IT’S getting sorted in the summer. They’ll talk about it in the summer. What if the summer is too late?
Hands up, I don’t know anything about negotiating contracts. I haven’t sat in a room with an agent and a player and got down to the nitty gritty of salaries, clauses, image rights and the rest.
But as a Liverpool fan I’m getting more and more concerned with the constant contract brinkmanship that now seems to be de rigeur for the men in suits crunching the numbers behind the scenes at the club.
The Raheem Sterling contract situation has been headline news for weeks now, just how his agent Aidy Ward no doubt wanted it. When you consider his deal expires in 2017 it’s hard to understand what all the fuss has been about. But then maybe it isn’t all down to the ‘greedy’ player and the ‘money-mad’ agent.
Jordan Henderson, a man widely expected to inherit the armband from Steven Gerrard, has less than a year left on his deal, although the Sunday Mirror yesterday claimed he is close to agreeing a £100,000-a-week contract with the club.
Jordon Ibe is also close to penning a new deal, according to reports today.
Meanwhile, and largely under the radar until the last week or so, Martin Skrtel’s contract enters its final year in June while Jon Flanagan’s deal expires in the summer, the younger of the defenders described as “a big part of the future” at Anfield less than a month ago by his manager.
“Hopefully Flanno’s contract will be sorted out,” Brendan Rodgers told The Echo.
It’s the same situation for Glen Johnson but a parting of the ways clearly suits both parties in that instance while Brad Jones and Kolo Toure are also out of contract come the summer.
Toure has apparently been offered an extension but isn’t sure because he wants to play regular football while Jones, you would guess, will leave.
But players that have contributed, players that the manager picks on a regular basis and wants to keep, why are they so regularly reaching the very end of their deals before a move is made? Surely Liverpool risk losing these players? Why is it seemingly a strategy to run deals so close to their expiration date before a new contract is agreed?
It’s clearly a change to what has come before at Liverpool when deals were routinely renewed when a player entered the last two years of his contract.
And it appears to have sparked some frustrations, as revealed by the comments from Gerrard, a first-teamer for 17 years, earlier in the year.
He said: “When I was coming through at Liverpool, every time you got within a couple of years left your contract would be renewed and there would no worrying or panic stage, but I see Henderson with a year left and I see Sterling — it is in the paper too much and I know there is no smoke without fire.
“So, for me, the message to the club is to get these done sharpish because these are the future of the club and I want to watch this team do well, in cup finals and challenging for the league.”
Don’t we all.
It also seems that deals used to be improved at Liverpool as a matter of course if a player was doing well and deserved a bump in wages; everyone working for each other, everyone having a share of the rewards and all that.
That seems to be exactly what is happening now with Ibe yet for all the Sterling talk, wouldn’t it have been a thought to improve his deal from his current c.£30,000 a week as a reward for his progress and standing within the first team? Perhaps then the messy public debacle we have witnessed in recent weeks could have been prevented.
Remember when Jamie Carragher broke his ankle at Blackburn? Soon after Gerard Houllier revealed in the media that Carragher would be rewarded with a new deal. His quote at the time read: “I don’t like to talk about individual contract talks, but Jamie knows what we think of him and you can be sure he’ll be looked after.
“There’s nothing specific on that. No timescale. But when we want a player to stay and the player wants to stay, this club has always found a solution.”
That’s how I remember it, too. How are we for solutions now? Rodgers is only hopeful of a deal for Flanagan. The Henderson and Sterling situations remain. And what about Skrtel? You might say, ‘he’s 30, he’s been here seven years. He’ll just sign, won’t he?’
But what if he’s thinking, ‘I’m 30. I’ve been here seven years. And the club can’t be arsed to pull its finger out to conclude a deal despite me being one of the most consistent defenders in the last two seasons’?
The club describes Skrtel on the official website as “regarded as one of the best centre backs in Europe”. This time last year he was starting his 33rd consecutive game for the club and Rodgers told the Echo: “Martin has been a colossus for us throughout this season. His performances speak for themselves. I think he’s been the top centre-half in the Premier League, alongside Vincent Kompany.”
Are Liverpool now treating him in a manner befitting of those descriptions?
Perhaps tellingly, Paul Joyce reported in The Express that Skrtel said negotiations would restart at the end of the season “if Liverpool want”.
Doesn’t exactly sound like he’s punching the air about it all, does it? And who can blame him. Everyone loves to remind footballers about the lavish lifestyle they lead but it’s a fair bet they crave security in their lives as much as the rest of us.
Skrtel could also rightly suggest that he deserves better. He hasn’t always convinced, and I’ve been the first to criticise him in the past. But risking losing him now makes no sense at all.
Think back to the start of Rodgers’ reign when Liverpool welcomed Manchester City to Anfield. Then we weren’t conditioned to the preference of the Ulsterman in the dugout for playing out from the back even when under pressure. Neither, it seemed, was Skrtel.
What would have represented a great result against the Premier League champions was transformed into the throwing away of two points as Skrtel’s backpass error let in Carlos Tevez to score with 10 minutes to go and City escaped from L4 with a draw.
It seemed then that the writing was on the wall for the Slovak, who signed from Zenit for £6million in 2008.
He will struggle to play out from the back, we said. They say his days are numbered he’s not favourite anymore. And yet he is still here, offering the doubters the middle finger (sorry, Martin) and no doubt expecting to reap the rewards via a new deal.
Skrtel has played in 45 games for club and country this season. He played in 42 last season. There doesn’t appear to be a problem with his fitness or form and, according to The Echo, Rodgers is keen to keep him at Anfield. It would be quite the turnaround if he didn’t given his comments last season.
So what’s the problem? It’s times like these that the ghost of John W Henry’s open letter to fans comes back to haunt me. “Our ambitions do not lie in cementing a mid-table place with expensive, short-term quick fixes that will only contribute for a couple of years,” he wrote. “Our emphasis will be on developing our own players using the skills of an increasingly impressive coaching team.”
Is that now — aged 30 — the perception of Skrtel? A short-term quick fix?
Skrtel was linked with a move to Manchester City last summer (expensive, short-term quick fixes are of course no problem for them) and after the way they defended at Old Trafford yesterday who is to say they won’t be back?
By stalling, delaying and playing this bizarre game of brinkmanship with players, Liverpool are simply putting key assets in the shop window and undoubtedly pissing off their employees at the same time. Lose too many and what does it say about the club, it’s ambition and its direction? At least we’ve got Tiago Ilori.
Liverpool is experiencing an experience drain. In the summer Gerrard goes to LA. Johnson leaves. Do we really want Skrtel, who should return to the side at Wembley on Sunday, to be added to that list?
Liverpool need nous, need leaders and need to keep their best players on the books. That’s not just my opinion. All of this was stated in public earlier this month by Rodgers.
He said: “ I think the most successful teams will average 28-29 years of age and ours will be below that. You will see that in the United game, where a lack of experience shows.”
The manager also said: “My focus is to keep this group together and add to it and compete for trophies. Otherwise you just have to keep rebuilding or restocking your squad.”
Brendan Rodgers may well now be asking if that focus is matched by the focus of others inside Anfield, and those residing in Boston. And a summer of rebuilding and restocking the squad? Would you rule it out right now?
Read: Rodgers’ race isn’t run yet
Read: Preview: Liverpool v Newcastle with Toon fanzine The Mag
[rpfc_recent_posts_from_category meta=”true”]
Pics: David Rawcliffe-Propaganda-Photo
The rot has set with players wanting that new TV money, and their agents are clearly encouraging it. By offering Sterling CL level wages despite not being at that level, everyone else in the squad wants more, a lot more. After all, the money will soon be available and all players say “fuck fans’ ticket pricing, give me moar moneeee!”
They also have no affinity with the club, haven’t won anything other than a token league cup – which the top sides can’t be bothered with most of the time, and they probably never will. Plus it’s the en vogue thing to talk about regarding LFC’s contracts.
Remember 2005, winning a big shiny thing? Remember the club captain shortly declaring he’s never play for the club again after Parry fucked off to the Caribbean instead of working on Gerrard’s contract? Ten years later, bugger all has changed.
This is all very worrying and i don’t buy the players are greedy PR. Top players get top money always have always will and their will always be some players on more than others. All these contracts being run down seems like a new policy and it feels like playing well is no longer being rewarded and some loyal players are no longer wanted at the club, to me it sends out all sorts of the wrong type of message to players and agents would be negligent if they did not find out what other clubs are willing to pay, instead of creating stability it looks like the club are going out of their way to rid the club of players
Do we know that Skrtel wasn’t offered a contract last Summer and turned it down? Also when we were updating contracts all the time we were under a ridiculous wage/turnover ratio that was unsustainable. I’m not sure it’s all doom and gloom really. Do you really think Flanagan won’t sign?
This is just par for the course under Fenway. As the months have gone on you can clearly see a strategy in place. Remove the high earners – buy in young potential on incentive based contracts and if they fail, well theres no big loss, if they become world beaters we will sell them at a profit.
Mark my words, we will be mid table before too long, it’s been gnawing away at me since they took charge. They are not interested in success – certainly not at a cost.
Not sure I understand what all the fuss is about here to be honest.
Sterling’s situation has been talked to death, but he’s only actually been in the first team and truly playing at a high level (befitting being paid £100k+ per week) since the Norwich home game in December 2013, so roughly 16 months. The club could have tied him down with 80-90k a week in the summer apparently, but doing so would have meant committing 5 years on that wage to a player when it wasn’t certain whether that development would continue or not. Hindsight is easy, but he had 2 years to run and you can make a reasonable argument that the club were right to see whether he carried his play into this season before looking to pay him that type of wage.
Henderson looks like he will sign, and again, £100k a week for 5 years is the type of wage you only pay a mainstay in your first XI if you are a club in our financial position, and arguably again it’s only with his impressive play THIS season that Henderson has shown that last year was the norm and not the exception.
Flanagan, again, had a great year last season and hasn’t played at all this. Hands up who thinks the club should have tied him down to a big contract before knowing whether he’d come back from his injury? Not me.
Skrtel is the wrong side of 30. Not old for a centre half by any means, but again, you can make a reasonable argument that waiting until the summer to do another 1 or 2 year deal with him is the sensible approach, especially if the club are considering investing in a new centre back this summer again.
The worst thing LFC can do at the moment is pay players for past performance, and as far as I can see that’s what they are managing to avoid.
My bet is Henderson, Skrtel, Flanagan, Sterling and Ibe all sign new deals by 1 July and we’re talking about something else before long!
It seems to me you’ve contradicted your own argument… you say the worst thing we can do is pay for past performances but if that’s the case then we need to project what a player will develop into and pay them for that then. So if hypothetically speaking, that is the policy then the deals for Hendo and Raheem should already have been sorted. You can’t have your cake and eat it.
It would seem you are choosing to read it that way. Past performances means distance past, not last season. Surely you can see that? E.g. Johnson was giving CL level wages by Rafa, he was a reasonable player a few seasons ago; do you think he should be offered that much again when it’s clear he’s well beyond his best or simply not arsed anymore?
When a deal is on the table and the player says “no” and wants to run down their contract to apply further pressure, there’s fuck all the club can do other than offer more money or play hardball. Offering more money will damage the club, because everyone will be on to the ruse or sulk. If Hendo gets £5 million a year, he should be near the top earner if he’s the club captain. He will be the face of the club. If he wants out to earn more as a City squad player, that’s up to him.
All players can tell the club to piss off and leave on a Bosman. No business will give in to every player, let alone players like Flanno.
Hendo said no with almost 2 seasons left, and has burnt through one of them. Sterling said no many months ago despite having over 2 seasons left today. That’s plenty of time, don’t be a sucker by his BS interview. He’d had only just signed a new deal last season so he wasn’t about to be offered £100k three months later. Clearly the crap he was talking about on the BBC is complete bollocks.
Many of the older players couldn’t be sold and are on a managed contract decline because the players know they won’t get the same money elsewhere. Why is that? Because they’re not as good as their agents claim they are, otherwise they’d be rolling in offers from the top European sides. Again, fuck all the club can do about it other than cutting them a cheque and showing them the door.
If Sterling was 24, no one would give a shit about him. He is a decent player but when was the last time you saw him skin a couple of players and blast the ball into the net? For an attacking player, he simply does not excite like a top attacker does. He’s getting some age related factor to propel him beyond his current level. I’ve seen his fans try to prove he’s better than Messi and Ronaldo. It’s mental. If we had a proper squad last season, he wouldn’t have had many games. Think back, last season many were expecting him to get sent out on loan, that’s how poor he was.
Ha ha ha, errm, tonight!
Haha, quality mate.
From the club’s point of view I just think they’re taking their time. There’s a new generation now at Liverpool and FSG need to decide the level they’re going to pay them. I feel like once say Hendo signs, the rest will fall into place. They need to set a benchmark first and then return to the agents with the explanation of the wage structure and where their clients fit into that. People might respond by saying look how quickly Coutinho signed but so far as I can tell he’s not close to the top bracket at Liverpool and rightly so considering his output is diminished relative to some of the other players. Sturridge on the other hand probably got more than he’s worth which makes it slightly more difficult, but I think Sterling/Hendo and Skrts will all get something in between in the end.
That depends on whether it’s true his contract is made up with big performances related bonuses. Which he ain’t gonna get with his infinite stream of sick-notes! Perhaps that’s why he’s not looking bothered? Thought he’d be getting £150k a week but poor finishing and lack of effort means he could be on a mere £80k and the last thing he wants is Sterling to out earn him at this stage.
Feck sake! If Studge was only interested in cash and not playing he could have stayed at Chelsea.
He came here to play games. The notion he’s not interested and phoning it in is daft.
Modern media coverage will always allow for some leakage of contracts and to be honest contracts aren’t worth the paper their written on half the time. If a players wants off then he’ll get it at some point. At best you end up in a Suarez situation where you get an extra year and then he’s off. I actually think the club handled that new contract pretty well. Signed him up on a new deal with a decent buyout.
But if we look at the current mess then there’s a few viewpoints to consider from an accountants point of view the club have saved £60K per week on the new Sterling deal for say 12 months, call it £3m and I’m sure that particular number cruncher is well happy with that result.
It all depends who’s calling the shots on getting deals done and I’m sure lets say for arguments sake the club doesn’t have a bunch of idiots working for them. BUT as I say it really is down to who is calling the shots on getting deals done.
So for arguments sake someone at the club is saying
“look the team are doing well, were 2nd in the table, moral is good and there’s a new TV deal being done next year. Every other TV deal has resulted in increased revenue which has historically ended up in increased wages, lets get this Sterling deal done at 80,90K a week now.”
forward 12 months the deal isn’t done, a new spanking TV deal has landed and all the agents are rubbing their hands together, moral is low, team not doing so well, & top player has left leaving massive void.
All the agent has done is factored in the loss of the £3m from last year over a 2-3 year period knowing the club can soak it up with the extra tv money.
Like I say it all depends on who’s calling the shots and this one feels like an accountants decision instead of a decision based on all the factors at play at the time.
Right or wrong, this is part of their policy. Fans won’t like it, I don’t myself, but FSG have made a big thing about contracts over the years. TAW seems to have a lot of Americans commenting on it’s articles and I’ve noticed they often have a different outlook on this sort of thing. They seem quite composed. I’d guess sports contracts are very different in the U.S. FSG have said repeatedly they were shocked at how little a contract means over here. They were shocked that some of the top earners couldn’t get a game and I’m going to assume they were probably shocked that contracts get renewed with 40 or 50% of it still remaining. I think holding on is a deliberate policy to try and change how football is done over here (and save money). There are plenty of other examples that fit in – won’t overpay on transfer fees, won’t pay a lot for older / experienced players because they want value, won’t pay over the top wages. I think most people will be aware this is just a policy and not as sinister as some of the comments make out but it has bitten us before (or could be perceived to have bitten us). We’ve certainly lost out on players because of these policies and we’ll lose out again in the future. It worries me that they think FFP means everyone will eventually do the same which will level the market. It’s not necessarily the case. Instead of buying 3 expensive players on high wages the big clubs will just buy two rather than pay less. I respect FSG’s attempts but I don’t want to see us be the fall guys to make a point.
From their point of view, I think Sterling is the only one who may not be here next season (though I’m not as convinced tonight as I was at the weekend after the appeal for a song and the revelation that he’s a crack head, although two stories in a few days??? Nothing stories but it crossed my mind whether it was a bit of a set up between Raheem and a club who want him, to lower his value. Saying that, people made the same ridiculous comments that Suarez bit that bloke to leave Liverpool – On second thoughts I’m gonna retract that claim). All the others we want to stay will sign while some we don’t will leave. If Sterling did stay the club could look at it that the policy has saved them a good few mill. If he doesn’t then it undermines everything.* In reality, it doesn’t matter what region or profession you’re in you secure your best assets at the first available opportunity.
*Based on the assumption we’ve got to this because we didn’t offer enough rather than because Sterling was refusing to sign anything as he could see (at the time) that we weren’t gonna be in the top 4.