  I'd be surprised if Liverpool paid Wilson's contract off in full but the issue is that he would be returning to a lesser wage when like Berra he could almost certainly have earned more where they were or with other clubs.  They obviously came back for reasons other than money.

It is a bit far fetched to be comparing footballers' earnings with those of everyday Joes.  The answer to your last question is that Wilson almost certainly will have improved his wage with Sevco who were keen to sign Berra before we did and I firmly believe would still take him - on a higher wage than we pay.

 

PS - If you want the facts about earnings etc Bowman's Boot claims to know them.

[kingantti1874]

Terminated his contract in SK

[Heartsofgold]

Wouldn't be surprised to see him in maroon in January then.

[JAMMY1980]

Can't he sign now if he's a free agent??

[Howdy Doody Jambo]

1 minute ago, JAMMY1980 said:

Can't he sign now if he's a free agent??

Emergency Loan ?

[JAMMY1980]

You can sign free agents anytime.

[Heartsofgold]

No, he cannot sign for anyone till January.  He was signed with a club after the previous transfer window.

[milky_26]

1 minute ago, JAMMY1980 said:

You can sign free agents anytime.

only if they were free during a transfer window for the club they are going to sign for

[JAMMY1980]

Sorry didn't realise that guys

[Sarah O]

Could get him in training with the squad so he can hit the ground running come January...

 

 

[i wish jj was my dad]

Hopefully, we're on the case.

 

He seems to fit the profile of players we've been pursuing recently.  And it would be a nice boost right now. 

[Swanny17]

46 minutes ago, JAMMY1980 said:

Can't he sign now if he's a free agent??

 

Yes, we could sign him now. However, he wouldn’t be able to play for us until the January transfer window opens. 

[Section Q]

On 12/11/2017 at 08:22, GavK1012 said:

Apologies if mentioned elsewhere type thing but read a wee bit in one of todays sundays that he may well be looking for an out re his Korea move and that we may still be interested come January...just posting what I read.....

The quality of our squad won't be enough to attract him to us.

[CJGJ]

We were interested in the summer and I would imagine we would still be if he was a free transfer.

 

We have to consider finance though never mind the future...I grant you this season he would be starter but next may be more questionable if a couple of the youngsters break through as we hope

 

But if you don't ask.................

[Lord Beni of Gorgie]

Can he drive a cherry picker?

[soonbe110]

On 13/11/2017 at 23:22, merseyjambo said:

 

Do you live in a CL world of make believe or something.

 

Of those players mentioned we are paying next to nothing for Randall and Smith-Brown

 

Norling and Stockton are unlikely to be on huge wages.

 

That then leaves Sammon, Hughes, Martin and Buaben. Hughes will be in his last 6 months of playing football. No one is going to want an injury prone 38 year old who will retire at end of season and would require a pay off. Sammon, still has 18 months left on his contract, not ripping it up at Partick. Should have used as a makeweight in approach for Cadden in my opinion. He will only go if someone wants to sign him which at present seems unlikely. Even if we are prepared to let him go for nothing we are still likely to have to give him some sort of pay off to compensate for his undoubted drop in salary in order for us to get him of our books. Martin should never have been signed but still has two and a half years on his contract. Will be on more money here than he’s likely to get elsewhere at this point in his career. Again unlikely to to leave to go elsewhere without having to make some sort of payoff. That leaves Prince. As per Sammon and Martin, we want rid he’s going to be asking for some sort of pay off to get him off our books. 

 

The cost of getting them off wage bill is going to be something we can’t afford at present due to costs already incurred for paying off guys like Oshinawa and Kitchen as well as our flop of a coaching experiment.

 

The only way we will be able to bring anyone in is if we can sell someone and saleable assets are not something that we have in abundance. 

 

Short sightedness and and poor judgement in the transfer market are what has put us in a bit of a financial bind with regard to bringing in new players now.

 

Even if we could get the money, the kind of wages McGinn will be looking for is not worth bringing him in on as it would only be a short term fix. 

Of all the players I mentioned all but Hughes will be looking to move in January. None of them have futures at Hearts. Hughes may well retire if he picks up another injury before the break. Much easier for players to find a  decent contract elsewhere when they enter last 12 months of current deal. Clubs that want  them take care of most of any salary issues they have. Sammon may be the only exception however at his age and size he needs to be playing regularly. What you overlook is that a two/three year deal on £2k a week is better than 6 months on £3k per week to most players at this level. They are typically trying to maximise weekly wage and length of contract combined. It’s a short career. 

[wavydavy]

1 hour ago, Swanny17 said:

 

Yes, we could sign him now. However, he wouldn’t be able to play for us until the January transfer window opens. 

 

Would that still apply if his club released him from his contract?

[wavydavy]

On 11/14/2017 at 08:49, JamboAl said:

Ipswich had a year's option on Berra which ultimately they did not exercise because he wanted back home.  He signed for us in the full knowledge he would be earning less.  I'd be surprised if Liverpool paid Wilson's contract off in full but the issue is that he would be returning to a lesser wage when like Berra he could almost certainly have earned more where they were or with other clubs.  They obviously came back for reasons other than money.

It is a bit far fetched to be comparing footballers' earnings with those of everyday Joes.  The answer to your last question is that Wilson almost certainly will have improved his wage with Sevco who were keen to sign Berra before we did and I firmly believe would still take him - on a higher wage than we pay.

 

PS - If you want the facts about earnings etc Bowman's Boot claims to know them.

 

The thing with an option on a contract is that both parties have to agree. In Berra's case Ipswich wanted him to stay but he wanted to come back to Edinburgh so he was allowed to leave. Not sure of the detail of the contract if they could have forced him to stay but then that would not really be beneficial to either side so they made the right choice by letting him leave.

[socrates82]

On 2017-11-13 at 14:09, Bowmans_Boot said:

Fair enough. I am pretty depressed about the state of the team, and also the state of the clubs finances at present, so am most probably overly negative.  

 

Couldn't let this go. Every club in Scotland outwith Celtic would like to be in our financial situation right now:

 

3rd highest average attendances

A relatively trim squad (too trim IMO) with no really high earners on long contracts

Record ST sales over the last couple of seasons

Profit of around 1m in transfer dealings over last 3 seasons

New stand with increased earning potential across a few revenue streams soon to open

Posting a profit not long ago and debt free (no idea what we are now considering the stand expenditure)

 

And most importantly of all, about 100 grand a month extra I think it is going into the club's coffers from FoH contributors.

 

Obviously we want that to transfer to the pitch which is what our focus will be once the rebuilding job from the mess Romanov left us in is complete.

[Jambo, Goodbye]

He was an unused sub a couple of weeks back when I went to watch Daegu v Gwangju. Gwangju were a truly awful team who were bottom of the Korean Classic (top division).

 

Even with Daegu 1-0 up and seeing out the game, along with a dodgy left back that would make Osh look good, he didn't get a sniff. 

 

I'm not sure why it didn't work out for him though.

 

Still unconvinced he had all that much money thrown at him either. Such is the level of football here. Maybe more than in Scotland but not "silly money".

[Gorgie_Rules]

I'd be surprised if MacPhee hasn't made contact with him, however I think he will have his sights set elsewhere

 

I also thought there was no chance Berra would come home or that we would sign Lafferty however

[Bowmans_Boot]

46 minutes ago, socrates82 said:

Posting a profit not long ago and debt free (no idea what we are now considering the stand expenditure)

This is key: where are we now following the chosen overspend on the new stand? This is what worries me. 

 

As for the "no high earners on long contracts": Martin? We are still paying Sammon for playing for another club and had to pay Oshiniwa off. 

 

CLs comment that it would be 1 in/1 out suggested to me that we were not cash rich, given that it totally obvious the team desperately needs a few quality players to add to the quality we already have (namely Berra, Jamie, Isma & Lafferty). 

[Unknown user]

17 minutes ago, Bowmans_Boot said:

This is key: where are we now following the chosen overspend on the new stand? This is what worries me. 

 

As for the "no high earners on long contracts": Martin? We are still paying Sammon for playing for another club and had to pay Oshiniwa off. 

 

CLs comment that it would be 1 in/1 out suggested to me that we were not cash rich, given that it totally obvious the team desperately needs a few quality players to add to the quality we already have (namely Berra, Jamie, Isma & Lafferty). 

I'd also add that Levein was quoted as looking forward to seeing who was available after the window closed, only to later say we'd be signing no one after the window closed and would turn to youth instead.

We're skint. Not administration skint, but the football equivalent of taking kitchen roll off the shopping list.

[Bowmans_Boot]

1 minute ago, Smithee said:

I'd also add that Levein was quoted as looking forward to seeing who was available after the window closed, only to later say we'd be signing no one after the window closed and would turn to youth instead.

We're skint. Not administration skint, but the football equivalent of taking kitchen roll off the shopping list.

I would tend to agree with this.

 

The new stand is great and will be (hopefully) a great money earner for us. However, I suspect the next 2-3 years may well be tough watching. 

[JamboAl]

31 minutes ago, Bowmans_Boot said:

This is key: where are we now following the chosen overspend on the new stand? This is what worries me. 

 

As for the "no high earners on long contracts": Martin? We are still paying Sammon for playing for another club and had to pay Oshiniwa off. 

 

CLs comment that it would be 1 in/1 out suggested to me that we were not cash rich, given that it totally obvious the team desperately needs a few quality players to add to the quality we already have (namely Berra, Jamie, Isma & Lafferty). 

Did he actually say that?

[Spencer]

14 minutes ago, Smithee said:

I'd also add that Levein was quoted as looking forward to seeing who was available after the window closed, only to later say we'd be signing no one after the window closed and would turn to youth instead.

We're skint. Not administration skint, but the football equivalent of taking kitchen roll off the shopping list.

Think you're right. That's not great given the level of attention of squad needs

 

I think we've sunk everything and more into the new stand. I have been critical previously of this approach. The more I reflect the more I can see why it was deemed necessary. I've sat in the Wheatfield since it was built. Whilst I have a great seat that I wouldn't change for anywhere in the stadium, the facilities in both the Wheatfield and Roseburn stands are incredibly basic. I appreciate that something will happen in the Wheatfield undercroft idc and that is admirable. Something the heralded Russian neglected 

 

Clearly a decision has been made to finish the Main Stand to as high a standard possible in order to try and maximise revenue from it 

 

Does appear to have left us a bit short of cash though. Although operationally we should be fine and it should have little impact on our ability to sign free agents.  Transfer fees are another matter altogether I suspect 

[Bowmans_Boot]

14 minutes ago, JamboAl said:

Did he actually say that?

From memory, he said that we would need to lose players before we signed any. 

[JamboAl]

2 minutes ago, Bowmans_Boot said:

From memory, he said that we would need to lose players before we signed any. 

Aye from memory!

Tell us where he said one out/one in.

[Bowmans_Boot]

2 minutes ago, JamboAl said:

Aye from memory!

Tell us where he said one out/one in.

Cant be arsed, Al. But he did. 

[JamboAl]

1 minute ago, Bowmans_Boot said:

Cant be arsed, Al. But he did. 

You can't be arsed because he didn't.  That's just your convenient interpretation.

He also suggested AB hadn't closed the door.

[Bowmans_Boot]

4 minutes ago, JamboAl said:

You can't be arsed because he didn't.  That's just your convenient interpretation.

He also suggested AB hadn't closed the door.

Fair enough, Al! I already said I cant be arsed. We will see. 

[Unknown user]

5 minutes ago, JamboAl said:

You can't be arsed because he didn't.  That's just your convenient interpretation.

He also suggested AB hadn't closed the door.

What door?

He did say players would need to leave before we could sign anyone in january by the way, which could mean 2 out for 1 in I suppose, but the message is the same.

But I remember it too. And I also can't be arsed searching for it.

[Bowmans_Boot]

13 hours ago, Spencer said:

 

I know what I read, and CL did say that. I am not spending time searching for it, though, particularly not to disprove someone who seemingly (& unbelievably) believes we are about to embark on a spending spree. 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

6 minutes ago, Bowmans_Boot said:

I know what I read, and CL did say that. I am not spending time searching for it, though, particularly not to disprove someone who seemingly (& unbelievably) believes we are about to embark on a spending spree. 

 

He's nitpicking but I suppose he's right that it's not 1 in/1 out. If we got an Osh-sized contract off our books that could bring in two, I suppose.

 

My hunch is that Budge is insisting on a fixed playing budget and staying within it.  My hunch is also that it's probably 3rd or 4th largest in the top tier, and that therefore we should be able to put together a playing side that's a lot better than what we've had so far, but that windfalls from extra ST sales aren't automatically going into players. I imagine those are going into stand payments and will for the next few years.

 

Cathro's clearout and rebuild can't have been cheap, which is why I imagine we don't have a lot of room to maneuver at the moment. But I still expect we'll make a move or two in January.

[Bowmans_Boot]

Just now, Ugly American said:

 

He's nitpicking but I suppose he's right that it's not 1 in/1 out. If we got an Osh-sized contract off our books that could bring in two, I suppose.

 

My hunch is that Budge is insisting on a fixed playing budget and staying within it.  My hunch is also that it's probably 3rd or 4th largest in the top tier, and that therefore we should be able to put together a playing side that's a lot better than what we've had so far, but that windfalls from extra ST sales aren't automatically going into players. I imagine those are going into stand payments and will for the next few years.

 

Cathro's clearout and rebuild can't have been cheap, which is why I imagine we don't have a lot of room to maneuver at the moment. But I still expect we'll make a move or two in January.

I mainly agree with this, but some appear to believe we can fund the new stand and also sign top players. I would love it if this were to be the case, but it appears highly unlikely. 

[Watt-Zeefuik]

2 hours ago, Bowmans_Boot said:

I mainly agree with this, but some appear to believe we can fund the new stand and also sign top players. I would love it if this were to be the case, but it appears highly unlikely. 

 

I agree that we shouldn't expect a squad of Berras any time in the next couple of years. I think once the stand is completed and its final cost finally known, the purse strings might loosen a bit. But right now we have to have cash on hand for contingencies and that means no splashes, and probably no McGinn, as much as we could use him.

[merseyjambo]

8 hours ago, soonbe110 said:

Of all the players I mentioned all but Hughes will be looking to move in January. None of them have futures at Hearts. Hughes may well retire if he picks up another injury before the break. Much easier for players to find a  decent contract elsewhere when they enter last 12 months of current deal. Clubs that want  them take care of most of any salary issues they have. Sammon may be the only exception however at his age and size he needs to be playing regularly. What you overlook is that a two/three year deal on £2k a week is better than 6 months on £3k per week to most players at this level. They are typically trying to maximise weekly wage and length of contract combined. It’s a short career. 

 

Stockton, Sammon and Martin have over 18 months to run on theirs deals and are not going to get better wages now than they’re on so they will be in no hurry to move unless we pay them off. Buaben I can’t seem to find if he’s out of contract at end of this season or next so I can’t answer that one. Salmon and Martin in particular are likely to be among the higher earners at the club.

 

However, are  you you really that naive to think a player on 3k per week is going to give up 30k plus so he can sign another deal elsewhere??? His agent will be making him aware what his options are come the end of his contract. They will know that someone is interested and will tell them to sign pre contract for that 2k per week you’re talking about. As you’ve said it’s a short career so they will making the most of it so why would they give up 30k plus. You’ve just contradicted yourself. 

 

Its a moot point as the players you mentioned as with the exception of Hughes, 2 are loanees whom we aren’t paying a great deal for in wages and Norlng who is unlikely to be on a huge wage. Hughes will be on a decent wage but knowing he’s going to retire at end of season, will in all likelihood hang it out until then.

 

You can’t just tell a player to move on. You can make it clear that we won’t be difficult to deal with like we did in summer with Sammon yet we got the grand total of zero interest. 

 

To fund the kind of wages McGinn is likely to want we would need to get rid of Sammon or Martin or both. As you’ve said it’s all about earnings for guys in their age group and there’s no chance they are likely to get another contract offer from another club on the same level we are paying them so if we want rid we are going to have to pay them off and when you’ve got 18 and 30 months respectively on your contract, that’s not going to be cheap.

 

[Seymour M Hersh]

6 hours ago, Gorgie_Rules said:

I'd be surprised if MacPhee hasn't made contact with him, however I think he will have his sights set elsewhere

 

I also thought there was no chance Berra would come home or that we would sign Lafferty however

 

He may well have his sights set elsewhere but does elsewhere have their sights set on him? 

[merseyjambo]

On 14/11/2017 at 08:49, JamboAl said:

Ipswich had a year's option on Berra which ultimately they did not exercise because he wanted back home.  He signed for us in the full knowledge he would be earning less.  I'd be surprised if Liverpool paid Wilson's contract off in full but the issue is that he would be returning to a lesser wage when like Berra he could almost certainly have earned more where they were or with other clubs.  They obviously came back for reasons other than money.

It is a bit far fetched to be comparing footballers' earnings with those of everyday Joes.  The answer to your last question is that Wilson almost certainly will have improved his wage with Sevco who were keen to sign Berra before we did and I firmly believe would still take him - on a higher wage than we pay.

 

PS - If you want the facts about earnings etc Bowman's Boot claims to know them.

 

As has been already pointed out, Ipswich wanted Berra to stay but he wanted to come back to Scotland to be nearer to his family so they clearly felt they didn’t want an unhappy player. There were paper rumours that Rangers wanted him, however I didn’t see anything when he signed that he’d been offered a contract at Ibrox and turned it down so that’s speculation.

 

As far as Wilson is concerned, do you think he agreed to leave Liverpoool without some sort of pay out???? Knowing what their reserves and youth players are on, he would almost certainly have been on way more money than we could give him. He will have had some form of pay off to get him off the books as they made it clear he wasn’t in their plans. When he came back up to Scotland, he signed for us, were other options available to him. Remember though at the first point of interest, he jumped ship for more money.

 

The point raised about players returning to their homeland and earning less money. If you are Grzelak or Novak is that while you are in contract with a club, and you have at least 6 months of earning a much higher wage, are you going to give that up to move home. You’re trying to compare Berra and Wilson to them when it’s a completely different scenario. When they moved back here, both were out of contract in one way or another. These guys have at least 6 months on their contact and if you think they will move back home to earn far less money than they’re on now, you’re deluded. 

 

If you were working in America earning 2k per week and still had 6 months to go to work there and knowing you’re career is a short one, would you give it up to earn £700 per week in Scotland??? That’s what you’re saying these guys may want to do. Look at their playing history and it should tell you they won’t get another contract earning what they are at moment.

[Le Chat]

Exactly the kind of player we are crying out for but I don't think he'll be short of decent options.

 

[soonbe110]

1 hour ago, merseyjambo said:

 

Stockton, Sammon and Martin have over 18 months to run on theirs deals and are not going to get better wages now than they’re on so they will be in no hurry to move unless we pay them off. Buaben I can’t seem to find if he’s out of contract at end of this season or next so I can’t answer that one. Salmon and Martin in particular are likely to be among the higher earners at the club.

 

However, are  you you really that naive to think a player on 3k per week is going to give up 30k plus so he can sign another deal elsewhere??? His agent will be making him aware what his options are come the end of his contract. They will know that someone is interested and will tell them to sign pre contract for that 2k per week you’re talking about. As you’ve said it’s a short career so they will making the most of it so why would they give up 30k plus. You’ve just contradicted yourself. 

 

Its a moot point as the players you mentioned as with the exception of Hughes, 2 are loanees whom we aren’t paying a great deal for in wages and Norlng who is unlikely to be on a huge wage. Hughes will be on a decent wage but knowing he’s going to retire at end of season, will in all likelihood hang it out until then.

 

You can’t just tell a player to move on. You can make it clear that we won’t be difficult to deal with like we did in summer with Sammon yet we got the grand total of zero interest. 

 

To fund the kind of wages McGinn is likely to want we would need to get rid of Sammon or Martin or both. As you’ve said it’s all about earnings for guys in their age group and there’s no chance they are likely to get another contract offer from another club on the same level we are paying them so if we want rid we are going to have to pay them off and when you’ve got 18 and 30 months respectively on your contract, that’s not going to be cheap.

 

They will and do, if the next contract is of a decent length and acceptable salary. Guys like Stockton are looking for security of employment as long as pay is at a certain level. Just ask a few players that play at  that sort of level. You don’t really think’ the Cole Stockton’s and Malaury Martins of this world can really hold a gun to a clubs head do you? In both cases if they languish on the bench or worse at us for the rest of their contracts their playing careers are over. Sammon is a slightly different case because of salary but again if he wants to play for another three or four years he can’t afford to sit on the sidelines for 18 months. 

You  do Hughes a dis-service. He ha# been open and hones5 with the club from day 1. Joined us with Euro 16 as the goal. Achieved that. O’Neill asked him  to stick around for Brazil 18. We were happy to give him  a contract to help him  towards that goal and help him beat Jennings cap record. Injuries have caught up with him.  Russia is off the agenda. Unless we offer him a coaching contract or he becomes a first team regular he will  tear up his contract soon. He certainly isn’t  here for the money. 

McGinn will get an 18 month deal at best wherever he goes. Buaben,Stockton, Randall wages more than cover that. 

[soonbe110]

7 hours ago, Smithee said:

I'd also add that Levein was quoted as looking forward to seeing who was available after the window closed, only to later say we'd be signing no one after the window closed and would turn to youth instead.

We're skint. Not administration skint, but the football equivalent of taking kitchen roll off the shopping list.

I believe Levein decided to use  the Sept to Dec period to test how many of the youngsters were close to being ready for the first team before deciding what he needed in Jan window. Seems sensible to me. No point in having an academy if you don’t give them  a chance to impress  and develop. 

[soonbe110]

7 hours ago, Bowmans_Boot said:

Cant be arsed, Al. But he did. 

He didn’t. Just check out the interview transcript. JamboAl is correct. 

[soonbe110]

7 hours ago, Spencer said:

I'd urge you to think twice about engaging with this one mate

 

****ing torture 

Pot, kettle, black springs to mind!