Barnes

[dylanlegend]

4 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Please can we stop debating how much players earn. - it’s completely irrelevant to us as it’s a world we couldn’t imagine (well 99.9% of us ) 

 

Yeh it’s irrelevant of course we’d all love to earn that but we are not elite sportsmen just like we aren’t rockstars or movie stars. I’m just surprised he’s only on ‘38k a week’ surely he’s on more than that 

[Ric Flair]

Just now, dylanlegend said:

Yeh it’s irrelevant of course we’d all love to earn that but we are not elite sportsmen just like we aren’t rockstars or movie stars. I’m just surprised he’s only on ‘38k a week’ surely he’s on more than that 

He's had a 35-40% pay cut, like they all have.

[Ryy]

11 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

He's had a 35-40% pay cut, like they all have.

So if my maths is decent say he was on around 80k for example he’d be on around 56k now? Then you see Newcastle would probably offer him 100k maybe? 

[sacreblueits442]

14 minutes ago, Ric Flair said:

He's had a 35-40% pay cut, like they all have.

...with a 40% haircut, and his salary dropping to £38k,  it still puts him originally at £63k per week. Still seems less than you would envisage!!!

Edited 8 July 2023 by sacreblueits442
Update.

[st albans fox]

11 minutes ago, sacreblueits442 said:

...with a 40% haircut, and his salary dropping to £38k,  it still puts him originally at £63k per week. Still seems less than you would envisage!!!

Where did the 38k come from ?

 

he renewed in aug 21 after he’d recovered from his knee injury  - I think he would be on around 80k. with his reduction I reckon he’ll be on approx 50k 

[urban.spaceman]

1 hour ago, dylanlegend said:

I don’t think we were held back at all. The Newcastle owners just have a lot more money than our owners do. Who was we ever linked with for big money wages? No one. Only thing that held us back was Rodgers et al poor transfer dealings.

Categorically untrue.

 

See below:

 

On 24/06/2023 at 00:17, urban.spaceman said:

I don't want anyone to take this personally but I feel that not enough people quite understand the ways in which we've been held back since we won the league. It's not just about Everton and Man City's antics - to add to the unlevel playing field analogy we've also quite literally had our arms tied behind our back by a system that treats the "big" with deference and everyone else with nothing but contempt, including us fans as consumers.

 

The TV deal for UK consumers is quite literally the worst in the world for non-"top 6" clubs and consumers. It's what sustains the "big" clubs and prevents smaller clubs from ever developing and breaking into the top 7 places on a long term basis.

 

If you are a British consumer and you want to access every single Premier League match, then you have absolutely no legal right or means to do so.

 

In most other countries you can.

 

In the UK you are expected to subscribe to Sky, BT and Amazon and yet you only get access to 52% of the matches. A rough estimate on my part is that this will cost you £775 per annum, although I can only find a minimum 18 month contract with Sky and 24 month contract with BT.

 

I've said this before, but for the last 6 months of our title winning season I was living in Cape Town then spent 2-3 months living in Botswana and travelling around the region. I could either pay for DSTV/Supersport at £360pa and get access to every single Premier League match, or walk in to any pub to get access to it.

 

My dad lives 8 miles away from the King Power and had absolutely absolutely no legal right or means to watch us play on tv.

 

A few weeks ago there was a gang of Brits jailed for decades for providing access to "illegal" streams for UK consumers.

 

Or to put it another way, the Premier League managed to prosecute people for making their product actually accessible to people who wanted to access it. 

 

-------

 

But here's why it's bad for clubs like us.

 

Football has had a Saturday 3pm broadcast blackout since the 60s, which is why UK based consumers can't watch the games. So matches are selected by broadcasters and moved away from the Saturday 3pm slot to get around that rule. Clubs are given "facility fees" - £1.2m per game as it stands - for every match selected for UK broadcast. They have viewers to attract, so the broadcasters pick the clubs they feel will bring in more viewers, which is what tips the eventual earnings in favour of the biggest clubs.

 

To give you an example, in 2014/15, we were selected for broadcast only 8 times.

 

In 2015/16, we were selected for broadcast 15 times (just 12 in 2016/17). Newcastle 16. Everton 18. Spurs 21. Chelsea 22. Liverpool 23. Man Utd 25. Man City 26. Arsenal 27.

 

In total prize money, we were the 5th highest earners with £93m. Spurs £95m, Man Utd £96.3m, Man City £96.8m and Arsenal £100.8m.

 

That right there is evidence of football not being a meritocracy.

 

And that's before you even get to the extra exposure for sponsors which sends their 'earnings' skyrocketing - Man City have certainly been using it as an excuse to inflate their deals, hence the constant investigations.

 

And that's just part of the issue. One of the FFP measures they brought in in 2013 was called Short Term Cost Control (STCC). It was basically, they said, designed to keep clubs spending within their means {directly controlled, see above} and not have wage bills spiralling out of control.

 

Clubs were restricted from increasing wage bills by more than 7% each season.

 

That in itself is designed to protect the bigger clubs IMO.

 

We won the league with a squad that had been promoted 2 seasons earlier and had finished 14th the previous season. So despite being the actual Champions, we were restricted from spending money {that had already been stifled} on players to compete at the top where we found ourselves.

 

We were the reigning Champions but effectively only had the spending power of 14th place club.

 

(Side note - STCC ended in 2019 which is why Newcastle were able to spend £300m in the last year despite circa £30m the previous)

 

-------

 

In summary, you've basically got a company (the Premier League) colluding with participants (the "big" clubs) and restricting access (via broadcasters) in order to restrain competition (the "other 14") and prices for consumers (us).

 

That, my friends, is the dictionary definition of a cartel:

 

cartel

noun

a group of similar independent companies who join together to control prices and limit competition

 

-------

 

Miguel Delaney did a fantastic article in The Independent in early 2020, about a month before lockdown. It begins:

 

“We don’t want too many Leicester Citys.”

These were the words spoken by a senior figure from the Premier League’s ‘big six’ clubs, in the kind of high-end London hotel you can easily imagine.

“Football history suggests fans like big teams winning,” the official continued, to the group of business people and media figures present. “A certain amount of unpredictability is good, but a more democratic league would be bad for business.”

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/champions-league-superclubs-liverpool-man-utd-barcelona-real-madrid-a9330431.html

 

That was about 9 months before Man United and Liverpool tried to bring in Project Big Picture, which involved reducing the teams to 18, giving the 9 clubs with the longest time in the league (but in reality allowing 'any six clubs' and we all know who they are) more voting power on competition issues, and especially distribution of broadcast revenues. citation

 

That was 14 months before they announced the European Super League which as we all know would have bankrupted everyone but themselves.

 

-------

 

We absolutely should not have been allowed to win the Premier League. It shouldn't have happened. They let their guard down expecting that one of the six (well, four; Liverpool hadn't won a title in 25 years and Tottenham are, well, Tottenham). They had controlled the finances and fortunes (in every sense of the word) of the competition for so long that a club ACTUALLY WINNING IT ON MERIT was utterly unthinkable.

 

As far as I'm concerned, with our relegation, they got exactly what they wanted. This is our punishment for humiliating them without buying in.

 

Clubs like Manchester City and Newcastle are so wealthy that they are unaccountable. Man City's CEO is literally on record saying he'd rather spend £50m on lawyers suing UEFA than pay a £30m fine. They refused to cooperate with UEFA for years, were allowed to appoint 2 of the 3 CAS judges who - lo and behold - declared that their rule breaks were "time barred". The Premier League spent 2 years investigating Man City before they were even allowed to report on it. Just look at the trophies they've won in just the 4 years they were being investigated.

 

Football is broken to such a level that only government action will fix it. The problem we have with that is that we don't have a functioning government, and the Shadow Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport is a vocal Man City fan who expressed disappointment after the UEFA ban.

 

Football in this country is beyond broken.

 

And it won't get 'fixed'. Because it already is.

 

-------

 

“We don’t want too many Leicester Citys.”

 

[justfoxes]

10 hours ago, StriderHiryu said:

Losing Tielemans, Maddison, Barnes and Soyuncu in one window. Has there ever been a more brutal departure window than that? Maybe Leeds or West Ham when they went down I suppose.

Can’t believe they’ve allowed a huge core of the team to go in one window, yes the money is great for the club but replacing a player like Maddison will cost more than the cost it took the Spuds to prise him of us ?

 

Youri had left the club before Christmas anyway his performances at times were so hit and miss and his body language when things in the game weren’t going his way showed he just didn’t want to be here, Souyuncu was Fuched over by Blodgers god knows what went on there and why he was benched for so long and a poor excuse of lack of fitness comment maybe he saw Cags absolutely massive 🍆 that Blodgers felt inadequate with so he got so jealous that his wife probably said one night whilst In Bed “ so Brendan is it true what the fans sing about Souyuncu’s 🍆? “ he got the hump and benched Cags ??

 

Barnes going would be a mistake for us in this league can see him doing well for us getting plenty of goals down the wing also giving plenty assists, so unless it’s a Barnes has asked to be sold then we should keep him offer him a decent contract with an option to sell next year if unhappy, it just seems whoever is sanctioning these sales needs Rudkins head looking into what also with Rumours of Vardy, Nacho, Daka, Praet, Castagne & Ndidi being available is just ridiculous I think Rudkin has lost his Marbles is he even thinks of letting anymore of our core team / starting 11 being sold on ?

[StriderHiryu]

41 minutes ago, justfoxes said:

Can’t believe they’ve allowed a huge core of the team to go in one window, yes the money is great for the club but replacing a player like Maddison will cost more than the cost it took the Spuds to prise him of us ?

 

Youri had left the club before Christmas anyway his performances at times were so hit and miss and his body language when things in the game weren’t going his way showed he just didn’t want to be here, Souyuncu was Fuched over by Blodgers god knows what went on there and why he was benched for so long and a poor excuse of lack of fitness comment maybe he saw Cags absolutely massive 🍆 that Blodgers felt inadequate with so he got so jealous that his wife probably said one night whilst In Bed “ so Brendan is it true what the fans sing about Souyuncu’s 🍆? “ he got the hump and benched Cags ??

 

Barnes going would be a mistake for us in this league can see him doing well for us getting plenty of goals down the wing also giving plenty assists, so unless it’s a Barnes has asked to be sold then we should keep him offer him a decent contract with an option to sell next year if unhappy, it just seems whoever is sanctioning these sales needs Rudkins head looking into what also with Rumours of Vardy, Nacho, Daka, Praet, Castagne & Ndidi being available is just ridiculous I think Rudkin has lost his Marbles is he even thinks of letting anymore of our core team / starting 11 being sold on ?

The club said they were reviewing what went wrong last season and would make corrections on it, and I think they did:

 

- Took too long last season negotiating with Chelsea over Fofana. Meant they didn't have the funds to refresh the squad. So this season sold Maddison early, trying to do the same with other big players.

- Realised that a malaise has set in, so are open to starting again. Hence getting rid of all players that don't want to be there, allowing the new manager to bring in his own team from scratch. Drain the swamp and all that.

 

There's pros and cons to both sides, but that's what seems to be happening to me. My biggest fear though is that we might bring in players who are good at this level, but don't have a high ceiling. In 19/20 under Rodgers we had this incredible team featuring Ndidi, Maddison, Tielemans, Soyuncu, Chilwell, Barnes... these players were already good and had huge potential. I think players like Coady, Winks and Cairney and Steffen if they come in are fine signings, but they don't have that potential. The reason for the direction change I guess is that they've said they want leaders and model pros... look at the boys that went to the darts every year in terms of setting the wrong example.

 

This thread is about Barnes, and I for one think it's depressing he is leaving us. Trained in the academy, was one of the most important players in our team by the end and had a decent season given we got relegated. But he was in that team that stunk the place out, so maybe it is time to move onwards and upwards.

[Grebfromgrebland]

We need a fresh start and rebuild. That means getting rid of anyone and everyone who isn't 100% committed to the cause.

 

Having 15 players not committed last season is what screwed this club up.

[LCFCJohn]

6 hours ago, StriderHiryu said:

The club said they were reviewing what went wrong last season and would make corrections on it, and I think they did:

 

- Took too long last season negotiating with Chelsea over Fofana. Meant they didn't have the funds to refresh the squad. So this season sold Maddison early, trying to do the same with other big players.

- Realised that a malaise has set in, so are open to starting again. Hence getting rid of all players that don't want to be there, allowing the new manager to bring in his own team from scratch. Drain the swamp and all that.

 

There's pros and cons to both sides, but that's what seems to be happening to me. My biggest fear though is that we might bring in players who are good at this level, but don't have a high ceiling. In 19/20 under Rodgers we had this incredible team featuring Ndidi, Maddison, Tielemans, Soyuncu, Chilwell, Barnes... these players were already good and had huge potential. I think players like Coady, Winks and Cairney and Steffen if they come in are fine signings, but they don't have that potential. The reason for the direction change I guess is that they've said they want leaders and model pros... look at the boys that went to the darts every year in terms of setting the wrong example.

 

This thread is about Barnes, and I for one think it's depressing he is leaving us. Trained in the academy, was one of the most important players in our team by the end and had a decent season given we got relegated. But he was in that team that stunk the place out, so maybe it is time to move onwards and upwards.

The main argument to let Barnes go for me is if he think he’d definitely not sign a new contract even if we went up, to avoid the situation with Tielemans and Maddison where they walk for free to get to their last year. On that basis, sell. If we he saying ‘I categorically want to spend my career here, get the club back up and stay, and will sign a new contract’, then I want to keep but that is an unlikely scenario and as I say, we need to avoid that situation again. 

[Big Dave]

6 minutes ago, LCFCJohn said:

The main argument to let Barnes go for me is if he think he’d definitely not sign a new contract even if we went up, to avoid the situation with Tielemans and Maddison where they walk for free to get to their last year. On that basis, sell. If we he saying ‘I categorically want to spend my career here, get the club back up and stay, and will sign a new contract’, then I want to keep but that is an unlikely scenario and as I say, we need to avoid that situation again. 

Unless he stays for the season, gets us promoted then leaves. Will be worth more than any current transfer fee.

[JimJams]

Only if you believe promotion basically lies totally at the feet of Harvey Barnes. And if it does, we're fked anyway.

[sacreblueits442]

9 hours ago, st albans fox said:

Where did the 38k come from ?

 

he renewed in aug 21 after he’d recovered from his knee injury  - I think he would be on around 80k. with his reduction I reckon he’ll be on approx 50k 

...the previous poster stipulated that he was presently on £38k per week!!!

 I viewed the amount with suspicion and calculated that it would therefore had been £63 k per week prior to a 40% reduction. 

[sacreblueits442]

1 hour ago, Big Dave said:

Unless he stays for the season, gets us promoted then leaves. Will be worth more than any current transfer fee.

...we said the same thing about Tielemans!!!

 We will have to sell now, to maximise his value, with a year left on his contract and even being back in the top tier, we are not going to get his true value.

[Silva Fox]

£25m are they having a laugh?

Newcastle preparing £25m bid for Leicester's Harvey Barnes as they gear up for the Champions League | Daily Mail Online

 

[JimJams]

Either the Daily Mail are or Newcastle are.

[Foxin_Mad]

If they bid 25 million, I would tell them to **** off and never insult us again, Saudi FC corrupt *****.

 

In this Market a 2 year contracted English winger is at least 40m all day long. 

[Edingleyfox]

If Newcastle can spend £55 million on a player they can surely find £40m for Barnes. However, it wouldn't surprise me at all if they go in at £25m. West Ham should have a bit of money soon so hopefully we can get a bidding war. However I'm concerned about the number of proven goal scorers that appear to be on the way out with no concrete links on incoming strikers/wingers etc

[Ric Flair]

I still don't think he ends up there, they'll continually try and low ball us and then West Ham or Villa will pay the proper money for him and they'll be nowhere to be seen.

[coolhandfox]

9 hours ago, StriderHiryu said:

The club said they were reviewing what went wrong last season and would make corrections on it, and I think they did:

 

- Took too long last season negotiating with Chelsea over Fofana. Meant they didn't have the funds to refresh the squad. So this season sold Maddison early, trying to do the same with other big players.

- Realised that a malaise has set in, so are open to starting again. Hence getting rid of all players that don't want to be there, allowing the new manager to bring in his own team from scratch. Drain the swamp and all that.

 

There's pros and cons to both sides, but that's what seems to be happening to me. My biggest fear though is that we might bring in players who are good at this level, but don't have a high ceiling. In 19/20 under Rodgers we had this incredible team featuring Ndidi, Maddison, Tielemans, Soyuncu, Chilwell, Barnes... these players were already good and had huge potential. I think players like Coady, Winks and Cairney and Steffen if they come in are fine signings, but they don't have that potential. The reason for the direction change I guess is that they've said they want leaders and model pros... look at the boys that went to the darts every year in terms of setting the wrong example.

 

This thread is about Barnes, and I for one think it's depressing he is leaving us. Trained in the academy, was one of the most important players in our team by the end and had a decent season given we got relegated. But he was in that team that stunk the place out, so maybe it is time to move onwards and upwards.

This are supposed to be the next Morgan, Fuchs sort of players creating a culture and leadership group.

 

I expect we will bring in 4 or 5, 19-23 years olds who will be player we look to the future with.

 

 

[coolhandfox]

1 minute ago, Ric Flair said:

I still don't think he ends up there, they'll continually try and low ball us and then West Ham or Villa will pay the proper money for him and they'll be nowhere to be seen.

Similar to Maddison.

 

Loads of smoke about Newcastle, but only Spurs willing to pay up.

Edited 9 July 2023 by coolhandfox

[funkyrobot]

1 hour ago, Silva Fox said:

£25m are they having a laugh?

Newcastle preparing £25m bid for Leicester's Harvey Barnes as they gear up for the Champions League | Daily Mail Online

 

Classic Newcastle low ball offer. It’s becoming a standard practice with them. 

[mozartfox]

1 hour ago, Silva Fox said:

£25m are they having a laugh?

Newcastle preparing £25m bid for Leicester's Harvey Barnes as they gear up for the Champions League | Daily Mail Online

 

If this is correct, they should be told the price is X.  So save wasting our time do not bother us again unless they are prepared to treat Leicester City with respect.  
 

More importantly what is now patently evident is, that our DoF’s reputation as being a total mug, is now being exploited by English and Italian Clubs.   This is what happens Top when you employ people in high positions that are frankly out of their depth.  

 

[JimmyC74]

35 minutes ago, mozartfox said:

If this is correct, they should be told the price is X.  So save wasting our time do not bother us again unless they are prepared to treat Leicester City with respect.  
 

More importantly what is now patently evident is, that our DoF’s reputation as being a total mug, is now being exploited by English and Italian Clubs.   This is what happens Top when you employ people in high positions that are frankly out of their depth.  

 

Rather keep the lad this season than accept a low ball offer.

 

Reject 25m out of hand and see if West Ham come in with a bid.

 

[DezFox]

If it’s 25 mill that is mental. Actually disgraceful from us again if true. Wake up.