Raheem Sterling to...? | joins Arsenal on loan

[quadrant]

A player doesn't go from earning £325k a week with 3 years remaining of his contract to a modest wage at his new club. Even half that amount is a significant wage, so it is a guarantee. I don't know what kind of deal you're expecting Chelsea to do for us.

Sterling won't be losing out, because Chelsea will have to settle some of the £70M he's owed on his current contract. Hell, if you could make a player leave without paying them a penny, we'd have done it many times over the years.

And by the way, if we were to pay half his current Chelsea wage, we'd be paying Sterling slightly less over 3 years that we're committed to paying Sancho over 2. So we'd be paying less in total, less per year, and have a better player in the squad. I'd call that a pretty simple decision.

 

[AndySmith1990]

If the only two options are keep Sancho or swap for Sterling, I'd choose the latter, all things being equal. Sancho is a waste of space and his behaviour last season, where he preferred to play video games over turning up for work, is reason enough to get rid of him

 

[Rnd898]

So we're all taking Daily Mail's sensationalist "£70M owed by Chelsea" at face value then? Because everything the Daily Mail writes is always true, right?

Sterling has 2 years and 10 months left on his contract, so that's basically 147 weeks. If he was actually owed £70M for the remainder of his deal, he would have to be earning around £475K/wk for that figure to be true. Make that math make sense to me.

He's already earning a shitload more than he deserves without making up the numbers out of thin air.

 

[JoeyJoJoJrShabadoo]

So we're all taking Daily Mail's sensationalist "£70M owed by Chelsea" at face value then? Because everything the Daily Mail writes is always true, right?

Sterling has 2 years and 10 months left on his contract, so that's basically 147 weeks. If he was actually owed £70M for the remainder of his deal, he would have to be earning around £475K/wk for that figure to be true. Make that math make sense to me.

He's already earning a shitload more than he deserves without making up the numbers out of thin air.

Article said £70m in wages and bonuses. Not clear if that means bonuses per game or signing on bonus. From what I've read he earns 325k or 350k a week. If he's got a signing on fee then it's likely paid out over course of contract, which could take his wage up over 400k

 

[freddie the red]

Sir Matt never managed Liverpool, he played for them and he also played for City, Dennis Law also played for City but we din't sign him from them, that was Torino

One "n" in Denis,
There's only one "n" in Denis,
One "n" in Dehhhhhnissss,
There's only one "n"in Dehhniss.
;-)

 

[nickm]

100%

Nobody’s dream but under certain conditions it could be beneficial in the short term for United.

I:d have him over Sancho in a heartbeat, he adds goals and goal threat which Sancho does not have for us. If it's cost neutral, it's a no brainer IMO.

 

[dwd]

One "n" in Denis,
There's only one "n" in Denis,
One "n" in Dehhhhhnissss,
There's only one "n"in Dehhniss.
;-)

One ‘s’, no ‘h’

 

[Tom Van Persie]

 

[Utterly De Ligt'd]

He played for Liverpool, there is literally nothing else to discuss.

 

[Tom Van Persie]

 

[TheReligion]

Yeah this seems most likely.

I can also imagine Chelsea being desperate to move on Sterling and making contact RE Sancho. Doesn’t mean anything.

 

[Rnd898]

Article said £70m in wages and bonuses. Not clear if that means bonuses per game or signing on bonus. From what I've read he earns 325k or 350k a week. If he's got a signing on fee then it's likely paid out over course of contract, which could take his wage up over 400k

He's widely reported to be on 325K/wk, which would put the remaining wage balance at £48M for the 2y 10m period.

He'll probably have received a signing bonus when he joined, that I agree with. But for those Daily Mail figures to make any sense that signing fee would have had to be around £40-50M for the math to add up. I don't know about you but Sterling getting a signing bonus of roughly 100% his full transfer fee seems a tad unrealistic to me, especially when he already got a salary increase over his Man City wages and four mour extra years on his deal upon joining (he had just one year left at City and signed a 5 year deal). I find it way more likely Daily Mail have just pulled the numbers out of their arse to get clicks.

And in any case, the way I understand it the signing fees usually get paid in full at the time of the actual signing but are just amortised over the full contract period for accounting purposes, even though the actual money already changed hands. So basically Sterling would have received his signing bonus in 2022 and the value of the signing fee, together with any agent fees involved in the deal, then got divided equally over the 5 year deal. Now if he were to move on a permanent transfer this summer, then that balance becomes due on Chelsea's accounts just like the remaining transfer fee amortisation (£26.5M for Sterling) but at this point Sterling himself is actually owed feck all except for his weekly wages.

There is of course the possibility that there are some appearance bonuses, goal bonuses etc. involved but it's not like he's getting those paid anyway if he doesn't actually play another game for us so it's impossible to say he's "owed" money for something that will never happen whether he does a Bogarde or moves to another club.

 

[Berbaclass]

Don’t buy it. Been linked by people like Hirst and Ornstein.

 

[Shark]

I still don't believe this is genuine interest, INEOS have been smart enough so far, and this would almost obliterate my faith in them. Chelsea are likely just using our name to try and offload him.

 

[Frosty]

Don’t buy it. Been linked by people like Hirst and Ornstein.

That could be the club briefing to drive down prices. There is always a tonne of posturing at the end of the window.

 

[WeePat]

Don’t buy it. Been linked by people like Hirst and Ornstein.

When Ornstein put his name to it, it seemed pretty legit that United were interested in Sterling.

 

[ThanksBoss26]

The thing that makes me not rule out us doing something with this is the board connections with the player through England (Ashworth) and City (Wilcox, Berrada). They know him well presumably and might well think they can get a tune out of him.

 

[VP89]

Don’t buy it. Been linked by people like Hirst and Ornstein.

In a swap deal not a signing with any fee?

 

[Tom Van Persie]

 

[TheReligion]

I think there’s also logic in that Chelsea are desperate to get rid of him. Any club that likes the look of Sterling has them over a barrel.

 

[KD6-3.7]

Signing Sterling would completely ruin the transfer window for me.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

So we're all taking Daily Mail's sensationalist "£70M owed by Chelsea" at face value then? Because everything the Daily Mail writes is always true, right?

Sterling has 2 years and 10 months left on his contract, so that's basically 147 weeks. If he was actually owed £70M for the remainder of his deal, he would have to be earning around £475K/wk for that figure to be true. Make that math make sense to me.

He's already earning a shitload more than he deserves without making up the numbers out of thin air.

The Daily Mail are a cacophony of cnuts. But they’ll be calculating every bonus as payable too I expect. ie if Chelsea won every game and thus every trophy.

It’s still pathetic. But I suspect it’s approaching accurate on some really busted formula.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

He played for Liverpool, there is literally nothing else to discuss.

You wouldn’t have taken VvD, Alison or Salah at any point over the past 4 years?

 

[Grand Vizier]

I still don't believe this is genuine interest, INEOS have been smart enough so far, and this would almost obliterate my faith in them. Chelsea are likely just using our name to try and offload him.

Genuinely interested in your thought process behind this. If they have been doing smart business so far - both incomings and outgoings - then why would one single signing obliterate your faith in them? What is your thinking here? Why would you lose faith in them? You're acting as if Sterling is some League One player straight from Exeter when he is in fact a top proven player with a lot of experience. Sure, he is not the player he used to be, but he is still better than what we have, so explain the reason for losing faith in INEOS if we sign him - as if they give a shit where your faith is anyway

 

[Berbaclass]

That could be the club briefing to drive down prices. There is always a tonne of posturing at the end of the window.

Ornstein doesn't BS. I'm sure he would have independently sourced also.

 

[Shark]

Genuinely interested in your thought process behind this. If they have been doing smart business so far - both incomings and outgoings - then why would one single signing obliterate your faith in them? What is your thinking here? Why would you lose faith in them? You're acting as if Sterling is some League One player straight from Exeter when he is in fact a top proven player with a lot of experience. Sure, he is not the player he used to be, but he is still better than what we have, so explain the reason for losing faith in INEOS if we sign him - as if they give a shit where your faith is anyway

It's my opinion. Even at his peak I never fancied Sterling. Now that he's lost a yard of pace even more so. Not to mention he played for Liverpool and City. My thought process is that signing Sterling would be a massive backwards step in what INEOS are seemingly trying to achieve, so stick your laughing smiley where the sun don't shine.

 

[Utterly De Ligt'd]

You wouldn’t have taken VvD, Alison or Salah at any point over the past 4 years?

Absolutely not, I have standards.

What are your thoughts of Micheal Owen, beloved Manchester United hero? or daft scouser with stupid opinions that you forget, or maybe blocked out, the fact that he ever played for United.

 

[Highfather_24]

Sterling has too many miles on his clock ala Rooney. His actual footballing age is probably closer to 33-34. For the love of god, stay away.

 

[Grande]

One "n" in Denis,
There's only one "n" in Denis,
One "n" in Dehhhhhnissss,
There's only one "n"in Dehhniss.
;-)

‘We’ll never die, we’ll never die
We’ll never die, we’ll never die
So keep the red flag flying high
‘Cause Man United will never die’

There’s no ‘die’ in Fred The Red

 

[Witchking]

You wouldn’t have taken VvD, Alison or Salah at any point over the past 4 years?

These questions really depend on the situation.

If VVD, Salah, Alison put in a transfer request at Liverpool and hold ground that they would want to join only United, then yes. But that never happens except for Hienze who ruined his relationship with the club and fans and regrets it today.

So, short answer, no. Do not want.

 

[Jacob]

Sterling has too many miles on his clock ala Rooney. His actual footballing age is probably closer to 33-34. For the love of god, stay away.

That's why you have medicals. Do you honestly believe that Wilcox, Ashworth etc. are sat there thinking they should buy Sterling based on his performances 6 years ago? Their professional opinion on his current ability is obviously not in line with yours.

So far, we have no reason to mistrust their judgement.

 

[Darlington Padgett]

These questions really depend on the situation.

If VVD, Salah, Alison put in a transfer request at Liverpool and hold ground that they would want to join only United, then yes. But that never happens except for Hienze who ruined his relationship with the club and fans and regrets it today.

So, short answer, no. Do not want.

And all of those players are much better players than Sterling.

 

[padzilla]

He would be a good option to have for a knockdown price and half decent wage. However, that's unlikely to be the case.

 

[GoodTimes]

He played for Liverpool, there is literally nothing else to discuss.

Yeah, we really shouldn’t have hired Busby.

 

[Tom Van Persie]

Sterling won't be happening then

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Absolutely not, I have standards.

What are your thoughts of Micheal Owen, beloved Manchester United hero? or daft scouser with stupid opinions that you forget, or maybe blocked out, the fact that he ever played for United.

We disagree.

I’d take more value from stealing Liverpools best player than tying myself up in knots over the fact they’d have played for them.

Owen is an odd little man that’s not loved by a single set of fans. He was a qualified success here. That goal against City and his celebration kind of assists with it all.

I just want to watch great players play well for my club while we win things. I’m a simple sort.

 

[Highfather_24]

That's why you have medicals. Do you honestly believe that Wilcox, Ashworth etc. are sat there thinking they should buy Sterling based on his performances 6 years ago? Their professional opinion on his current ability is obviously not in line with yours.

I dont buy these "appeal to authority" fallacy. Even clubs with top DOFs get bad deals all the time, what's with this blind faith?

I have eyes, I can see. Sterling is finished.

Anyway, thankfully reports coming out that Juventus have agreed a deal with Sancho.

 

[LawCharltonBest]

What is our net spend after ugarte then? Feels like we’ve sold quite a lot

 

[strandty]

Sterling won't be happening then

May have been a ploy to get Juve to speed up

 

[Footyislife]

What is our net spend after ugarte then? Feels like we’ve sold quite a lot

Teams can engage each other saying they want to do things. But only they know the true reasons.

In this scenario no way United takes on Sterling and no way Chelsea settles the Sterling debt while also taking on Sancho demands.

Logic dictates it's a strategic ploy by both clubs to drive up bidding for Sancho and Sterling with 3rd parties.