Report in some of the papers saying Dominic Solanke won't agree to a new deal unless he's guaranteed 1st team football and £50,000 a week. Can't post a link from my phone. Surly must be agent speak?

http://www.theshedend.com/topic/25424-dominic-solanke/page-5#entry1173783

Report in some of the papers saying Dominic Solanke won't agree to a new deal unless he's guaranteed 1st team football and £50,000 a week. Can't post a link from my phone. Surly must be agent speak?

Saw that as well as Ola Aina doing the same.

If true, people will be angry that these players are trying to jump ship and hold the club to ransom but to be honest this was always going to happen with a world class academy.

I don't mind it, we either keep him and pay the ridiculous sum and use him in the first team.  Or we sell the player, he's had world class training and first team experience in Holland and the club benefits from a youth sold for more than they're really worth.

 

Saw that as well as Ola Aina doing the same.

If true, people will be angry that these players are trying to jump ship and hold the club to ransom but to be honest this was always going to happen with a world class academy.

I don't mind it, we either keep him and pay the ridiculous sum and use him in the first team.  Or we sell the player, he's had world class training and first team experience in Holland and the club benefits from a youth sold for more than they're really worth.

 

 

No one will be buying a player out of contract either this summer or next. They'll wait for them to leave on a free and all we will get is a small compensation fee. 

No one will be buying a player out of contract either this summer or next. They'll wait for them to leave on a free and all we will get is a small compensation fee. 

Then he doesn't want to play for the club and I'm fine with that.  The club would have done all they could to sell the prospect of playing for Chelsea to the lad and if he wants big bucks and first team football immediately he may as well go for that.  If he wants success, he should stay.

Edited April 26, 20169 yr by Van Butsen

Maybe he just wants a fair chance to play first-team football and feels he won't get it here because no-one else except for John Terry has managed it consistently in the last 15 years despite us having the best Academy in the country.

Maybe he just wants a fair chance to play first-team football and feels he won't get it here because no-one else except for John Terry has managed it consistently in the last 15 years despite us having the best Academy in the country.

And maybe he's a clown who has his facts wrong

Dont blame him tbh.

Eh, even if he does leave I doubt he'd get 50k regardless...

And maybe he's a clown who has his facts wrong

It's true

No one will be buying a player out of contract either this summer or next. They'll wait for them to leave on a free and all we will get is a small compensation fee. 

 

In that case making ultimatums is not the smart play. If no one buys him in the summer and he makes it clear that he will not sign a new contract then he might end up playing zero minutes next season. 

Dont blame him tbh.

 

Just to add that azpilucueta earns in the region of 50/60k a week playing out of his favored position..  who the hell is solanke again?? 

Maybe he just wants a fair chance to play first-team football and feels he won't get it here because no-one else except for John Terry has managed it consistently in the last 15 years despite us having the best Academy in the country.

 

That sounds good, except there is the talk of that 50000 number that is also being thrown into the contract. I am not going to get angry with the players team for getting greedy, It is human - but if the club were to give in I will not be happy.

No one will be buying a player out of contract either this summer or next. They'll wait for them to leave on a free and all we will get is a small compensation fee. 

 

The fees are quite reasonable these days. Sturridge cost us about 5m back in 2009.

 

I'd say tell these lot to piss off and get that compensation from which ever team they join.

 

Makes you value players like Colkett even more. The lad could have walked this summer and probably gotten a first team place in lower PL/High Championship teams but he has signed for another 3 seasons.

It is a similar story to that of RLC 2 years ago when he was apparently on £1.7m a year (£30,000+ a week) but then realistically when the story died down and the media got bored of making up figures the more reasonable figure of between £5,000-£10,000 a week became the more common place with £5,000 a week being the more official basic salary quoted, so don't believe these astronomical sums being quoted as they are currently being used as a way of attacking Chelsea and to give fans around the country another thing to try and beat Chelsea fans with realistically both Solanke's demands and RLC's curret quoted wage will be a lot less than being portrayed by the media as lets face it you don't become a multi billionaire by throwing money down the toilet or having bad financial negotiators.  

Edited April 26, 20169 yr by PedroMendez

It a similar story to that of RLC 2 years ago when he was apparently on £1.7m a year (£30,000+ a week) but then realistically when the story died down and the media got bored of making up figures the more reasonable figure of between £5,000-£10,000 a week became the more common place with £5,000 a week being the more official basic salary quoted, so don't believe these astronomical sums being quoted as they are currently being used as a way of attacking Chelsea and to give fans around the country another thing to try and beat Chelsea fans with realistically both Solanke's demands and RLC's curret quoted wage will be a lot less than being portrayed by the media as lets face it you don't become a multi billionaire by throwing money down the toilet or having bad financial negotiators.  

 

Wasnt the story that rlc signed a contract worth 1.7m over the life of said contract? but as per the rags spun it to make a headline, this article seems like it would be most realistic in terms of money

Wasnt the story that rlc signed a contract worth 1.7m over the life of said contract? but as per the rags spun it to make a headline, this article seems like it would be most realistic in terms of money

Yeah the outline in that article seems pretty realistic. Although I can't fathom how getting a teenager to sign a £5,000 a week contract is worth £1m, how hard can it be.

Prime example of a spun headline which considering the story does go on to mention that the £1.7m spans the length of the contract surely is as morally wrong as they are making out giving a 17 y/o £5,000 a week is. 

Ruben Loftus-Cheek's £1.7m a year at 17: It's morally and ...

www.mirror.co.uk › Sport › Football › Ruben Loftus-Cheek

1.  

This is a difficult one.

 

On one hand Solanke is a greedy little S**t and proves how too many footballers are paid too much too young and don't fulfill their potential.

 

On the other hand, he's fully aware of the reputation this club has not playing youth and doesn't want to end up like another Bamford. Maybe he's demanding so much money because it might force the club to play him.

 

We need to start trusting academy players and because of our track record, I would take the risk, give in and accept his demands. Rather that than spend £50m to buy Lukaku back.

This is a difficult one.

 

On one hand Solanke is a greedy little S**t and proves how too many footballers are paid too much too young and don't fulfill their potential.

 

On the other hand, he's fully aware of the reputation this club has not playing youth and doesn't want to end up like another Bamford. Maybe he's demanding so much money because it might force the club to play him.

 

We need to start trusting academy players and because of our track record, I would take the risk, give in and accept his demands. Rather that than spend £50m to buy Lukaku back.

 

Good post but why call him a 'greedy little sh*t'? 

 

Do you do your job for free? Do you look for parity with your peers? Fact is he could be requesting a very fair base level that increases if he hits a number of targets. I think it's bang out of order slating the guy but that's probably what whoever leaked this story wanted.

This is a difficult one.

 

On one hand Solanke is a greedy little S**t and proves how too many footballers are paid too much too young and don't fulfill their potential.

 

On the other hand, he's fully aware of the reputation this club has not playing youth and doesn't want to end up like another Bamford. Maybe he's demanding so much money because it might force the club to play him.

 

We need to start trusting academy players and because of our track record, I would take the risk, give in and accept his demands. Rather that than spend £50m to buy Lukaku back.

 

Thats a dangerous precedent. We give Solanke 50k a week, Abraham suddenly wants it, Palmer wants it, Clarke Salter wants it, Boga wants it etc. Then are wage bill goes through the roof with players most likely out on loan. I desperately want to keep him but I'd try to negotiate him down significantly which I'm sure is what the club is doing. I firmly believe the club leaked the story to the media in order to put pressure on Solanke and his representatives. I hope it's working.

Good post but why call him a 'greedy little sh*t'?

Do you do your job for free? Do you look for parity with your peers? Fact is he could be requesting a very fair base level that increases if he hits a number of targets. I think it's bang out of order slating the guy but that's probably what whoever leaked this story wanted.

If the story is true then he is greedy. I'm just a casual worker earning a decent wage not a soon to be multi millionaire who can retire in 10 years. When I was an apprentice I didn't demand a 30K a year annual salary.

If the story is true then he is greedy. I'm just a casual worker earning a decent wage not a soon to be multi millionaire who can retire in 10 years. When I was an apprentice I didn't demand a 30K a year annual salary.

 

But you don't know if it's true. You've decided to call him a 'greedy little sh*t' based on media bollocks.

 

If you were potentially worth £30k a year and not asking for it then that's a mistake on your part.

Just read kyle Scott has put a transfer request in now.

Just read kyle Scott has put a transfer request in now.

 

Only one source so far and that's ESPN.

 

Having said that would anyone be surprised? I don't rate Scott as highly as some others but surely this was always likely to happen eventually? We don't give youngsters a chance so they'll simply start asking to leave.

 

That's entirely sensible. Join Chelsea at 8, let us train you in the best facilities with the best coaches, win everything there is to win and play with the best youngsters around then leave around the age of 18 before you get lost on a series of loans. 

 

Or stay, we'll loan you out a few times and you can leave in your early-20s and start your career. Meanwhile we'll sign players on-loan for a season when they're clearly past it, buy youngsters from other clubs who you were outplaying in the youth ranks but who got first-team chances or simply sign players approaching their 30s for huge money.

 

If Colkett, Clarke-Salter, Christensen, Musonda, Boga, Abraham or any other young player isn't seriously thinking about doing the same then I'm sorry, but their agents and advisors want sacking.

Only one source so far and that's ESPN.

Having said that would anyone be surprised? I don't rate Scott as highly as some others but surely this was always likely to happen eventually? We don't give youngsters a chance so they'll simply start asking to leave.

That's entirely sensible. Join Chelsea at 8, let us train you in the best facilities with the best coaches, win everything there is to win and play with the best youngsters around then leave around the age of 18 before you get lost on a series of loans.

Or stay, we'll loan you out a few times and you can leave in your early-20s and start your career. Meanwhile we'll sign players on-loan for a season when they're clearly past it, buy youngsters from other clubs who you were outplaying in the youth ranks but who got first-team chances or simply sign players approaching their 30s for huge money.

If Colkett, Clarke-Salter, Christensen, Musonda, Boga, Abraham or any other young player isn't seriously thinking about doing the same then I'm sorry, but their agents and advisors want sacking.

Totally agree with you. I don't rate Scott either tbh. Certainly not as highly as baker, musonda, rlc and boga.

I think it was yourself that posted about our reported targets being in their late 20s, as opposed to likes of hazard and Oscar that were brought in in their early 20's.

I think there a couple of reasons for that, the 1st being that some of those younger players we bought, haven't turned into long term solutions for replacing the old guard, so we need to bring in some players that can do the job from day 1 to avoid compete against at a high level season.

The second reason I think we are targeting the late 20'summer age group, is so hopefully they are around long enough to justify the transfer fees, but not too long to block the best set of young footballers in world football.

Back on to solanke, I've already seen few post saying he isn't that good because he hasn't lit up the Dutch league, but I think the time has come to realise it doesn't matter too much about how a young player gets on while on loan, it's all about getting minutes and experience. We will never know whether any of these boys are good enough for Chelsea, unless they get a good amount of opportunities for us.

You put solanke in a team with the likes of fabregas and hazard performing at their best, whose to say he won't be an overnight success.

I can understand why these boys are looking for contracts to secure their development and future, they have proven themselves to be the best in Europe.

We need to build a squad which will enable at least 3 academy boys to be a big part of.

Edited April 27, 20169 yr by big blue