No it just means City will get a massive fee when he does move to Real.
Gonna score loads next season in the championship
I think the risk is his physicality and the immense pressures he places on his body given his build which pose a risk to recurring and worsening injuries.
It's mean 1 of 2 things for me.
Either City are confident that they are going to come out of this investigation in a relatively healthy position.
Or they are positioning the Club for a large money transfer that effectively secures City's finances against potential relegation.
This could allow them to keep the rest of squad for a promotion campaign and immediate return to the top flight.
I don’t think he’s a Madrid player anyway especially if Vini and Mbappe are there long term.
comment by FishMCFC (U16301)
posted 13 minutes ago
Or they are positioning the Club for a large money transfer that effectively secures City's finances against potential relegation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I understand your reasoning, but why would he use himself as a pawn in all this? If we're guilty, there will be a firesafe and would benefit him more in signing on bonuses (in lieu of transfer fees) and/or salaries.
It's simple really - just guarantees a big fee. Contracts are broken all the time
The timing and the unusual length of the contract is very suspicious for me.
comment by Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan (U1217)
posted 1 minute ago
The timing and the unusual length of the contract is very suspicious for me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, the length of contract only adds up to 114 months. Could at least add another month on top.
With the new contract I doubt anyone but the Saudi's could afford his wages surely?
comment by Playmaker (U22780)
posted 3 minutes ago
With the new contract I doubt anyone but the Saudi's could afford his wages surely?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was thinking that too. But who knows
comment by kinsang (U3346)
posted 2 minutes ago
It's simple really - just guarantees a big fee. Contracts are broken all the time
----------------------------------------------------------------------
9.5 years is very odd. Thebfee they've paid for him wasn't massive so it's not as if they're trying to spread huge numbers over a long period like Chelsea had to to afford lots of new deals. His wages will be a bigger cost that his amortised fees.
He's only 14 and this takes hi., on presumably massive wages, to age 34 by the time he leaves. It's a massive risk on those wages . He could be burned out in 4 seasons
Struggle to get my head around this one. 4 or 5 years I'd understand
comment by Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan (U1217)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Playmaker (U22780)
posted 3 minutes ago
With the new contract I doubt anyone but the Saudi's could afford his wages surely?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was thinking that too. But who knows
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe the likes of RM will make bundles more from commercial revenue but I don't see him as a flair player having the same appeal worldwide as names like Mbappe or Vini or Benzema previously.
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 32 minutes ago
comment by kinsang (U3346)
posted 2 minutes ago
It's simple really - just guarantees a big fee. Contracts are broken all the time
----------------------------------------------------------------------
9.5 years is very odd. Thebfee they've paid for him wasn't massive so it's not as if they're trying to spread huge numbers over a long period like Chelsea had to to afford lots of new deals. His wages will be a bigger cost that his amortised fees.
He's only 14 and this takes hi., on presumably massive wages, to age 34 by the time he leaves. It's a massive risk on those wages . He could be burned out in 4 seasons
Struggle to get my head around this one. 4 or 5 years I'd understand
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have to admit it does seem crazily long, but no doubt there is some clear thinking behind it...................
He’s going to tear it up in League 2
Statue incoming, suggest putting him in between Richard Edgehill and Shaun ‘the goat’ Goater
Seems odd to give him such a long contract to me. As others have said, there is no guarantee that he won't pick up a serious injury. Even though recovery from something like an ACL injury is better than in the past, I'm not sure that you can ever be the same player again. We have seen how quickly a knee injury can result in the decline of a players' performance levels with the likes of Sanchez and Torres.
Haaland is a big lad and there will be a lot of stress on his knees.
Seems like a huge risk to give him a £250m contract when he could suffer a serious injury at any time.
He's an incredible finisher but as a an around footballer he's not amazing. I don't think City are any better now than when they didn't have him really. Much of a muchness and if anything I thought Aguero was slightly the better player.
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 30 minutes ago
Seems odd to give him such a long contract to me. As others have said, there is no guarantee that he won't pick up a serious injury. Even though recovery from something like an ACL injury is better than in the past, I'm not sure that you can ever be the same player again. We have seen how quickly a knee injury can result in the decline of a players' performance levels with the likes of Sanchez and Torres.
Haaland is a big lad and there will be a lot of stress on his knees.
Seems like a huge risk to give him a £250m contract when he could suffer a serious injury at any time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. Seems a very bizarre decision from City.
Career ending injuries are pretty rare now. Even if he did pick up a serious but not career ending injury, I'd fancy him to come back and continue his levels while he's still in his 20's.
I don't blame City for the contract. He's pretty much the best striker in the world and you know it would have to take a career ending injury to stop him carrying on scoring bucket loads and breaking the records.
lengvfth o contracked meens nuthin
it can b broked v easily
comment by #4zA (U22472)
posted 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
lengvfth o contracked meens nuthin
it can b broked v easily
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, especially if it is in phonetic English.
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 4 hours, 36 minutes ago
Good for him
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What's your interpretation from the club's point of view, Melton?
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 3 hours, 23 minutes ago
Career ending injuries are pretty rare now. Even if he did pick up a serious but not career ending injury, I'd fancy him to come back and continue his levels while he's still in his 20's.
I don't blame City for the contract. He's pretty much the best striker in the world and you know it would have to take a career ending injury to stop him carrying on scoring bucket loads and breaking the records.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's true, but on the flip side players' effectiveness dropping off a cliff in their late 20s is more common than it used to be, because football is more physically intense and involves more games than ever.
Sign in if you want to comment
Haaland renewal
Page 1 of 2
posted on 17/1/25
No it just means City will get a massive fee when he does move to Real.
posted on 17/1/25
Gonna score loads next season in the championship
posted on 17/1/25
I think the risk is his physicality and the immense pressures he places on his body given his build which pose a risk to recurring and worsening injuries.
posted on 17/1/25
It's mean 1 of 2 things for me.
Either City are confident that they are going to come out of this investigation in a relatively healthy position.
Or they are positioning the Club for a large money transfer that effectively secures City's finances against potential relegation.
This could allow them to keep the rest of squad for a promotion campaign and immediate return to the top flight.
posted on 17/1/25
I don’t think he’s a Madrid player anyway especially if Vini and Mbappe are there long term.
posted on 17/1/25
comment by FishMCFC (U16301)
posted 13 minutes ago
Or they are positioning the Club for a large money transfer that effectively secures City's finances against potential relegation.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I understand your reasoning, but why would he use himself as a pawn in all this? If we're guilty, there will be a firesafe and would benefit him more in signing on bonuses (in lieu of transfer fees) and/or salaries.
posted on 17/1/25
It's simple really - just guarantees a big fee. Contracts are broken all the time
posted on 17/1/25
The timing and the unusual length of the contract is very suspicious for me.
posted on 17/1/25
comment by Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan (U1217)
posted 1 minute ago
The timing and the unusual length of the contract is very suspicious for me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, the length of contract only adds up to 114 months. Could at least add another month on top.
posted on 17/1/25
With the new contract I doubt anyone but the Saudi's could afford his wages surely?
posted on 17/1/25
comment by Playmaker (U22780)
posted 3 minutes ago
With the new contract I doubt anyone but the Saudi's could afford his wages surely?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was thinking that too. But who knows
posted on 17/1/25
comment by kinsang (U3346)
posted 2 minutes ago
It's simple really - just guarantees a big fee. Contracts are broken all the time
----------------------------------------------------------------------
9.5 years is very odd. Thebfee they've paid for him wasn't massive so it's not as if they're trying to spread huge numbers over a long period like Chelsea had to to afford lots of new deals. His wages will be a bigger cost that his amortised fees.
He's only 14 and this takes hi., on presumably massive wages, to age 34 by the time he leaves. It's a massive risk on those wages . He could be burned out in 4 seasons
Struggle to get my head around this one. 4 or 5 years I'd understand
posted on 17/1/25
Good for him
posted on 17/1/25
comment by Peter O'Hanraha-hanrahan (U1217)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Playmaker (U22780)
posted 3 minutes ago
With the new contract I doubt anyone but the Saudi's could afford his wages surely?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was thinking that too. But who knows
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe the likes of RM will make bundles more from commercial revenue but I don't see him as a flair player having the same appeal worldwide as names like Mbappe or Vini or Benzema previously.
posted on 17/1/25
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 32 minutes ago
comment by kinsang (U3346)
posted 2 minutes ago
It's simple really - just guarantees a big fee. Contracts are broken all the time
----------------------------------------------------------------------
9.5 years is very odd. Thebfee they've paid for him wasn't massive so it's not as if they're trying to spread huge numbers over a long period like Chelsea had to to afford lots of new deals. His wages will be a bigger cost that his amortised fees.
He's only 14 and this takes hi., on presumably massive wages, to age 34 by the time he leaves. It's a massive risk on those wages . He could be burned out in 4 seasons
Struggle to get my head around this one. 4 or 5 years I'd understand
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I have to admit it does seem crazily long, but no doubt there is some clear thinking behind it...................
posted on 17/1/25
He’s going to tear it up in League 2
posted on 17/1/25
Statue incoming, suggest putting him in between Richard Edgehill and Shaun ‘the goat’ Goater
posted on 17/1/25
Seems odd to give him such a long contract to me. As others have said, there is no guarantee that he won't pick up a serious injury. Even though recovery from something like an ACL injury is better than in the past, I'm not sure that you can ever be the same player again. We have seen how quickly a knee injury can result in the decline of a players' performance levels with the likes of Sanchez and Torres.
Haaland is a big lad and there will be a lot of stress on his knees.
Seems like a huge risk to give him a £250m contract when he could suffer a serious injury at any time.
posted on 17/1/25
He's an incredible finisher but as a an around footballer he's not amazing. I don't think City are any better now than when they didn't have him really. Much of a muchness and if anything I thought Aguero was slightly the better player.
posted on 17/1/25
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 30 minutes ago
Seems odd to give him such a long contract to me. As others have said, there is no guarantee that he won't pick up a serious injury. Even though recovery from something like an ACL injury is better than in the past, I'm not sure that you can ever be the same player again. We have seen how quickly a knee injury can result in the decline of a players' performance levels with the likes of Sanchez and Torres.
Haaland is a big lad and there will be a lot of stress on his knees.
Seems like a huge risk to give him a £250m contract when he could suffer a serious injury at any time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Agreed. Seems a very bizarre decision from City.
posted on 17/1/25
Career ending injuries are pretty rare now. Even if he did pick up a serious but not career ending injury, I'd fancy him to come back and continue his levels while he's still in his 20's.
I don't blame City for the contract. He's pretty much the best striker in the world and you know it would have to take a career ending injury to stop him carrying on scoring bucket loads and breaking the records.
posted on 17/1/25
lengvfth o contracked meens nuthin
it can b broked v easily
posted on 17/1/25
comment by #4zA (U22472)
posted 1 hour, 40 minutes ago
lengvfth o contracked meens nuthin
it can b broked v easily
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, especially if it is in phonetic English.
posted on 17/1/25
comment by meltonblue (U10617)
posted 4 hours, 36 minutes ago
Good for him
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What's your interpretation from the club's point of view, Melton?
posted on 17/1/25
comment by Spurtle (U1608)
posted 3 hours, 23 minutes ago
Career ending injuries are pretty rare now. Even if he did pick up a serious but not career ending injury, I'd fancy him to come back and continue his levels while he's still in his 20's.
I don't blame City for the contract. He's pretty much the best striker in the world and you know it would have to take a career ending injury to stop him carrying on scoring bucket loads and breaking the records.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That's true, but on the flip side players' effectiveness dropping off a cliff in their late 20s is more common than it used to be, because football is more physically intense and involves more games than ever.
Page 1 of 2