CONFIRMED Dean Henderson returns on season long loan

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Nicolaus_Copernicus said:
But should a football club pay for the services of a player's agent? Shouldn't that burden fall on the player?
Click to expand...
Well. Simple answer is of course those that engage there services should pay. However, if you work that through to its logical conclusion, you’ll just have to pay them more as they'll add it to their demands. It’s certainly what I’d do.
Also, clubs use agents too in order to get deals through and get players to choose them over their rivals so clubs can’t play that card.
Nicolaus_Copernicus said:
That's the thing though, footballers are currently earning more than their fair share of the money being generated. If the owners of the blades have to subsidise the cash flow with their own money on an annual basis (sometimes mid season in emergencies), the players are being paid to much. When I say too much, I mean in reation to what the specific business can afford.

During the last decade, what wealth and for whom have players of sheffield united generated? On the face of it, they've cost the McCabe family half it's fortune.

The examples of film stars & musicians is different as there is more of an identifiable direct link between performance/popularity and reward. That's why you have the phrase 'bankable star', they bring in a profit on a film that they star in.

The current market for professional footballers is a bubble, and has little relation to anything other than the inflated market in which they operate.
Click to expand...
Clubs need to stop overpaying and the market will do the rest. Of course it’ll never happen as fans won’t accept it.
 

Flatulent_Bob said:
Well. Simple answer is of course those that engage there services should pay. However, if you work that through to its logical conclusion, you’ll just have to pay them more as they'll add it to their demands. It’s certainly what I’d do.
Also, clubs use agents too in order to get deals through and get players to choose them over their rivals so clubs can’t play that card.

Clubs need to stop overpaying and the market will do the rest. Of course it’ll never happen as fans won’t accept it.
Click to expand...

The role of a football agent is basically parasitical, and they are behind much of the problems within the game at the moment. If FIFA had any balls they would make them illegal.

All that is needed is a central database of FA approved solicitors and accountants, who can deal with transfers on a player's behalf. A player is 'contractually owned' by a club, and there is no reason why any other person should be involved. Milner and Scholes have both had extremely profitable careers without the need for an agent.

Fan's may be forced to accept it, because the way things are currently going football in the UK will look very different in a decade or so. It's bankrupting itself due to the fact it's paying out more than it's taking in.
 
Nicolaus_Copernicus said:
The role of a football agent is basically parasitical, and they are behind much of the problems within the game at the moment. If FIFA had any balls they would make them illegal.

All that is needed is a central database of FA approved solicitors and accountants, who can deal with transfers on a player's behalf. A player is 'contractually owned' by a club, and there is no reason why any other person should be involved. Milner and Scholes have both had extremely profitable careers without the need for an agent.

Fan's may be forced to accept it, because the way things are currently going football in the UK will look very different in a decade or so. It's bankrupting itself due to the fact it's paying out more than it's taking in.
Click to expand...
I’m all for the money from football staying in the game but the simple fact is, if there wasn’t a need for them they wouldn’t exist. No one wants to pay more for a service they do not need, but they’re clearly worth it to clubs and players.
 
Last edited:
Nicolaus_Copernicus said:
That's the thing though, footballers are currently earning more than their fair share of the money being generated. If the owners of the blades have to subsidise the cash flow with their own money on an annual basis (sometimes mid season in emergencies), the players are being paid to much. When I say too much, I mean in reation to what the specific business can afford.

During the last decade, what wealth and for whom have players of sheffield united generated? On the face of it, they've cost the McCabe family half it's fortune.

The examples of film stars & musicians is different as there is more of an identifiable direct link between performance/popularity and reward. That's why you have the phrase 'bankable star', they bring in a profit on a film that they star in.

The current market for professional footballers is a bubble, and has little relation to anything other than the inflated market in which they operate.
Click to expand...

Of course there is a link between the performance of players/managers and revenue. How much do you think Wilder and his bargain buys have made United? It’s the same with clubs like Spurs getting in the Champions League without signing a player in over a year.

There is obviously the issue that players can sign a massive contract and turn out to be crap, but that’s the same with a film. There are no guarantees that a film will make money just because you have a star name.

I agree clubs shouldn’t be losing money and players wages are the reason for that. My point is that players should be able to earn big money as long as it fits within a clubs budget. So if a club can afford to to £500k a week I’m ok with it, if United can afford to pay £100k a wage that’s all good with me.
 


Movement with Hendo?
 
Flatulent_Bob said:
So who gets all the money the sport is generating?
I’m also assuming these wage caps are going to be applied across all industries as £1 million a year isn’t a lot for top performers who directly contribute to the revenue of global billion dollar organisations.
Click to expand...
No. This will only apply to football. Merchant bankers will stay be able to coin in millions for doing not very much.
 
It's like the EEL situation a couple of seasons ago. As soon as he sorted his new Wolves contract he came straight back to us on loan.
 
I agree, far, far too much unless of course it's your son, and then it's how much? Tell em to fuck off, your worth far more than that, trying to rip you off £75k? Cheeky bastards.
 

I assume they're just in the final stages of deciding what category of multi millionaire he'll be.

And only when that vital bit of business is done might we finally see him sign....
 
Quite frankly Hendo signing a new contract and with it all the wealth it brings, has zero interest to me. He is a nice young man who is getting paid way way too much for the job he does (and forget about market forces, be is playing fkin football for a living not saving lives every day or putting his life on the line like some of us have done).

No, he is a nice lad who will live very well financially for the rest of his life if he retired now...at 22? Its obscene.

I dont begrudge him doing it, cos i would do the same, but if he wants to sign for us, fkin get on with it sunshine or simply just dont bother. I dont need to see twitter showing him signing a contract. Its just not interesting tbh. And i like the lad.

United should tell Man Utd and the lad that we want to do a deal, and if they fuk about, move on. Simple. Hes a very good young player but thats it. There are other keepers out there who are also very good and who would jump at the chance of playing for United. People shouldnt forget that SUFC are way way more important than any football player. They are fuk all in the scheme of things and the club will still be here when the last diamond earringed dipshit has long since shuffled off their mortal coil.

Ive stopped ranting now....i think..lol !
 
S15Blade said:
Why should Man U sanction that and risk a potential England goalkeeper walk away for free in a year
Click to expand...

Is that in reply to my comment?

What difference would sorting his loan to us out make to that? He can sort his new contract out after agreeing to return to us on loan. Man U wouldn’t lose him next summer anyway as they have an option of a further year.
 
LJBlade said:
Is that in reply to my comment?

What difference would sorting his loan to us out make to that? He can sort his new contract out after agreeing to return to us on loan. Man U wouldn’t lose him next summer anyway as they have an option of a further year.
Click to expand...
I suspect it's because once he's sorted out how much he's getting paid under his new contract, Manchester will come to us to sort out how much of it we're going to pay, at which point we may say, "How much?! Fuck that for a game of soldiers."
 
Not surprised he has not signed yet, he has been away with England U-21. He will then no doubt sort out his situation with Man Utd first as this will be his priority and then hopefully the final bit will be signing for us for the forthcoming season.
 
Weasel said:
Quite frankly Hendo signing a new contract and with it all the wealth it brings, has zero interest to me. He is a nice young man who is getting paid way way too much for the job he does (and forget about market forces, be is playing fkin football for a living not saving lives every day or putting his life on the line like some of us have done).

No, he is a nice lad who will live very well financially for the rest of his life if he retired now...at 22? Its obscene.

I dont begrudge him doing it, cos i would do the same, but if he wants to sign for us, fkin get on with it sunshine or simply just dont bother. I dont need to see twitter showing him signing a contract. Its just not interesting tbh. And i like the lad.

United should tell Man Utd and the lad that we want to do a deal, and if they fuk about, move on. Simple. Hes a very good young player but thats it. There are other keepers out there who are also very good and who would jump at the chance of playing for United. People shouldnt forget that SUFC are way way more important than any football player. They are fuk all in the scheme of things and the club will still be here when the last diamond earringed dipshit has long since shuffled off their mortal coil.

Ive stopped ranting now....i think..lol !
Click to expand...
Didn't CW recently say that both deano and us want the deal done ASAP but it's man Utd holding it up?
 
Hamburg Blade said:
I suspect it's because once he's sorted out how much he's getting paid under his new contract, Manchester will come to us to sort out how much of it we're going to pay, at which point we may say, "How much?! Fuck that for a game of soldiers."
Click to expand...

I assume that’s why as well but United should have some idea on what he’s likely to cost us after his new deal and if we are able to/won’t pay it then we should move on. We’ve got to think of what’s best for us, rather than what’s best for Dean Henderson. Bearing in mind that he won’t be playing for Man U next season and there won’t be any other Premiership teams in for him so we’re currently the best option, if he wants to be playing next year.

*this all ignores the possibility that it could already have been agreed and just not announced
 
He's still worth a lot less in the final year of a contract. Dean probably wants more money, Man you will want him tied down for longer so it makes perfect sense that needs to be sorted first without even taking into account that it's better for us to have a loan player who isn't negotiating a contract elsewhere while playing for us...
 
LJBlade said:
I assume that’s why as well but United should have some idea on what he’s likely to cost us after his new deal and if we are able to/won’t pay it then we should move on. We’ve got to think of what’s best for us, rather than what’s best for Dean Henderson. Bearing in mind that he won’t be playing for Man U next season and there won’t be any other Premiership teams in for him so we’re currently the best option, if he wants to be playing next year.

*this all ignores the possibility that it could already have been agreed and just not announced
Click to expand...
Yes, though I'm sure United are looking out for United and will turn it down if he/Manchester ask for too much. By this time I hope they have started to look for possible alternatives.
 
He has more than a year left on his contract. He signed one last summer. I don't need to check to know that it will have been more than 2 years. There's no urgent need to get him on a new one.

The sort of wage they're talking about now is what they should possibly consider offering him after he's actually proven something in the top flight. Give him some incentive rather than giving him everything now.

All they're doing by going stupid now is potentially making us pay a ridiculous amount.

I hope we've been clear from the start that we won't pay more in total than what adds up to 50k p/w for the duration of the loan.
 
Ricky said:
He has more than a year left on his contract. He signed one last summer. I don't need to check to know that it will have been more than 2 years. There's no urgent need to get him on a new one.

The sort of wage they're talking about now is what they should possibly consider offering him after he's actually proven something in the top flight. Give him some incentive rather than giving him everything now.

All they're doing by going stupid now is potentially making us pay a ridiculous amount.

I hope we've been clear from the start that we won't pay more in total than what adds up to 50k p/w for the duration of the loan.
Click to expand...

Man Utd have a habit of it recently Lingard, Rashford and soon to be Rashford again.

Rumoured to be 250k PW for Rashford on his new deal. He has years left on his current contract, no one wants to buy him and IMO he has been rather underwhelming the last few years.

They are so poorly run it’s unreal, give Wilder, Knill and the crew 2 years and they would be competing for the league again(without the whole Woodward/exec interference).
 
RMBlade said:
Man Utd have a habit of it recently Lingard, Rashford and soon to be Rashford again.

Rumoured to be 250k PW for Rashford on his new deal. He has years left on his current contract, no one wants to buy him and IMO he has been rather underwhelming the last few years.

They are so poorly run it’s unreal, give Wilder, Knill and the crew 2 years and they would be competing for the league again(without the whole Woodward/exec interference).
Click to expand...

Woodward wants Ferdinand as DoF or some such role doesn't he. Says it all.
 

blade67 said:
No. This will only apply to football. Merchant bankers will stay be able to coin in millions for doing not very much.
Click to expand...

When you say ‘not doing very much’, you mean physically as opposed to financially? Because the way a lot of these private sector entities work is that you turn a profit, a big profit, you get paid accordingly. If you don’t, we’ll then you don’t and if you lose money hand over fist, the business usually ceases trading. If I make a shi load of money for my employers, then it’s only fair that I should receive the benefit. It doesn’t matter whether you’re lugging bags of coal or pressing a button on a computer.

Football currently operates in a paradoxial state, on one hand people claiming that it operates as a multi billion £ business (a shockingly poorly run one) and on the other hand, usually when the shits hit the financial fan, that they’re part of the community and an important historic entity, and should be exempt from the normal rules of business, blah, blah, fucking blah. Shut clubs down, until the 92 are reduced to a number that are properly run and financially stable.

The wage cap operates in the US well enough in a number of sports, and would stop a situation whereby someone as unproven as DH gets £75k a week.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom