Daniel Sturridge

Status
Not open for further replies.

Brwned

Have you ever been in love before?
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
50,937
Mark Hughes has urged Daniel Sturridge to think carefully about his future as contract talks between the young striker and Manchester City reach an impasse.

Having entered the final year of his Eastlands deal, Sturridge is in a position of real strength, as a number of other suitors continue to monitor his situation closely.

While Sturridge has impressed whenever called upon, Hughes points to the fact he has made only five Premier League starts to date.

Five goals in 11 appearances in all competitions is testimony to the player's potential but a reported demand of around £65,000-a-week, a figure claimed in a number of national newspapers, has fallen on deaf ears in the City boardroom.

Hughes is determined to balance lavish spending with the development of young talent and sees Sturridge as a key part of his plans.

He will not, though, be held to ransom.

"We want Daniel to stay because he's an outstanding player but we are now in a situation where he is in the last year of his contract," Hughes told The Times.

"Because of that, he knows, and his advisers know, that puts him in a position of strength when it comes to the terms of his contract.

"But there has to be an understanding from his advisers that there is a level for everybody. Daniel has made something like five Premier League starts and is still making his way in the game."

Hughes went on to reveal his frustration at the manner in which negotiations with the player's representatives had gone to date.

"At the moment, we're not even close to an agreement," he said. "We've made it clear we feel, for the sake of the player, that this is the best place for him.

"Unfortunately, other things seem to be of more importance to the people around him, but we're trying to make sure Daniel is here and not anywhere else."


http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_4919555,00.html

Been talked up for a while now as someone with real talent, he's made a good impact this season and Mark Hughes is just backing up those claims by calling him an outstanding talent.

Would it be the right move for him to turn them down if they won't pay him the big money, or should he be asking for a bit lower considering is age?

And is City the right club for him?
 
Mark Hughes has urged Daniel Sturridge to think carefully about his future as contract talks between the young striker and Manchester City reach an impasse.

Having entered the final year of his Eastlands deal, Sturridge is in a position of real strength, as a number of other suitors continue to monitor his situation closely.

While Sturridge has impressed whenever called upon, Hughes points to the fact he has made only five Premier League starts to date.

Five goals in 11 appearances in all competitions is testimony to the player's potential but a reported demand of around £65,000-a-week, a figure claimed in a number of national newspapers, has fallen on deaf ears in the City boardroom.

Hughes is determined to balance lavish spending with the development of young talent and sees Sturridge as a key part of his plans.

He will not, though, be held to ransom.

"We want Daniel to stay because he's an outstanding player but we are now in a situation where he is in the last year of his contract," Hughes told The Times.

"Because of that, he knows, and his advisers know, that puts him in a position of strength when it comes to the terms of his contract.

"But there has to be an understanding from his advisers that there is a level for everybody. Daniel has made something like five Premier League starts and is still making his way in the game."

Hughes went on to reveal his frustration at the manner in which negotiations with the player's representatives had gone to date.

"At the moment, we're not even close to an agreement," he said. "We've made it clear we feel, for the sake of the player, that this is the best place for him.

"Unfortunately, other things seem to be of more importance to the people around him, but we're trying to make sure Daniel is here and not anywhere else."


http://www.skysports.com/story/0,19528,11661_4919555,00.html

Been talked up for a while now as someone with real talent, he's made a good impact this season and Mark Hughes is just backing up those claims by calling him an outstanding talent.

Would it be the right move for him to turn them down if they won't pay him the big money, or should he be asking for a bit lower considering is age?

And is City the right club for him?

He's not half as good as he thinks he is. £65,000? Evra's on that kind of cash:lol:
 
He's not half as good as he thinks he is. £65,000? Evra's on that kind of cash:lol:

Isn't Evans on a similar amount?

And I can't blame him in all honesty, if they're going to be throwing around cash the way they have been I'd do exactly what he did and get as much as he could while he has the chance.
 
Isn't Evans on a similar amount?

And I can't blame him in all honesty, if they're going to be throwing around cash the way they have been I'd do exactly what he did and get as much as he could while he has the chance.

Yup, same thing happened at Chelsea, backup players on massive wages (Cudicini, Bridge).

Sturridge is in a strong negotiating position, and he knows the club has money to burn, he'd be silly not to ask for big money.


Incidentally, how good is he? Ive heard a lot about him in the past, scored a few goals hasnt he this season?
 
Isn't Evans on a similar amount?

And I can't blame him in all honesty, if they're going to be throwing around cash the way they have been I'd do exactly what he did and get as much as he could while he has the chance.

Nop evans is on two thirds of that and he's twice the player sturidge is, relative to their positions.
 
Nop evans is on two thirds of that and he's twice the player sturidge is, relative to their positions.

We've no way of knowing that.

Evans is an outstanding talent, we all know that, but all the noises coming out about Sturridge are saying the same thing.

We'll need to see him in more games before making that judgement.
 
Isn't Evans on a similar amount?

And I can't blame him in all honesty, if they're going to be throwing around cash the way they have been I'd do exactly what he did and get as much as he could while he has the chance.

There is no way Evans is on that amount - not even half.

£65k is ridiculous - in fact I suspect this is just newspaper bullshit as Sturridge cant be so deluded to think he is worth anymore than about £20k a week - although I suppose he could get a sign on bonus elsewhere if he left on a free so maybe that is why his agent is trying to push it.
 
There is no way Evans is on that amount - not even half.

£65k is ridiculous - in fact I suspect this is just newspaper bullshit as Sturridge cant be so deluded to think he is worth anymore than about £20k a week - although I suppose he could get a sign on bonus elsewhere if he left on a free so maybe that is why his agent is trying to push it.

Newspapers did also claim that lucas Neil wanted 90k....
 
65k!? That's wrong in so many ways. Very talented player though.
 
Isn't Evans on a similar amount?

And I can't blame him in all honesty, if they're going to be throwing around cash the way they have been I'd do exactly what he did and get as much as he could while he has the chance.

I swear I saw something about Evans being currently only on £3,000 a week, but has been offered a contract for £40,000 a week.

And that's considering he's proven to actually be a class act at the back.

Sturridge is only demanding such high wages because of two things:

1. Man City have ridiculous money.

2. He's a young, talented English player. They are at a premium.

Hughes will knock him back. Maybe Sturridge will head to Spain and fail. Maybe he'll be bought by Villa or West Ham. Who knows. Who cares.
 
Nop evans is on two thirds of that and he's twice the player sturidge is, relative to their positions.

Ridiculous statement. Based on what is Campbell twice the player? The Championship? Sturridge is the superior player by some distance. His finishing is on a different level. Ask anyone that’s familiar with the youth teams and academies over the last 3/4 seasons.
 
Ridiculous statement. Based on what is Campbell twice the player? The Championship? Sturridge is the superior player by some distance. His finishing is on a different level. Ask anyone that’s familiar with the youth teams and academies over the last 3/4 seasons.
Where did Campbell come in?

Doubt Evans is on anything described - I'd be surprised if it was above £30,000 a week and even £20,000 a week.
 
Ridiculous statement. Based on what is Campbell twice the player? The Championship? Sturridge is the superior player by some distance. His finishing is on a different level. Ask anyone that’s familiar with the youth teams and academies over the last 3/4 seasons.

How many times (even if we just count with United) have fantastic performances from talented individuals in youth teams and academies NOT translated into being an excellent premier league player?

Too many times - that's how many.

Youth teams and academies spot only potential and ability. He needs to show he can do it with the big boys before demanding such ridiculous wages - and that, I believe, is where he is coming from with the comparison to Evans. Evans showed how bloody good he is - not against Youths - against proper Premier League opposition.
 
Where did Campbell come in?

Doubt Evans is on anything described - I'd be surprised if it was above £30,000 a week and even £20,000 a week.

Ha ha for some reason I replied as if the original comment related to Campbell and not Evans! Oops!!!

Still Im willing to argue Sturridge will become a far better player than Campbell.
 
How many times (even if we just count with United) have fantastic performances from talented individuals in youth teams and academies NOT translated into being an excellent premier league player?

Too many times - that's how many.

Youth teams and academies spot only potential and ability. He needs to show he can do it with the big boys before demanding such ridiculous wages - and that, I believe, is where he is coming from with the comparison to Evans. Evans showed how bloody good he is - not against Youths - against proper Premier League opposition.

Very true happens all the time especially in England with the media and everything. From what Ive seen of him in the first team hes defo good enough. I think he'll go on an be an international of some quality for England. Theres a sharpness about him in the box that reminds me of Andy Cole at newcastle although he isnt as one dimensional (at the same age that is)
 
I seen him a couple of weeks ago and had a quick chat with him. He told me he's happy and wants to stay at City.

But I reckon if the right offer from Aston Villa came along, he'd be off.
 
Ha ha for some reason I replied as if the original comment related to Campbell and not Evans! Oops!!!

Still Im willing to argue Sturridge will become a far better player than Campbell.

maybe, but he's not worth 65K now. Rooney only received about 50K after a 28m move because of his age. sturridge has done nothing significant as a pro. Not even a first team regular in a squad struggling for proper strikers all season
 
Sign of the times, like Evans...

He's very talented, but another young, over-hyped English starlet potentially.

Evans is much more proven than Sturridge and already an important player at a Champions League club. And he's on nowhere near 65k. If the reports I've read are to be believed his new contract will be worth a potential 40k if all clauses are triggered.
 
Sign of the times, like Evans...

He's very talented, but another young, over-hyped English starlet potentially.

Sturridge is actually under-hyped. Barely anything is said about him in the media and most fans don't have a clue who he is.

He's the best upcoming forward in his age group and has the halmarks of star talent if he puts his game together.

City are bound to feck it/him up.
 
Sturridge is probably hangin out with Micah Richards, Kieron "80grand" Dyer far too much. How the feck he thinks he's deserving of that sort of pay is a fecking disgrace!

Dude needs to cop-on to himself, keep the head down & learn his trade. This is the type of thing that has people in the streets complaining about footballers & their lifestyles, when the working man is busting a gut to pay for a bleedin match ticket & at the same time probably sacrificing something else in the process!

He's a good player & I rate him highly just as Decotron does, but if his main motive now is money, then he's not gonna be gettin any kudos from the watchin football public or from players in general. He's beginning to get a reputation now & that shit sticks!

Kieron Dyer's nickname is "80 grand", because he was always crapping on about how much he earns. The England squad named him that - and that says something if that shower of greedy fecks come out with terms like that!

Robbie Savage did something similar. He was being all mouthy on the pitch to some dude & then came out with "how much do you earn? I earn £40 grand per week" to belittle the other guy. This was picked up by alot of players & he still gets grief over it because of the arrogance!

Man City are being two-faced here in my opnion. They were willing to buy Kaka's soul at Xmas for an obscene amount & pay him a reported £250k per week, so what do they expect?!

Players will only want to play for City because they'll be overpaid for their services. If they flaunt obscene amounts about & proclaim their minted & can afford anyone, then players will be just as obscene - just like Sturridge is being now!

He's still a twat for demanding that sum tho, and for once I agree with Hughes who is being very diplomatic about this, and i'm not a fan of his - see Hughes thread in football forum for details :D
 
Sturridge is actually under-hyped. Barely anything is said about him in the media and most fans don't have a clue who he is.

He's the best upcoming forward in his age group and has the halmarks of star talent if he puts his game together.

City are bound to feck it/him up.

Nah, Welbeck's better. A year younger, not yet as physically developed but still prefered by Stuart Pearce & co.
 
Welbeck is better than Sturridge, says a lot that his own ex-boss doesn't have a preference for him at the moment. Sturridge is just another of those overly hyped up 17 year old players at a small team.
 
Welbeck is better than Sturridge, says a lot that his own ex-boss doesn't have a preference for him at the moment. Sturridge is just another of those overly hyped up 17 year old players at a small team.

Or he could just be a top quality talent, we can't be sure.

People seem intent on pigeon holing young players before seeing them enough to make a fair judgement.
 
You know that from seeing them both play about 10 times?

:confused:

I'd say watching a player ten times is a fairly good basis for evaluating how good they are.
 
I'd say watching a player ten times is a fairly good basis for evaluating how good they are.

I wouldn't, 10 games spread out over a few sub appearances and the odd start doesn't show you enough. You'd need to see them in a run of games really. I doubt most people have even seen Sturridge play 10 times anyway.
 
You know that from seeing them both play about 10 times?

:confused:

So I get judged when I say Sturridge > Wellbeck but no one else does when it's the other way round? Yeah I haven't seen THAT much of both but from what I've seen, Sturridge is better and his technique is quality. I don't know how their careers will go but Sturridge is more talented imo.
 
Nah, Welbeck's better. A year younger, not yet as physically developed but still prefered by Stuart Pearce & co.

Pearce isn't a barometer for anything, to be fair.

Sturridge is better than Welbeck, for my money.

If he's developed right he should be a star - I think the same goes for Welbeck, mind, but I favour Sturridge over anyone else - he's a superb young player.
 
I wouldn't, 10 games spread out over a few sub appearances and the odd start doesn't show you enough. You'd need to see them in a run of games really. I doubt most people have even seen Sturridge play 10 times anyway.

It's obviously down to the individual how quick and/or how well he can judge talent.

Some will take a couple of games it'll take others twenty or more to formulate the same conclusion.

Doesn't make one way better than the other.
 
So I get judged when I say Sturridge > Wellbeck but no one else does when it's the other way round? Yeah I haven't seen THAT much of both but from what I've seen, Sturridge is better and his technique is quality. I don't know how their careers will go but Sturridge is more talented imo.

I don't think either of them should be compared yet, because they've both had so few starts at the top level.
 
It's obviously down to the individual how quick and/or how well he can judge talent.

Some will take a couple of games it'll take others twenty or more to formulate the same conclusion.

Doesn't make one way better than the other.

I know that, I just think it's all a bit unnecessary.
 
I know that, I just think it's all a bit unnecessary.

You were actually arguing over someone else's method of assessing a player - you made the point of raising contention about the amount of games mentioned.

If you knew, why would you raise the issue in the first place?

What could you hope to achieve from that?
 
You were actually arguing over someone else's method of assessing a player - you made the point of raising contention about the amount of games mentioned.

If you knew, why would you raise the issue in the first place?

What could you hope to achieve from that?

I was hoping that he might say, 'true, it is a bit early to make a real judgement but I still feel he'll become the better player, he seems like a special talent that you can see straight away, although I can't be sure'.

Helps to see where he's coming from, encourages debate too.

I achieved something similar.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.