Shankland contract extension ( merged )

[Japan Jambo]

8 hours ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

I don't want to overpay for someone who will soon hit 30. Sell in the close season please.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/67716062

 

Well that reads to me like the 'for sale' sign is well and truly up...

[tian447]

First player to score 30 goals a season in decades, and instinctively knows where the back of the net is. 

 

He is exactly the sort of player we should be breaking the bank for, because if he doesn't do it for us, he will do it for someone else. 

 

He's the only player we've had in a long time who has justified big money. If anyone else is unhappy about it, they can up their game until they are rated similarly.

 

Humming and hawing over a couple of grand a week is exactly what has cost us big time in recent years with getting players in the door.  

 

If he wants £10,000 a week plus for a 4 year deal, give it to him. It's not a risk, he's not riddled with injuries, and he has proven he is worth it.  His goals alone could lead to multiple millions of pounds coming our way in European competitions.  

[soonbe110]

1 hour ago, OTT said:

 

Thats the point though, stay, become a club legend. Be this generations Skacel. Its a bit of a romatic pitch, but if he's open to staying then there is a glimmer of hope. Lay it on thick, get Mr Anderson opening the cheque book and see where we can get to with him. 

Or go somewhere else, become a legend there and earn two, three times the money. It’s not a tough call. He isn’t a Hearts supporter b

[Bazzas right boot]

12 minutes ago, soonbe110 said:

Armstrong not worth the money. Over 7 figures according to Savage. 

 

We really aren't going to grow tbh, we're between a rock and a hard place.

 

If we can't afford guys like Armstrong then why is Savage talking about challeging rangers and celtic, we should be worrying more about the likes of  Killie catching us.

 

 

[Thunder and Lightning]

11 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

mate, 30/40 goal a season strikers are a rarity. Every team wants them but very few have them. 
 

rarely do you find one available at a price point we can pay.  
 

I think that’s a very obvious statement 

 

40 goals? What season was that? 

 

He is excellent yes. But we should be looking all over for players, not relying on hope. Our scouts should be racking up the miles. 

 

We signed Robbo, we signed Laferty and we signed Shankland. 

 

We should offer him the very best we can. And then maybe a pound more. But he should remember that he came from **** all and it works for him at Hearts. He has a chance to carve out a legacy for himself. 

[soonbe110]

3 hours ago, Pasquale for King said:

Still haven’t done it though, he should’ve been first in line. 

Agreed, huge error if this is the first discussion . 

[RudiSkacelsLeftPeg]

1 hour ago, Tynecastlesmychurch said:

It’s not just about offering him a pay rise!

We need to be making the case to him that despite recent setbacks. The club is still incredibly ambitious and does want to close the gap on the old firm or at the very least be pulling away from everyone else. We need to be making the case that we really are going to be going for the best players possible. Players that actually could see us challenging for trophies on a regular basis. 

So what have the club done to try and close the gap? Buy players like Tagawa, Vargas and Grant? Absolute duds who will take us back the way not forward. 
 

Why is he going to want to stay with us? We’re doing nothing for him. He is carrying the full squad and we are currently sitting mid table. If we were performing week in/week out then potentially but we are absolutely shite. 

[Bazzas right boot]

4 minutes ago, tian447 said:

First player to score 30 goals a season in decades, and instinctively knows where the back of the net is. 

 

He is exactly the sort of player we should be breaking the bank for, because if he doesn't do it for us, he will do it for someone else. 

 

He's the only player we've had in a long time who has justified big money. If anyone else is unhappy about it, they can up their game until they are rated similarly.

 

Humming and hawing over a couple of grand a week is exactly what has cost us big time in recent years with getting players in the door.  

 

If he wants £10,000 a week plus for a 4 year deal, give it to him. It's not a risk, he's not riddled with injuries, and he has proven he is worth it.  His goals alone could lead to multiple millions of pounds coming our way in European competitions.  

 

He's also not reliant on pace so his game will not deteriorate as quickly as he gets older.

His game will remain the same. 

 

 

[soonbe110]

1 hour ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

What will happen is that he won’t sign a new deal and then we’ll have to sell him in the summer for whatever we’re offered 

We get more next month than next summer just based on contract left. 

[soonbe110]

1 hour ago, kingantti1874 said:

I can see the wood mate, things are far from great. But there’s no criticism from me on the club offering shanks a new deal regardless of whether he signs it or not.   I always think if you can call out the good stuff as well as the bad, and admit when you are wrong like I’ve been many a time then it’s a good start. 

I agree.  Just hope this isn’t the first discussion  re extending. Should have happened in the summer 

[naeclue]

I would play Shanks until the end of his contract anyhow. 

 

Hopeful he'll stay longer - I think he's in the form of his life, and Hearts have been a part of that.

[OTT]

5 minutes ago, soonbe110 said:

Or go somewhere else, become a legend there and earn two, three times the money. It’s not a tough call. He isn’t a Hearts supporter b

sure why not. 

[soonbe110]

56 minutes ago, Thunder and Lightning said:

 

There are clubs outside of Scotland ffs. The old firm doesn't rule the world. 

 

 

He also needs to realise he has had far from a glittering career outside of Hearts. 

That’s why there has been such little interest other than through west 

[Thunder and Lightning]

15 minutes ago, tian447 said:

First player to score 30 goals a season in decades, and instinctively knows where the back of the net is. 

 

He is exactly the sort of player we should be breaking the bank for, because if he doesn't do it for us, he will do it for someone else. 

 

He's the only player we've had in a long time who has justified big money. If anyone else is unhappy about it, they can up their game until they are rated similarly.

 

Humming and hawing over a couple of grand a week is exactly what has cost us big time in recent years with getting players in the door.  

 

If he wants £10,000 a week plus for a 4 year deal, give it to him. It's not a risk, he's not riddled with injuries, and he has proven he is worth it.  His goals alone could lead to multiple millions of pounds coming our way in European competitions.  

They didn't last year. We came fourth. 

 

He needs help. 

[soonbe110]

53 minutes ago, chrystaf said:

Pace is the key word here (unless you're Man City!) and not only that but the ability to hold the ball i.e. possession.  

Re hoof ball, many teams both sides of the Border use it very successfully, especially when breaking from defence. 

We are far too predictable and that pisses shankland off.

Shankland is a poacher, best in the country. Poachers perform best in the opposition pen area. We are seldom in the other teams pen area these days. He gets deeper and deeper looking for the ball every passing month. We need to play to our strengths based on current resources. 

[Pans Jambo]

5 hours ago, Sherbet said:

He could sign and still.be sold

Indeed. Reasonable extension of say 18 months with a 10 - 20% salary increase plus bonus payments. We could then insert a release clause for any bids over a certain threshold. Say Bids over £2.5M allows him to start talking to other teams. This doesn't mean we sell him for £2.5M.

[soonbe110]

27 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

mate, 30/40 goal a season strikers are a rarity. Every team wants them but very few have them. 
 

rarely do you find one available at a price point we can pay.  
 

I think that’s a very obvious statement 

 

30/40 goal a season striker? Think you are getting carried away. 

[soonbe110]

27 minutes ago, kingantti1874 said:

i read that and it irritated me. I’d rather we sign  1 Armstrong for a million rather than spend the same in total spread over a Jorge Grant, Oda and a Tagawa.

 

I agree but the inference yesterday is that we are not ready to spend that amount on one player. 

[Clerry Jambo]

Hibs might swoop for him with their treasure chest 😉

[soonbe110]

16 minutes ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

We really aren't going to grow tbh, we're between a rock and a hard place.

 

If we can't afford guys like Armstrong then why is Savage talking about challeging rangers and celtic, we should be worrying more about the likes of  Killie catching us.

 

 

I think they are 

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

1 hour ago, kingantti1874 said:

I can see the wood mate, things are far from great. But there’s no criticism from me on the club offering shanks a new deal regardless of whether he signs it or not.   I always think if you can call out the good stuff as well as the bad, and admit when you are wrong like I’ve been many a time then it’s a good start. 

I think you have to apply a certain degree of cynicism to these things.

 

Club under pressure, facing difficult AGM questions

 

Banderson (who has always been the Budge regime’s pet journo) appears immediately with a story about us preparing to offer a new deal to a big player who probably won’t sign one.

 

You watch now how this drifts into the ether. Shankland will be gone by the end of next summer. But for now, some handy PR

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

20 minutes ago, soonbe110 said:

We get more next month than next summer just based on contract left. 

They won’t dare sell him next month because 1) they’ll get a kicking from us and 2) they don’t have the talent to find a good replacement, and they know the season would become a complete debacle.

 

Next summer they’ll spin the ‘we did everything we could’ line, flog him for £750k rising to £1m and hope we all just shrug our shoulders

[Bazzas right boot]

12 minutes ago, soonbe110 said:

I agree but the inference yesterday is that we are not ready to spend that amount on one player. 

 

Agreed.

[Shanks]

We should be offering him top earner money and I would be delighted if he signed a new deal with us. 
 

I hate to say it though but I think he would be mad to sign a deal with us.  He’d be better seeing out his contract and leaving on a free, if he has a decent season next year a club will give him a huge signing on fee right in his pocket plus a big weekly wage, why sign a new deal to play in this Hearts side? 

[soonbe110]

10 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

They won’t dare sell him next month because 1) they’ll get a kicking from us and 2) they don’t have the talent to find a good replacement, and they know the season would become a complete debacle.

 

Next summer they’ll spin the ‘we did everything we could’ line, flog him for £750k rising to £1m and hope we all just shrug our shoulders

Maybe, or they know they are going to get an offer in January that they will accept as being exceptional in their eyes 

[davemclaren]

1 hour ago, Fort Vallance said:

It's very unlikely because it'll come down to cash and trophies. But I hope he takes into account that this is the first place where he's been properly appreciated.  All the crap about only being able to score in the championship has been put to bed. He doesn't owe us anything but hopefully he'll keep all that in mind.

 

He likes being called overweight? 😄

[davemclaren]

15 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

They won’t dare sell him next month because 1) they’ll get a kicking from us and 2) they don’t have the talent to find a good replacement, and they know the season would become a complete debacle.

 

Next summer they’ll spin the ‘we did everything we could’ line, flog him for £750k rising to £1m and hope we all just shrug our shoulders

Luckily, whatever happens, you'll be here to complain about it  😄

[Dusk_Till_Dawn]

2 minutes ago, davemclaren said:

Luckily, whatever happens, you'll be here to complain about it  😄

I’m consistent 

[davemclaren]

9 minutes ago, Dusk_Till_Dawn said:

I’m consistent 

No-one can argue that. 🤣

[H2]

2 hours ago, Geoff Kilpatrick said:

Paying a salary of tens of thousands per week.

so £10k a weeks is ok?

[SectionDJambo]

1 hour ago, tian447 said:

First player to score 30 goals a season in decades, and instinctively knows where the back of the net is. 

 

He is exactly the sort of player we should be breaking the bank for, because if he doesn't do it for us, he will do it for someone else. 

 

He's the only player we've had in a long time who has justified big money. If anyone else is unhappy about it, they can up their game until they are rated similarly.

 

Humming and hawing over a couple of grand a week is exactly what has cost us big time in recent years with getting players in the door.  

 

If he wants £10,000 a week plus for a 4 year deal, give it to him. It's not a risk, he's not riddled with injuries, and he has proven he is worth it.  His goals alone could lead to multiple millions of pounds coming our way in European competitions.  

This is pretty much where I'm at regarding Lawrence Shankland. Offer him a contract of real value to him, with security for him and his family. It would cost the club a great deal of money, but it will cost us a lot more in lost league positions and maybe even the difference of winning a cup. 

Teams all over the world will have a player or 2 who get paid far more than those with less talent or impact in games. They don't seem to have problems with the other players accepting that they just aren't in as strong a bargaining position. 

If any other players become as important to the team as Shankland is to us, then they can then negotiate a bigger contract for themselves. No successful club, these days, will be paying all their players the same salary. The other players will benefit from the team bonuses that having a few great players will earn the squad.

It doesn't have to break the bank to pay our best players really attractive money. It will take better decision making on future recruitment though.

[Lovecraft]

If we want to stand still - not go forward - stand still, we need to pay our players more.  It's that simple.

 

If there is any player that deserves a huge increase, it's Shankland.  As others have said, his game isn't reliant on pace, so a long contract will suit both.  If anything, Shankland keeps getting better.

 

Bin Haring, Halliday and Grant and give their wages to Shankland.   Easy to say, but we need to start paying money for quality and not quantity.

 

Players are essentially mercenaries now, and money talks.  Look at Rangers:  they pay high wages and get higher quality players.

 

The board need to accept this and deal with it.  All this increased revenue needs to be used to secure quality players.  If there is money left after that, then yes - go for some untested projects.

 

 

[Cameronstheman]

14 minutes ago, Lovecraft said:

If we want to stand still - not go forward - stand still, we need to pay our players more.  It's that simple.

 

If there is any player that deserves a huge increase, it's Shankland.  As others have said, his game isn't reliant on pace, so a long contract will suit both.  If anything, Shankland keeps getting better.

 

Bin Haring, Halliday and Grant and give their wages to Shankland.   Easy to say, but we need to start paying money for quality and not quantity.

 

Players are essentially mercenaries now, and money talks.  Look at Rangers:  they pay high wages and get higher quality players.

 

The board need to accept this and deal with it.  All this increased revenue needs to be used to secure quality players.  If there is money left after that, then yes - go for some untested projects.

 

 

This 

[Gorgiewave]

Each month we get a report on how much has been given to FoH. £140,000 or so, which goes it's never clear where.

 

How about we start a Shankland's wage fund? The more you put in the more we can pay him.

[OTT]

1 hour ago, Bazzas right boot said:

 

We really aren't going to grow tbh, we're between a rock and a hard place.

 

If we can't afford guys like Armstrong then why is Savage talking about challeging rangers and celtic, we should be worrying more about the likes of  Killie catching us.

 

 

 

We are growing, just doing it very conservatively and sustainably. 

 

(which is boring AF)

[PTBCAL]

When our CEO says there’s not been a bid or interest in Shankland I assume he means now. As there was definitely interest at the end of the last window. 

[john thomas]

33 minutes ago, SectionDJambo said:

This is pretty much where I'm at regarding Lawrence Shankland. Offer him a contract of real value to him, with security for him and his family. It would cost the club a great deal of money, but it will cost us a lot more in lost league positions and maybe even the difference of winning a cup. 

Teams all over the world will have a player or 2 who get paid far more than those with less talent or impact in games. They don't seem to have problems with the other players accepting that they just aren't in as strong a bargaining position. 

If any other players become as important to the team as Shankland is to us, then they can then negotiate a bigger contract for themselves. No successful club, these days, will be paying all their players the same salary. The other players will benefit from the team bonuses that having a few great players will earn the squad.

It doesn't have to break the bank to pay our best players really attractive money. It will take better decision making on future recruitment though.

Interview with ex EPL (MU?) player not so long ago . Players in the squad earning more didn't cause a problem 

[SectionDJambo]

5 minutes ago, john thomas said:

Interview with ex EPL (MU?) player not so long ago . Players in the squad earning more didn't cause a problem 

It really shouldn’t cause any problem.

The plus for Hearts would be that if Lawrence still didn’t sign a new contract, Hearts could say without any contradiction or criticism that they went way beyond our limits of contract values to try to get him to agree to stay, but he must have always seen himself as being elsewhere.

[chrystaf]

58 minutes ago, SectionDJambo said:

This is pretty much where I'm at regarding Lawrence Shankland. Offer him a contract of real value to him, with security for him and his family. It would cost the club a great deal of money, but it will cost us a lot more in lost league positions and maybe even the difference of winning a cup. 

Teams all over the world will have a player or 2 who get paid far more than those with less talent or impact in games. They don't seem to have problems with the other players accepting that they just aren't in as strong a bargaining position. 

If any other players become as important to the team as Shankland is to us, then they can then negotiate a bigger contract for themselves. No successful club, these days, will be paying all their players the same salary. The other players will benefit from the team bonuses that having a few great players will earn the squad.

It doesn't have to break the bank to pay our best players really attractive money. It will take better decision making on future recruitment though.

This.

[avhudtheteeshirt]

Hate to say it, but, imagine Shankland playing for Rangers or Celtic!

The amount of goal chances he would have, he could out score Kyogo with that sort of service!

If we don't sign him up, we would lose our only proven top goalscorer that we've had for years!

Where would we get the money for a replacement of his calibre?

Remember we tend to shop bargain basement, not many Shankland types around there!!! 

[HMFC01]

59 minutes ago, Lovecraft said:

If we want to stand still - not go forward - stand still, we need to pay our players more.  It's that simple.

 

If there is any player that deserves a huge increase, it's Shankland.  As others have said, his game isn't reliant on pace, so a long contract will suit both.  If anything, Shankland keeps getting better.

 

Bin Haring, Halliday and Grant and give their wages to Shankland.   Easy to say, but we need to start paying money for quality and not quantity.

 

Players are essentially mercenaries now, and money talks.  Look at Rangers:  they pay high wages and get higher quality players.

 

The board need to accept this and deal with it.  All this increased revenue needs to be used to secure quality players.  If there is money left after that, then yes - go for some untested projects.

 

 

 

I agree, respectfully of course.   If players are just sitting around on a wage that can be reinvested into a quality player, that makes sense.   Grant has had good moments but not enough it seems.    Haring has been falling behind.   Haliday is nowhere to be seen and should be first to go.    That doesn't mean we can't chop some other players as well.  I'm not picking on those three alone.   

 

 

 

 

[AllyjamboDerbyshire]

25 minutes ago, john thomas said:

Interview with ex EPL (MU?) player not so long ago . Players in the squad earning more didn't cause a problem 

I've never quite got the idea that players would be upset by another player getting more money than them, even if there exists a wage cap that is burst by the increased wage. It is clear to anyone interested that Shankland is far and away Hearts most valuable player, and that to keep him Hearts have to pay him a lot more than everyone else at the club. Some players might be a bit jealous, but if they want to be able to match his salary it'll be up to them to make themselves just as valuable - or ask for a transfer to find out just how valuable they actually are. Anyway, are there people on JKB who think every player is on the same wage or that everyone would be happy to see some players paid £5,000 while they're on £3,000 as long as the supposed wage cap isn't broken to keep a player like Shankland?

[132goals1958]

3 hours ago, soonbe110 said:

That’s why there has been such little interest other than through west 

 That’s a fair comment. He’s been great for us but previously had a bit of a chequered career. Didn’t make an impact at Aberdeen with loan spells at Dunfermline St Mirren and Morton. Prolific at Ayr and  Dundee Utd. Spell in Belgium probably soured by playing out of position. I think he would score goals for fun at either of the Bigot brothers mainly as a result of the huge gap between them and the others. If he goes hope it’s down South but I think it would be at championship level .

[Bainy]

The thing I read was mckinlay talking about 5M and shankland being the difference between Europe and no europe. So to me hes saying £5m and we might start talking. Can't see rangers getting anywhere near that maybe some English teams. 

[brawlad74]

I'm very much in make Shanks our best offer to get him to resign camp. Top player gets top salary. Might not be enough but we have to try and show we have tried. If Boycie Oda Tagawa and Vargas can't replace Gino's 13 league goals how do we begin top replace Shanks? 

[EH11 2NL]

4 hours ago, tian447 said:

First player to score 30 goals a season in decades, and instinctively knows where the back of the net is. 

 

He is exactly the sort of player we should be breaking the bank for, because if he doesn't do it for us, he will do it for someone else. 

 

He's the only player we've had in a long time who has justified big money. If anyone else is unhappy about it, they can up their game until they are rated similarly.

 

Humming and hawing over a couple of grand a week is exactly what has cost us big time in recent years with getting players in the door.  

 

If he wants £10,000 a week plus for a 4 year deal, give it to him. It's not a risk, he's not riddled with injuries, and he has proven he is worth it.  His goals alone could lead to multiple millions of pounds coming our way in European competitions.  

Couldn't agree more. The salary framework is all well and good, but its taken us 30 years to find Shankland. Being scared to raise the wages budget for a special player incase we go back to the dark days od debt is pathetic, we'll get no where. Wouldn't do it for an unknown, but if we can't do it for Shankland we can kiss goodbye the notion of putting a gap between us and the rest. 

[Taffin]

Offer out best contract. Make him top earner comfortably and at least somewhat competitive with the market rate.

 

If he doesn't sign it, we need to play hard ball for once. No extension, doesn't play and in turn doesn't go to the Euros and probably doesn't get the big move he's after anyway. We've been far too soft over the years and naive thinking being 'fair' will attract better players...and we get shafted time and again. 

[EH11 2NL]

3 hours ago, Gorgiewave said:

Each month we get a report on how much has been given to FoH. £140,000 or so, which goes it's never clear where.

 

How about we start a Shankland's wage fund? The more you put in the more we can pay him.

Interesting. If every FOH pledger added an extra £1 a month, there's about £2000 extra a week for Shanklands wages. Make it 3 or 4 quid really pay him well. Obviously on top of what he already gets. 

[Russ1977]

5 hours ago, tian447 said:

First player to score 30 goals a season in decades, and instinctively knows where the back of the net is. 

 

He is exactly the sort of player we should be breaking the bank for, because if he doesn't do it for us, he will do it for someone else. 

 

He's the only player we've had in a long time who has justified big money. If anyone else is unhappy about it, they can up their game until they are rated similarly.

 

Humming and hawing over a couple of grand a week is exactly what has cost us big time in recent years with getting players in the door.  

 

If he wants £10,000 a week plus for a 4 year deal, give it to him. It's not a risk, he's not riddled with injuries, and he has proven he is worth it.  His goals alone could lead to multiple millions of pounds coming our way in European competitions.  

Imagine how many goals he’d score if we actually provided him a decent amount of service. A goal very 2 games this season feeding of scraps is pretty impressive. If he was getting the penalties we got at the start of last season he’d be at 20 already. 

[DG_HMFC]

Shankland needs to think about if life away from Hearts would be a good thing.

 

He's tried going abroad and it didn't work out. If Hearts were to offer him a too deal I reckon he'd sign it because he's settled, he's the captain, he scores lots of goals at this level and he knows he's well loved. 

 

He's not even been here 2 years.