Lingard signs new £100k 4 year contract (Sky) | Official: Option to extend for a further year

Status
Not open for further replies.
oh god, what exactly has he done to warrant this? lingard has never been good enough for united and he never ever will be. Whose next? Smalling and jones to agree contract extensions :(

The club needs to be more ruthless and start phasing out average players like this or else we will forever be stuck were we are now.
 
Deserves it imo, an academy lad who has worked his socks of to be as good as he can be, he won us the FA cup, and is the scorer of really good goals, ok he's never going to be a truly top class player, but he is late bloomer so could improve quite a bit still yet, absolute worst case scenario we are protecting an asset.
 
He's basically been a starter this season. A starter at Manchester United who's seems more committed than Martial and Mhki. Of course he should be getting a big a pay rise.

And I don't think we'll find many better squad players to come in and do a professional job over the next few years.
 
The Firestarter said:
Although there is an inflation, regular wages have not reached that point yet. 100K / week is still reserved for players who are first teamers, and have shown to deliver great results on a regular basis. OR they are universally recognized young prospects that there are overwhelming odds they will turn into world class players. None of that applies to Lingard.

The problem with that statistic is this: Let's assume, that to create a real chance C requires a combination of A, B and D . If, the other players exibit all the three properties, but Lingard has displayed only A, and this statistic is based only on A, it will be meaningless.
Click to expand...

Apparently the likes of batshuayi and Wilshere earn 90k. None of them have done anything to prove they are going to turn into world class players either. Lingard seems to be a reasonably reliable player who gives you a decent performance whenever called upon (subs or as a starter in some games as rotation). If we want to buy such a player we would have to pay a reasonably high wage too. Such players are as important as having the greizmanns and the pogbas

The second part doesn't make sense. By your logic, If pogba is able to do AB and D then A alone should make him pretty creative too? It still doesn't make sense though. Chances created doesn't depend on such varied factors that it's going to change considerably. The only variation I can think of is whether half chances are also counted as chances which would see an increase in most of our other attacking players' stats too.
 
Top flight money has been silly for ages, and he is an England international at United, but rucks sake, 100k a week?!

No wonder we've struggled to shift players off our books!

When 100k a week is squad rotation player wage, you know it's a million miles beyond insane.
 
C'est Moi Cantona said:
Deserves it imo, an academy lad who has worked his socks of to be as good as he can be, he won us the FA cup, and is the scorer of really good goals, ok he's never going to be a truly top class player, but he is late bloomer so could improve quite a bit still yet, absolute worst case scenario we are protecting an asset.
Click to expand...

I don't mind Lingard, I think he's decent, is fast, mobile and has good potential.

But do you really think we need to tie him down in case someone else comes in and offers higher wages?!

My season ticket money covers about 1hour of his year.
I wonder if any fans still give it the "we pay your wages" nonsense :lol:
 
Up there with the Moyes 6 year contract this. A dark dark day.
 
C'est Moi Cantona said:
Deserves it imo, an academy lad who has worked his socks of to be as good as he can be, he won us the FA cup, and is the scorer of really good goals, ok he's never going to be a truly top class player, but he is late bloomer so could improve quite a bit still yet, absolute worst case scenario we are protecting an asset.
Click to expand...
Protecting an asset from what? Big clubs aren't going to be banging down our door trying to take him off us.
 
Watched him live on Tuesday night and on a few occasions he had chances to run in behind to stretch play, but he turned and wanted the ball played to his feet. Paying a 100k a week for such safe play doesn't sit right with me.
 
Sandikan said:
Top flight money has been silly for ages, and he is an England international at United, but rucks sake, 100k a week?!

No wonder we've struggled to shift players off our books!

When 100k a week is squad rotation player wage, you know it's a million miles beyond insane.
Click to expand...

Exactly.

He was never going to get that much from another club, so beggars belief that we offer him that.

Our negotiations in terms of transfer fees and contracts are terrible.
 
Raoul said:
Hopefully this finally proves what is clear as day now. Despite what some resident experts here think of Jesse, the club, the board, Mourinho et al clearly value him and want to keep him here for a long time. 100k/wk is a fair wage for a player Manchester United are betting on staying here for an entire career.
Click to expand...

It proves that the club is run by clowns, and that the next coach to replace Mourinho will have trouble shifting off the deadwood (incl Lingard) because no sane club will match those wages.
 
IrishRedDevil said:
Watched him live on Tuesday night and on a few occasions he had chances to run in behind to stretch play, but he turned and wanted the ball played to his feet. Paying a 100k a week for such safe play doesn't sit right with me.
Click to expand...

He's basically Tom Cleverley, but plays on the wing.
 
AndyJ1985 said:
Protecting an asset from what? Big clubs aren't going to be banging down our door trying to take him off us.
Click to expand...

the smaller clubs can afford £20 million + nowadays you know, + he's a good player to have from the bench no matter what some people think.
 
Bojan11 said:
Exactly.

He was never going to get that much from another club, so beggars belief that we offer him that.

Our negotiations in terms of transfer fees and contracts are terrible.
Click to expand...

He must have an amazing agent.

When everyone is fit and playing well, he isn't even a starter. And that's before we upgrade in the summer. So putting such money into him is incredible.
He could explode, and I love a fast mobile player, but I suspect his current level, ie some occasional brilliance, with mostly solid squad work is his max. And if that's 100k a week fodder we're in trouble when trying to sign the best
 
Oggmonster said:
I'm honestly intrigued how people judge this? Why should he be 70k a week and not 100k a week. What's the barometer? I said previously you can't compare him to other players in the world cos their wages don't matter.

Look at it like a business. United is a bigger business than most other football clubs and therefore can pay more money. There's construction businesses where people will be on more than a smaller company despite being worse at their job cos they can afford to pay the wages. That's just the way the world works and it's no different in football.

Lingard brings a lot to the table, he's local(ish), would be happy as a squad player, pops up with some useful goals every now and then and is proven in the premier league. It's not a huge risk really. Fooball has changed from the days of 50k a week being a massive contract. Average players in lower premier league teams can get that.
Click to expand...

What other Premiership club would offer Jesse Lingard more than 50k a week? So why are United offering twice the going rate?
 
Sandikan said:
I don't mind Lingard, I think he's decent, is fast, mobile and has good potential.

But do you really think we need to tie him down in case someone else comes in and offers higher wages?!

My season ticket money covers about 1hour of his year.
I wonder if any fans still give it the "we pay your wages" nonsense :lol:
Click to expand...

Not higher wages no, but if it is £75 k per wk, then that means a club like West Ham, Stoke, or West Brom could come in, match his wages, and offer us really good money for him, he is a good player, and clubs like that will want him if we ever deem him surplus to requirements.
 
Sandikan said:
But do you really think we need to tie him down in case someone else comes in and offers higher wages?!
Click to expand...

No sensible club would let a 24-year old England full international to start a season with only 12 months left on his contract. That'd be really bad business, I'm sure there are a lot of clubs that would have loved to sign Lingard on a free next January (joining in July 2018).
 
prath92 said:
Apparently the likes of batshuayi and Wilshere earn 90k. None of them have done anything to prove they are going to turn into world class players either. Lingard seems to be a reasonably reliable player who gives you a decent performance whenever called upon (subs or as a starter in some games as rotation). If we want to buy such a player we would have to pay a reasonably high wage too. Such players are as important as having the greizmanns and the pogbas

The second part doesn't make sense. By your logic, If pogba is able to do AB and D then A alone should make him pretty creative too? It still doesn't make sense though. Chances created doesn't depend on such varied factors that it's going to change considerably. The only variation I can think of is whether half chances are also counted as chances which would see an increase in most of our other attacking players' stats too.
Click to expand...
First, as you said, reportedly, and second two wrongs don't make a right. And third Wilshire was electric several years ago. Much better than anything Lingard has produced. The argument that United would be willing to buy Lingard if he wasn't homegrown, let alone putting him on 100k/week is nonsensical I am afraid. The only thing that he guarantees is mediocrity.
 
Son Of Sam said:
Lingard now earns more money than Paulo Dybala.
Click to expand...

Saw that on Twitter. Not having a go at him I just don't think our wage structure is right. So many players doing ten times better than Lingard earning less. I think wage increases should be earned. It will also make it more difficult to ship him out if we decide to do so in a year or two.
 
Horrendous. Calibre of player who will maybe be worth £50-60k a week at his peak, in like 5 years time.
 
Son Of Sam said:
Lingard now earns more money than Paulo Dybala.
Click to expand...
He probably earns more than half the Dortmund team too, and Spurs. But hey we're rich so feck it, we can throw money about willy nilly eh?

Speaking of Dortmund and Spurs, I'm incredibly envious of the way they've done business. Juventus and Monaco, too. They spend reasonably and sensibly and get so much more for their money than we do. I don't understand the mentality that because we're United we must spend more than anyone else on wages for average players. As if they'd throw a strop and go elsewhere if we offered normal wages.
 
Seems too much. If it is including performance incentives then it would be alright. Only worry is that we would struggle to offload players if we are keeping squad players on high wages. Anyway not fussed up much. We lost Ronaldo to Real when we paid like paupers when Spanish and Italian clubs paid handsome wages. Now all other clubs had to worry about our wage structure, not us. I can see some crocodile cries from German and Spanish clubs.
 
Torn on this one.

Right now, we have Ashley Young on 110k a week. I think Lingard has a much larger impact on this club than Young does.

However, I don't think either of them deserve that type of money based on their contributions.

So no, Jesse does not deserve to be making 100k a week, but it's all relative to other player's wages when it comes to negotiating new deals.
 
The Firestarter said:
First, as you said, reportedly, and second two wrongs don't make a right. And third Wilshire was electric several years ago. Much better than anything Lingard has produced. The argument that United would be willing to buy Lingard if he wasn't homegrown, let alone putting him on 100k/week is nonsensical I am afraid. The only thing that he guarantees is mediocrity.
Click to expand...

Assuming we need to buy a player who will be happy to stay as a rotational player and capable of putting in decent performance when called upon, we would have to pay that guy at least 50k. On top of that, we would need to pay a fee of 15m or so. If we pay lingard an extra 25k, it comes to about a million a year and 4 mill for 4 years. Surely it would be cheaper to sign lingard to a new contract.
 
AndyJ1985 said:
He probably earns more than half the Dortmund team too, and Spurs. But hey we're rich so feck it, we can throw money about willy nilly eh?

Speaking of Dortmund and Spurs, I'm incredibly envious of the way they've done business. Juventus and Monaco, too. They spend reasonably and sensibly and get so much more for their money than we do. I don't understand the mentality that because we're United we must spend more than anyone else on wages for average players. As if they'd throw a strop and go elsewhere if we offered normal wages.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's wrong to think we have to/should spend more than others, what i do think is wrong is the idea that we shouldn't demand higher quality for the bigger amount of money. Going way beyond market value in wages for a player just means he will be impossible to sell if we ever want to upgrade on him in the future.


prath92 said:
Assuming we need to buy a player who will be happy to stay as a rotational player and capable of putting in decent performance when called upon, we would have to pay that guy at least 50k. On top of that, we would need to pay a fee of 15m or so. If we pay lingard an extra 25k, it comes to about a million a year and 4 mill for 4 years. Surely it would be cheaper to sign lingard to a new contract.
Click to expand...
This and the English-player quota is the only thing that makes 100k okay, despite it being laughably overpaying him.
(If it's 75k I'd argue it's fair enough as he wouldn't be as hard to move on in the future if the club decided to)
 
top1whoisman said:
No sensible club would let a 24-year old England full international to start a season with only 12 months left on his contract. That'd be really bad business, I'm sure there are a lot of clubs that would have loved to sign Lingard on a free next January (joining in July 2018).
Click to expand...

Yes, that's a good and definitely overlooked point.

I suppose in 2 years time, 100k a week might even look cheap!!
 
top1whoisman said:
No sensible club would let a 24-year old England full international to start a season with only 12 months left on his contract. That'd be really bad business, I'm sure there are a lot of clubs that would have loved to sign Lingard on a free next January (joining in July 2018).
Click to expand...

Name one club that has ever showed any interest whatsoever in him, there were none before and there certainly won't be now
 
He deserves it in my opinion. It's clear Jose trusts him and whatever his limitations, you can't fault his application. Solid squad player.
 
MarchingOn said:
Torn on this one.

Right now, we have Ashley Young on 110k a week. I think Lingard has a much larger impact on this club than Young does.

However, I don't think either of them deserve that type of money based on their contributions.

So no, Jesse does not deserve to be making 100k a week, but it's all relative to other player's wages when it comes to negotiating new deals.
Click to expand...

It was different with Young, as we'd have probably had to pay more if he'd had longer left on his contract. So the difference went into his wage.
We brought Lingard up.
How the heck anyone fell upon 100k a week though...blimey Charlie. Although whether that's just media hype is something a lot of us haven't actually questioned!
It might be the max wage if we're winning stuff, he scored 20 goals, and becomes a regular England starter.
 
100k a week for a squad player is nuts to be fair and I like lingard.
Maybe the coaches see that there is a lot more to come from him and he will be worth it in the end. I don't get it from what we've seen so far though.

Edit - Thiago is on 90k at Bayern for some perspective....
 
He's been underwhelming this season. Don't see the reason in this contract at all. He needs to show a-lot more if he is really being paid that kind of money.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.