True but he was a free transfer and a 1 year deal. To stump up 25m + 100k a week over 5 years is a big outlay
Dean Henderson | Sold to Palace
- Thread starter roonster09
- Start date
- Status
True but he was a free transfer and a 1 year deal. To stump up 25m + 100k a week over 5 years is a big outlay
In the end they did not. His salary was reported a bit like our transfer deals where all possible bonuses and clauses were added in to state the highest figure. Because he did not activate any of the perfomance clauses or bonuses he ended up earning about 100k a week which was still the highest salary at the club and he only got that because he was on a free. The issue with Hendo is he wants 100k a week which will make him top earner at the club and they need to find a transfer fee which they are struggling with due to cashflow and FFP after last seasons spending spree.
They have a bunch of deadwood of their own they are trying to sell but it is not proving easy, I mean who is actually going to spend good money on Jonjo Shelvey? We might be in a much better position regarding a fee for Dean if Spurs, Brentford or someone meets their valuation of 50M for Johnson as his sale being an Academy product would fix almost all of their financial concerns in itself.
Henderson to return from his loan with one year less remaining on the contract and 29 games under his belt. Pay up or feck off.30 games
fuk that with a game number that they had to meet for the obligation to buy to kick in.....you want a loan move then obligation is to buy otherwise fuk off
Just our luck..when we have a nice saleble asset, the market gets saturated.
Hopefully someone gets desperate by end of the window.
Yeah not enough movement on this
Yeah it's just paying for terrible decision making in the past again. We're not in a good negotiating position on this one.
Yeah all down to Toy Story puppet and his uni mate sidekick in charge of contracts
it’s actually an option for them not to make it permanent.
Going well on the sell side again today 
Forrest wants to scam us with a THIRTY games played OTB clause while West Ham is bidding 20M for Harry M. Nice day at the office.
Forrest wants to scam us with a THIRTY games played OTB clause while West Ham is bidding 20M for Harry M. Nice day at the office.This can’t be true. What keepers have even moved?
All we could do is reject. Other teams are being cheap asses, what to do.Going well on the sell side again today
Why are people getting wound up? Before a number of games was specified, the assumption was the OTB would kick in at the end of the season - nobody got triggered then did they?
No we didn’t for the 80th time.
Yes, that´s what I mean. And dealing with us, they seem to act even cheaper. Wherever you look rn, Saudis are taking off unwanted player from the wage bill of City, LFC, Bayern for actually decent fees, which really gives them FFP advantage in the long run, compared to us. We would really need to do 2, 3 decent sales.
Probably for that very reason. People probably assumed that it would be an obligation to buy. Not an obligation depending on a certain amount of games. Definitely potential to be scammed.
The only way Henderson doesn’t start every match for us is injury. Our other options are Hovarth who Luton didn’t want for £4mil or an U21. Do you think we’d risk relegation to drop our only decent keeper to scam you lot! Tin foil hat time
Didn't you confirm the permanent signing of Chris Wood in mid February after he'd made his third appearance? So no, the obligation to buy can kick in whenever the clause has been met.
Yeh and he got a season ending injury a few games later - lesson learned.
What lesson? You’ll never sign another player ever again?
I think the made up stories about struggling with FFP is biting us here through no fault of our own. Everybody thinks we need to sell and, even in the Scott story reported a few weeks ago, teams are waiting until the window nears closing so we soften our stance.
Reality seems to be is that we won’t sell below our value and it’s surprising a few teams
That an OBL clause of a handful of games is stupid and pointless. This is especially so when the player in question has been out with a long term injury and still may not be fully recovered.
But obligation to buy is simply putting off paying the transfer for a year. That’s all it is. You’re arguing he’ll start every game anyway so there is no risk, you’re basically buying him now. So he’s just like every other player you buy, everyone can get injured at anytime
Hardly any and that is kind of the point. There are a lot of keepers available in this window and the market for keepers seems to be as dead as a parrot in the hands of John Cleese. Brentford are looking to shift Raya, already signed his replacement and he has 1 year on his contract. Brighton want Sanchez gone, he was dropped for Steele last season and they have now added a long term replacement as well. Leeds are getting Darlow in because Meslier wants out, Wolves are looking to sell just about anyone of value and so Jose Sa can be had for a modest sum. This has been the case since the window opened and none of them have moved.
It is not a good time to be selling a keeper and besides Forest we don't have anyone else even remotely interested in Henderson and so we may have to make a deal that hands a lot of the initiative to them. They do not have a senior keeper worth playing so provided Henderson stays fit and actually performs to a decent level I really don't think they will try to wriggle out of the deal although I do agree that 30 games is a bit excessive.
So the 30 players they signed last seasons were all a result of restraints and being thorough ?
I think that was the joke.
Yes. It’s just every time they thoroughly scouted someone perfect for their team someone else come along who was better.
No, you could just sign another ten keepers. You guys have form.
You little con artist, forgetting to mention legendary shot stopper Wayne Hennessey who you know is going to keep Hendo on the bench if he gets close to triggering that clause!
I know, I am Welsh and even I wouldn't pick Wayne over a traffic cone
I think most people assumed it was an obligation to buy no matter what, not dependent on appearances.
So people immediately think this a cunning plan to scam a keeper for a season? That’s just bat shit bonkers! Is this what supporting United does to you?
A few seem to think that, I personally just thought Forrest's insurance policy of 30 games was taking the piss a bit. I understand why they want to do it that way rather than an obligation from the off though.
We left him at home in our recent preseason in Spain and played the U21 keeper instead.10-15 games seems fair enough, as long as the price obliged was towards the top end of his value. 30 is no good.
I can understand that, but it’s the opening offer in a negotiation. I think we’ll agree to a number of games that takes it past the winter window.
Maybe not, but if your PL position is looking secure after 29 rounds, I could see him getting relegated to the bench for the remaining 9 matches.
It might not be a scam but it isn't watertight either, and if we allow Henderson's contract to enter the final year we probably won't get half as good a fee for him this time next year. We've already been stung by similar clauses during Andreas Pereira's Lazio loan and Eric Bailly's at Marseille last season.
He's contracted up until '25 (with a year option). I'm sure this will get done, they clearly want him. We just need to be creative. A loan fee to be paid in case of a buy-obligation not being met. A financial penalty for games sat out when he's fit. It's a huge season for him, I cannot imagine him going there if there's the slightest chance of him not being first choice. With his out-of-this-world self belief he must be thinking he'll edge out one of Pope/Pickford/Ramsdale and go to the Euros. Probably as first choice. So he's not going to go there without guarantees.
Forest fecking cheap skates think if they're heading for relegation they can just drop him for the last 8 games.
- Status