Vestergaard

[Dan LCFC]

8 minutes ago, lcfc_forever said:

I don't agree with a 3-year deal but funny this seems to be getting more response from posters than the GOAT staying for another year.

 

Outlines that people not just on here like a moan more! 

The two were announced together precisely for this reason. This place to its credit does see through this for large parts.

[dmayne7]

16 minutes ago, Babylon said:

If he’s on 50k a week, it’s about £8m over the course of the three years. And that’s if we stay up, clearly there will be a huge wage reduction built in for relegation.

 

And relegation is something that people keep seemingly forgetting. If we go down, we have one of our better players last season still at the club. 
 

If he goes, then you need a replacement. If you got someone on 30k, that’s still £4.7m before any kind of fees.

 

And who we buying for £3.3m on 30k a week that anyone is going to be remotely happy with. Plus any purchase goes onto the PSR calculation, which we don’t want. 
 

It’s a perfectly understandable financial and squad building decision, at this moment. 

 

Now in an ideal world you want your manager on board with it, or you would have the finances to just go and get better. But our situation is not ideal, in fact it’s pretty shit. 

One of the better players in that system. If he's not in the same role, his effectiveness will diminish massively.

 

Like many, I have major reservations he'll be up to it this year, especially with Enzo gone but I think it made a lot of sense to keep him for a year so no problem with that. But 3 years?! There's no sense in that. If we go back down, you shop for somebody appropriate for that market, in which case you could get plenty of players for the fees you've quoted and probably less on wages. It makes so much more sense to take a punt on a younger player because they only have to be half decent to be a far better financial investment.

 

I'm sorry, there's no way you can spin a 3 year deal for a soon to be 32 year old who was beyond awful when he last played in the prem, as 'understandable'. Making that decision without a manager is crazy and also shows that JV is far more bothered about the money than anything else (as he's proven before).

[nick6666]

I would have gave him 5

[lcfcsnow]

This is up there with Matty James 4 year contract which we awarded 3 games into his return after 2+ years injured, then the following match he was crocked again.

[DezFox]

8 minutes ago, Lambert09 said:

genuine question for some, would you prefer we massively overpaid for 1 year, overpaid for 2 or got him down to a sustainable wage and spread it out over 3? 

 

vestergarde knows this was his last decent deal in football, he would want 3 years from everyone. 

 

If the club have got him down to 40k at 3 years then that might well be better for our situation than 70k for 1 year.

 

These figures are random but probably fairly accurate based on what we pay atm. 

Or just don’t resign him. It’s not like he has much power surely? Accept this or don’t resign. We all know it would no big loss. 

[Out Foxed]

2 minutes ago, Lcfc82 said:

Spent 2 years unsuccessfully trying to get rid of him.

He has 1 half decent season in the championship.

Have a new 3 year contract !

 

Absolute madness, sums up how we have got into a mess with FFP

bananas

[waddadamadda]

Do I think 3 years was a bit stupid? Yup but I’ll be the one to say it…..I blinking love Vesty  

 

(he’s my every game £1 bet to score first and to score anytime) 

 

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

This is what happens when you put all the football direction in the hands of a manager rather than a DoF.

 

Manager leaves and you're left with players that don't fit the system.

[Noahfence]

An absolute joke of a decision. I welcome the day this club folds 

[DezFox]

I can only imagine this was signed with enzo at the helm and we now regret it but can’t pull out. 
 

[CosbehFox]

If you were Nelson, you'd be a little miffed. Club should priortising the development of him over giving players contracts until they are 34 (all evidence suggest its not sensible)

[SkidsFox]

Only reason I can think of for this, is we know we're going to be selling the likes of Souttar and Coady.

[Stuntman_Mike]

On the bright side, I don't think he'll lose much pace by 2027.

[Guest Chocolate Teapot]

Just now, SkidsFox said:

Only reason I can think of for this, is we know we're going to be selling the likes of Souttar and Coady.

We'd need to get fees of north of 10m for us to break even so we've no chance of this.

[Mark]

1 minute ago, SkidsFox said:

Only reason I can think of for this, is we know we're going to be selling the likes of Souttar and Coady.

They'll only leave on loan at best, being paid stupid money they won't get elsewhere. Souttar contracted until 2028 🤦‍♂️

[Jattdogg]

Ffs.  1 year extension fine but 3? 

 

 

[Vestan Pance]

No doubt the Ndidi contract will be similarly stupid. A dozen decent games in the last three seasons (all of which were in the Championship) and a contract will be offered, no other club will go near it. Genuinely this Club could go bankrupt if we don't remove those at the top.

[lcfcbluearmy]

12 minutes ago, HankMarvin said:

You have to wonder why? It not like the defenders were covering themselves in glory match after match 

 

he won’t be getting 5mins to wander with the ball at a snails paces like in the championship 

Same reason he didn't play soyuncu and constantly played ward, he had decided he was playing armarty and refused to change despite the obvious inability to play the role

[Ricey]

Just a bat shit crazy decision no matter how you dress it up.

 

High chance that he’ll be too slow for the PL and a high chance that he won’t suit the new managers system as much as he did Maresca’s.

[studentofthegame]

Found pictures of Rudkin in his former job before he came here

[sm1]

There's no saving us.

[Babylon]

7 minutes ago, dmayne7 said:

One of the better players in that system. If he's not in the same role, his effectiveness will diminish massively.

 

Like many, I have major reservations he'll be up to it this year, especially with Enzo gone but I think it made a lot of sense to keep him for a year so no problem with that. But 3 years?! There's no sense in that. If we go back down, you shop for somebody appropriate for that market, in which case you could get plenty of players for the fees you've quoted and probably less on wages. It makes so much more sense to take a punt on a younger player because they only have to be half decent to be a far better financial investment.

 

I'm sorry, there's no way you can spin a 3 year deal for a soon to be 32 year old who was beyond awful when he last played in the prem, as 'understandable'. Making that decision without a manager is crazy and also shows that JV is far more bothered about the money than anything else (as he's proven before).

He wouldn’t sign a year or two, clearly. 
 

I’ve just explained all the sense in it. 

 

He could just be a squad player for three years, we still need those. I don’t know why it’s looked at like he somehow has to be a starter for the next three years.

 

I’d have preferred a shorter contract, but it all depends on the wages. And if he wouldn’t sign it, we are stuck between a rock and a hard place because of our situation. 

[whoareyaaa]

Had a great season last season, 3 years seems a bit excessive but happy he is staying.

 

This is why I think Faes will be off.

[Jattdogg]

50 minutes ago, fazzyfox said:

Would he have rejected a 2 year? Doubt it so why 3? What with all that intense competition for his signature. Or is it just making sure we have enough players already on the books to get through the next 3 transfer embargo’s! Three years ?

 

 

My local gurdwara is looking for a defender and as I understand put in a bid for him. Looks like our offer of free langar food wasn't the selling point.

 

 

Orrrrrrr could this be a genius smoke screen. Maresca and chelsea to table his £100 million buyout?

Edited 7 June by Jattdogg

[Old Fox]

4 minutes ago, Vestan Pance said:

No doubt the Ndidi contract will be similarly stupid. A dozen decent games in the last three seasons (all of which were in the Championship) and a contract will be offered, no other club will go near it. Genuinely this Club could go bankrupt if we don't remove those at the top.

Let’s overreact ……🫣 club is only where we are because of those at the top ………….not going bankrupt whilst they are here ….i wish fans would realise how lucky we are