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

[roonster09]

Well, that's the premise of this thread and if you read the previous post, I did start with 'if the £75,000 + £25,000 reports are true'. If we insert the media-guess argument in every thread, we'd have very little to discuss because we can only base our opinions off what is being reported by the semi-credible media (unless we're ITKs with intimate and thorough knowledge of the club's dealings). And I don't particularly care about how he's rated by our staff because: a. they aren't always right (and neither am I) and b. as autonomous humans, and not part of some hive mind - we can make our individual assessments by watching in-game, and from that standpoint - anything approaching the reported figure is in dissonance with his quality. He is of a similar profile to Lucas Vázquez at Madrid, and he earns a reported ~£30,000 after tax till 2020 (which works out to ~£60,000 before tax). And in a sense, this isn't even about Lingard's salary - but the broader issue of how we overpay certain players when better ones can be procured for comparable wages, and how this could have a chain effect - in that the next time an academy player has 2 average-ish seasons - he's going to demand even higher wages because you've set a precedent by overpaying his seniors.

We can always discuss about a lot which has some truth in it. When Schweinsteiger was signed media reported he is on 250K and all that nonsense, later Bild or some paper reported much lesser wages. It happens with almost every contract, Rooney wages was reported from 180K to 300K plus. So you don't get proper number to discuss.

Also regarding Vazquez, we have to pay transfer fee and that is also added cost. Not only him, any decent player we try to sign we end up paying around 15-20 million.

Re your point about youngsters, maybe it will encourage them to improve and make it to the first team at ManUtd so that they can earn good money, fail to do so then they have to settle for lot less elsewhere.

 

[prtk0811]

He won't (except China), that's true. It depends 100% on what Rooney himself wants. I think there might be a couple of interested clubs, but he'd have to lower his wage demands to the level of a player he is. As almost always when transferring to a smaller/less rich club, especially at that age/stage of career.

Or wemay still cover part of his wages.

 

[Pogue Mahone]

@Pogue Mahone I thought about one of your post and I don't think it's a good thing regarding players like Mbappé but it's a great signal for academy prospects to see that at United, you will be given time and eventually money if you apply yourself enough.

Yeah, agreed. The Mbappe's of this world will be on mega wages very soon, wherever they go but it will be a big help in preventing the likes of Angel Gomes getting ideas about moving elsewhere.

 

[Handsome Devil]

It's really £4 per week for 100,000 years.

And we'll still be sixth!

 

[MoskvaRed]

There is another club in Manchester now too who will pay anything to get what they want and challenge the united's status, As fergie said, You have to adapt and be prepared to change.

We were penny pinching in 2008 - 2013 market and that's where lot of our problems began.

True but that was a case of refusing to do everything to keep the likes of Ronaldo and Tevez, or not competing harder for talent like Hazard. This is a bit different. I'm not bothered if they break the bank for Pogba or Griezmann. I am surprised why we think we need to pay a fairly average player so much.

 

[Eckers99]

Exactly, he scored in our last 2 cup finals (you could also add that he scored in the FA Community Shield), he is not one to go missing in the big games, in fact, he seems to relish those situations.

Seeing so many fans lining up to have a go at him when he is a local lad who has played an integral part of our few successes over the past few years is a bit dispiriting

Like the derby?

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Blimey, if the £75,000 + £25,000 reports are true - that's more than triple of what someone like Insigne is earning on his current deal, and 1.5 times what he's demanding on his new 'mega deal'. The Premier League is really distorting the football market when the likes of Sunderland have comparable revenues to a Champions League level club in Napoli. Wouldn't be surprised if Rashford wants to renegotiate to £100,000+ per week in the near future - rising to Harry Kane level with Champions League bonus. I mean, it's not my money (or so some like to point out - even though technically - us fans support the whole structure with escalating subscription fee and ticket fee and associated merchandise, and so forth), so whatever, I guess - but this is kinda why we often struggle to offload our players without subsidizing their wages. Also, the collective Champions League qualification escalator is quite daft - if you want to motivate the player, it makes more sense to include individual targets - like minutes played, a certain numbers of goals scored, total appearances in certain competitions - those are better markers for the player's contribution to the team. It isn't even about giving him X amount of money - but setting a precedent for future deals by paying over the odds (especially when the players have more leverage and can push our buttons).

Well that second sentence is key point here, isn't it? Lingard is fortunate to be playing in an incredibly wealthy league. And I firmly believe the players deserve to be rewarded for all the wealth they generate for the clubs that play in that league. So any comparison with the wages of players in other leagues is pointless.

 

[prath92]

If De Laurentiis and Galliani are talking shit then so am I. I don't think that a 30something winger on 110k a week who cant dribble past his opponent will be well sought off. Hopefully some chinese club will get him off our hands.

They wanted to sign them. we weren't looking to sell. They are 2 completely different situations. Only if we wanted to sell but we couldn't , could you say that wages were the major stumbling block. The first year with Napoli he was injured which was the reason for that move not materialising.

Young is versatile. Still reasonably fast and can put in great crosses. Also very defensively aware for a winger. He would be a very good player at many of the PL clubs like west brom palace etc.

 

[MoskvaRed]

I love watching you guys lose your shit over this stuff, must have a lot of accountants on here.

I'm glad he's staying, when he scores he normally does it in style and out of the blue to win us the match, he works hard, keeps pogba happy, makes silly instagram videos, from mManchester.

I don't think he's the next Giggs, but we could do worse in a squad player. Not me paying his wages so I don't care how much they are.

Most companies who are struggling don't give their employees big pay rises. We can afford it but it sends out a strange signal - United pays top of the market wages with Europa League level expectations.

 

[top1whoisman]

Or wemay still cover part of his wages.

Could be, we can thank Moyes for giving a past-it Rooney such a ludicrous contract.

 

[FujiVice]

Big Game Lingard. Wembley Hero.

 

[Ferguson]

Park Ji Sung was on similar wages, and wages have gone up since then.

I see Lingard as a Park Ji Sung sort of player. He can pop up with some goals from midfield, but will normally come off the bench.

He is useful in big matches where you need a quick forward who can press tirelessly and keep possession and who might pop up with a goal.

Plus, Lingard counts as homegrown, and he didn't cost us a transfer fee.

 

[AndyJ1985]

Most companies who are struggling don't give their employees big pay rises. We can afford it but it sends out a strange signal - United pays top of the market wages with Europa League level expectations.

This is it. We're paying CL winners wages and only getting Europa league qualification performances. It's not on. We're fully justified to have higher expectations than that.

 

[Paul the Wolf]

How the hell anyone can watch his average performances and go "yip that guy deserves 400k a month" is beyond me

If he wasn't English and didn't come through the ranks he would not have the blind support he does by some fans. United are more important than any individual.

It's not even the amount of money he's getting for 9/10 poor performances, it's that we have zero chance of ever moving him on unless he moves on a free when his contract expires, probably when he is 29 (by which time it is estimated by some) that he would have matured into a passably good player.
Another poor day for United.

 

[Invictus]

We can always discuss about a lot which has some truth in it. When Schweinsteiger was signed media reported he is on 250K and all that nonsense, later Bild or some paper reported much lesser wages. It happens with almost every contract, Rooney wages was reported from 180K to 300K plus. So you don't get proper number to discuss.

I just don't see the point of your argument...you can cite examples for both correct and incorrect figures. How do we discern which report has some truth in it? Unless the actual numbers are released somehow, this is what we have to go by - and pointless to and fro regarding the veracity of the figures serves no purpose.

Also regarding Vazquez, we have to pay transfer fee and that is also added cost. Not only him, any decent player we try to sign we end up paying around 15-20 million.

Hmm...I don't remember mentioning that we should get Vázquez? The argument was the Madrid have similar revenues to United, and Vázquez is a Spanish player (like Lingard is an English player), can feature in bit part roles (like Lingard), is a hard worker (like Lingard) - hence the similar profile (lower than someone like Pedro had to Barcelona) - yet we're paying our version of Vázquez double what he earns.

Re your point about youngsters, maybe it will encourage them to improve and make it to the first team at ManUtd so that they can earn good money, fail to do so then they have to settle for lot less elsewhere.

Improve to the level of what? You don't overpay existing players just to prove a point to the ones coming through. noodlehair aptly summed up Lingard with this post:

There are players who pick up the ball and you expect something to happen.

There are player who pick up the ball and if there is an opening or chance there, you expect them to spot and make use of it.

There are players who pick up the ball and you expect them to either not see the opening at all, or see it and make a mess of trying to make use of it.

Lingard is firmly in the third category.

Is that supposed to be the reference points for the likes of Angel Gomes - who is coming through the ranks?

 

[Pogue Mahone]

Wouldn't be like noodles to be unnecessarily harsh in his summation of a player, would it?

 

[devilish]

They wanted to sign them. we weren't looking to sell. They are 2 completely different situations. Only if we wanted to sell but we couldn't , could you say that wages were the major stumbling block. The first year with Napoli he was injured which was the reason for that move not materialising.

Young is versatile. Still reasonably fast and can put in great crosses. Also very defensively aware for a winger. He would be a very good player at many of the PL clubs like west brom palace etc.

I assure you, these clubs (especially AC Milan these days) won't go for a player unless they have been given plenty of nudges that they are available. Having said that, I agree with the club's stance not to sell him under those conditions. What Napoli/AC Milan were probably interested was not the player himself but simply to add more bodies in their team. If Fellaini did well, then rest assured that they would have whispered in his ear to cause havoc at United to push for a deal which is way lower to the fee initially agreed. You don't want to deal with De Laurentiis/Berlusconi.

Young is crap.

Anyway lets keep with the main argument. It does us no favour paying 100k a week to a squad player.

 

[roonster09]

I just don't see the point of your argument...you can cite examples for both correct and incorrect figures. How do we discern which report has some truth in it? Unless the actual numbers are released somehow, this is what we have to go by - and pointless to and fro regarding the veracity of the figures serves no purpose.

My point is arguing (or going crazy) about wages is useless when PL clubs don't release the numbers like Serie A do.

Hmm...I don't remember mentioning that we should get Vázquez? The argument was the Madrid have similar revenues to United, and Vázquez is a Spanish player (like Lingard is an English player), can feature in bit part roles (like Lingard), is a hard worker (like Lingard) - hence the similar profile (lower than someone like Pedro had to Barcelona) - yet we're paying our version of Vázquez double what he earns.

Going by your post Vazquez earns 60K before tax and Lingard earns 75K (as per Ducker, not 75K+25), so there isn't a big difference.

Improve to the level of what? You don't overpay existing players just to prove a point to the ones coming through. noodlehair aptly summed up Lingard with this post:

Is that supposed to be the reference points for the likes of Angel Gomes - who is coming through the ranks?

I don't know, you said we are setting a precedent by paying him big wages. I said it can work both ways, young players will work harder to make it at ManUtd as they see academy graduates are paid good money and they don't have to move elsewhere.

 

[devilish]

I don't know, you said we are setting a precedent by paying him big wages. I said it can work both ways, young players will work harder to make it at ManUtd as they see academy graduates are paid good money and they don't have to move elsewhere.

Well I beg to differ on that. Giving 100k a week to a squad player will give the impression that it really takes little to make good money at United. It will also make it very difficult for us to get rid of squad players since no one can afford them. That means, that we risk ending up losing top quality young players because someone average squad player is already here and we can't get rid of him

 

[Bastian]

Well I beg to differ on that. Giving 100k a week to a squad player will give the impression that it really takes little to make good money at United. It will also make it very difficult for us to get rid of squad players since no one can afford them. That means, that we risk ending up losing top quality young players because someone average squad player is already here and we can't get rid of him

We gave what, 120? to Young 3-4 years ago right. I'd say Lingard is a better deal factoring in his age, that he's brought up at the club and that he's a better player. I'm happy to have his contract sorted, but would preferred to have seen a 70-80K figure.

What are the likes of Smalling, Jones, Bailly, Blind, Shaw, Darmian, Romero earning? Could be a separate thread for club wages, it's a worthy discussion.

 

[roonster09]

Well I beg to differ on that. Giving 100k a week to a squad player will give the impression that it really takes little to make good money at United. It will also make it very difficult for us to get rid of squad players since no one can afford them. That means, that we risk ending up losing top quality young players because someone average squad player is already here and we can't get rid of him

Not sure why you always looks for worse number when Ducker has reported it's 75K.

It might give the impression that it's easy to make good money at United but it's very hard to make it at United. How many players are taken by academy and how many of them make first team debuts and how many of them play for few seasons?

So quality youngsters work hard to make it at United, if not they will be shipped off and they lose a lot.

 

[TheSweeper]

So many people overreacting

100k wouldn't get you a top players left foot these days. Lingard deserves this by +/- 10 %

People still think welbeck is better than this guy after all he has done for us. Welbeck had one good game against Real Madrid and that is it!

 

[Invictus]

My point is arguing (or going crazy) about wages is useless when PL clubs don't release the numbers like Serie A do.

No argument is useless as long the points are made within reason. If we were to ascribe to your point about official verification, then we'd end up locking the majority of FF threads because the information isn't officially released.

Going by your post Vazquez earns 60K before tax and Lingard earns 75K (as per Ducker, not 75K+25), so there isn't a big difference.

Vázquez doesn't have significant collective escalators in his contract - so yes, there is a big difference according to the reported numbers when one could earn upto £100,000 by merely qualifying for the Champions League and the other earns £60,000 for a club that's contending for the European crown:

"The 24-year-old England winger will earn a basic wage in the region of £75,000 a week, rising to £100,000 if Jose Mourinho’s side qualify for the Champions League by finishing in the top four or winning the Europa League. "

I don't know, you said we are setting a precedent by paying him big wages. I said it can work both ways, young players will work harder to make it at ManUtd as they see academy graduates are paid good money and they don't have to move elsewhere.

If they aren't motivated by playing for United, then they aren't going to be the artificially motivated by us overpaying for Lingard, unless you want to create an atmosphere or targeting the money, as opposed to targeting success as a player or collective sporting acclaim with United - just as overpaying an Evans in the past wouldn't have compelled Keane or Blackett to work harder.

 

[Eckers99]

So many people overreacting

100k wouldn't get you a top players left foot these days. Lingard deserves this by +/- 10 %

People still think welbeck is better than this guy after all he has done for us. Welbeck had one good game against Real Madrid and that is it!

How much of an average player would it buy?

 

[Rajeev]

What has Lingard done to deserve such a huge pay? Never realized scoring 3 goals in Wembley deserved such a huge raise.

 

[Turnip]

Most companies who are struggling don't give their employees big pay rises. We can afford it but it sends out a strange signal - United pays top of the market wages with Europa League level expectations.

Man United aren't struggling financially in the slightest. Since you pay footballers with money, we're all good.

 

[prtk0811]

True but that was a case of refusing to do everything to keep the likes of Ronaldo and Tevez, or not competing harder for talent like Hazard. This is a bit different. I'm not bothered if they break the bank for Pogba or Griezmann. I am surprised why we think we need to pay a fairly average player so much.

Well the Issue is whole lot bigger than that, City are developing a great academy structure within the club as well with the help of Pep guardiola and top class facilities to lure some of the biggest and brightest english and foriegn talents in their academy to challenge the united's dominance in that market as well, So United have to compete with that as well and giving a fair chance and stability to an academy player does send out a strong message and a ray of hope and extra motivation of the academy talents and new talents looking for a club to go on and become a first team regular at a top club like united.

Illennacho was touted to be a city youth capable of challenging Rashford but this season he hardly gets opportunities to play while they also signed Gabriel jesus as a competition. Youth academy prospects and younger talents need strong examples to belive in our project and our academy system.

United's challenge is bigger than ever at all levels and We have to compete in every sense at all levels to stay on our former levels. He is a squad player but is qualified as a home grown academy talent too which is ofcourse a motivation for our academy talents and future academy players we want to lure in and beat the Opposition to.

100k reports may not be totally true , but when lingard hit his peak which i think jose belives will, which explains this contract, than it may prove to be a extra motivation for him.

 

[devilish]

Not sure why you always looks for worse number when Ducker has reported it's 75K.

It might give the impression that it's easy to make good money at United but it's very hard to make it at United. How many players are taken by academy and how many of them make first team debuts and how many of them play for few seasons?

So quality youngsters work hard to make it at United, if not they will be shipped off and they lose a lot.

It surely looks better although still on the higher side. All I am saying is, that squad players should be paid at par to squad players/first teamers (not the stars ie like Lukaku) at lower club sides (ex Everton). The reasons for that are various

a- it creates a sense of order in the team while keeping jealousy between players to the minimum
b- it acts as an incentive. If anyone wants to be paid 150k a week then he better start working hard to win a first team place.
b- it wouldn't be that difficult to get rid of players when its time for them to leave. During SAF's reign we never really had issues in getting rid of squad players because the likes of OShea were paid at par to Sunderland's first teamers

In my opinion, things got hazy during the 'value' strategy. SAF refused to pay agent fees hence we found it very hard to sign the top talent we needed and ended up competing for a very small pool of players who still relied on the traditional type of agent and who could do well for us. Any sense of order went out of the window during Moyes administration. No one wanted to work with the man which forced him in giving crazy salaries to current players who did. LVG was even worse then Moyes. He seem to use United as a last hurray and he went on signing every player whom he owed something to (Bastian, Valdes, Dutch internationals Blind and Depay etc)

I am hoping that Mou will bring some order on that regard

 

[roonster09]

No argument is useless as long the points are made within reason. If we were to ascribe to your point about official verification, then we'd end up locking the majority of FF threads because the information isn't officially released.

But what's the point in using the numbers that are reported by some random site and when the better sources like Telegraph, Sky all publish different numbers. Like I said we don't even know how is salary is structured so we are arguing over some imaginary numbers.

Vázquez doesn't have significant collective escalators in his contract - so yes, there is a big difference according to the reported numbers when one could earn upto £100,000 by merely qualifying for the Champions League and the other earns £60,000 for a club that's contending for the European crown.

Again you are taking the highest possible number. As per telegraph it's 75K and nothing more. So going by that there isn't any difference.

If they aren't motivated by playing for United, then they aren't going to be the artificially motivated by us overpaying for Lingard, unless you want to create an atmosphere or targeting the money, as opposed to targeting success as a player or collective sporting acclaim with United - just as overpaying an Evans in the past wouldn't have compelled Keane to work harder.

Similarly they won't be negotiating in few years saying in the year 2017 player X was paid so much. Football changes very quickly. When the players like Gomes makes their debut and negotiate 100K might be seen as lower end player wages.

 

[devilish]

We gave what, 120? to Young 3-4 years ago right. I'd say Lingard is a better deal factoring in his age, that he's brought up at the club and that he's a better player. I'm happy to have his contract sorted, but would preferred to have seen a 70-80K figure.

What are the likes of Smalling, Jones, Bailly, Blind, Shaw, Darmian, Romero earning? Could be a separate thread for club wages, it's a worthy discussion.

And that was a big mistake.

 

[SteveJ]

There's probably a load of external factors in play, regardless of Jesse's quality as a player. For instance, if we're going to spend big on incoming signings' wages, then it makes sense to adjust other squad members' salaries to keep them content if they're due to become mere bit-part players. In this kind of context, it's not really about Lingard and, therefore, not worth making a fuss over.

 

[TheSweeper]

How much of an average player would it buy?

Since pogba is our big player who is relatively young and gets 290. Lingered getting 100k which is potentially add ons is perfectly fair.

That's like 3 x more than lingards wages.

Sure he may not make a difference every game he plays in but you cannot doubt his ability to put a shift and is arguably one of the best players and playing to the managers instructions - has done it for 2 managers now - so what fans say about him couldn't bother anyone else.

 

[prtk0811]

Vázquez doesn't have significant collective escalators in his contract - so yes, there is a big difference according to the reported numbers when one could earn upto £100,000 by merely qualifying for the Champions League and the other earns £60,000 for a club that's contending for the European crown:

How much is Raheem sterling earning to do the same at man city?

 

[Ferguson]

I'm sure the club has a clear idea of their wage structure.

The amount a squad player can earn at United is relative to the size of the pie. If you underpay compared to player contributions, then you just create jealousy and dissatisfaction.

Wages will go up across the board as more money floods into the Premier League.

You either pay at the front end or you end up like Arsenal with players leaving because they are dissatisfied with their wages two or three years into their contract. We need to be out ahead, especially with English talent.

 

[Invictus]

How much is Raheem sterling earning to do the same at man city?

I don't particularly care for the poor decision-making at other clubs. If your neighbor pays over the odds for something, you can't then justify your own poor decisions by going "how much did X pay for the same in Y". Because why just stop at Sterling-City, why not sign a lower Premier League level striker for British record fee and emulate Liverpool? That'll really drill the point home.

 

[golden_blunder]

misleading headline. its only 100k if we get into CL

 

[roonster09]

It surely looks better although still on the higher side. All I am saying is, that squad players should be paid at par to squad players/first teamers (not the stars ie like Lukaku) at lower club sides (ex Everton). The reasons for that are various

a- it creates a sense of order in the team while keeping jealousy between players to the minimum
b- it acts as an incentive. If anyone wants to be paid 150k a week then he better start working hard to win a first team place.
b- it wouldn't be that difficult to get rid of players when its time for them to leave. During SAF's reign we never really had issues in getting rid of squad players because the likes of OShea were paid at par to Sunderland's first teamers

In my opinion, things got hazy during the 'value' strategy. SAF refused to pay agent fees hence we found it very hard to sign the top talent we needed and ended up competing for a very small pool of players who still relied on the traditional type of agent and who could do well for us. Any sense of order went out of the window during Moyes administration. No one wanted to work with the man which forced him in giving crazy salaries to current players who did. LVG was even worse then Moyes. He seem to use United as a last hurray and he went on signing every player whom he owed something to (Bastian, Valdes, Dutch internationals Blind and Depay etc)

I am hoping that Mou will bring some order on that regard

Squad player at ManUtd and Squad player at midtable clubs are not same, not saying Everton are. They have their financial limitations. Squad player at ManUtd can be star player at midtable/lower table club, so comparing squad player at top club and squad player at bottom clubs is a wrong start.

Your first point is wrong. Paying star players massive wages and squad players peanuts will create lot of tensions in the dressing room.

Re the players in SAF reign, squad players were paid more than at midtable clubs. SAF even rewarded players who stayed for long time at ManUtd. O'Shea was on 80K per week when he signed contract in 2010-11 according to reports.
http://www.independent.ie/sport/soc...ready-to-cash-in-on-rooney-saga-26693759.html

So it's nothing new that squad player is paid more at ManUtd.

 

[Acole9]

A scapegoat for four years .

 

[SteveJ]

Leading socialist accountant Arsene Wenger pays his young players 60-grand a week(!), and none of them have achieved what Jesse has.

 

[Bastian]

@Ferguson
I hope you're right that the club has a coherent sensible approach. But of course, there has been strong evidence to the contrary: Rooney, Schweinsteiger, Young. Making players difficult to shift.

I do think it's worth knowing the wages of most squad players to get a better idea of what constitutes an OK contract for a squad player. Do Fellaini and Blind have such contracts that make them tricky to shift for example?