This is getting like one of those record final sets at Wimbledon (and I find tennis a bit boring, to be fair) ... each 'opinion' appears to 25% rational thought and 75% 'wishful thinking' ... fact is, only the player knows for sure what he will do - and, being human, could still change his current thinking in an inkling (sheer poetry eh?) ... so perhaps it's time for us all to sit back and watch the space until someone can actually say "told you so ... naa naa na neenee "
Uefa has warned Manchester City and Paris Saint-Germain they will not be allowed to "cheat" its financial fair play rules, as new figures showed the scale of the challenge in stemming the flow of red ink across Europe and it emerged that two English clubs would have fallen foul of the rules had they been in place this season. http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2013/feb/04/manchester-city-financial-fair-play
The difference is we don't need to do it on the same scale as they do. How much money do you judge genuine? FFP won't work
so all other clubs will be punished but Leicester will go under the radar , who are you trying to convince us or yourself ?
As I said before, If the player was not going to re-sign and we were faced with losing him for nothing then we would have to take what we could get, as the player holds most of the cards in that situation. Obviously, if we were only going to get 875K now, we wouldn't have much to lose by keeping him until Jan and if he did well at this level his value wouldn't drop that much between now and then, due to him proving himself and being more attractive to other premiership clubs. With Kasper however, everyone knows he's a very good Championship Keeper. Without adding value by playing him at a higher level between now and January his value would probably drop significantly, regardless of form. In short, you might have more to lose by hanging on to Kasper if he doesn't sign on then we might with Chester. A lot would depend on what other options the player has at the time and if more than one club were competing for his signature. If only one club were going to offer what the player wanted and we were faced with getting nothing for him at the end of the season, our hand would probably be forced. Obviously if he was committed to a longer contract his market value would be higher, as would Kasper's. Another factor is whether or not you want an unhappy player in your team every week who's more focussed on getting his move than the club he's playing for and whether you want a reputation at your club amongst agents for holding back talent from fulfilling it's potential. Could have a negative impact on your own recruitment.
I can see why you would hope that, but I can't see you having a top 3 or 4 wage-bill next season. If the rules are enforced, then any club with parachute money is theoretically going to be capable of investing more than you in the playing squad next year - i.e. anyone who has been relegated over the last 3 years.
It isn't like he lost out is it? There wasn't much of a future for him at Notts Co once the money dried up and I doubt he wanted to be playing in the lower leagues, even if he was on big money as it would have held back his career hugely. I read an interview after he move from leeds where he stated "everyone wants to play in the premiership". It's ridiculous to think he doesn't and at 26 he may well be wondering when his chance will come.
A good point and another reason what FFP is heavily flawed. As well as potentially lowering the quality of European league (international players are more likely to go to countries where no restrictions on wages exist), damaging the development of domestic talent (clubs will reduce squads in order to maximise the quality of the first team), it will also create a hierarchy where teams that are currently near the top (those that won't be punished by FFP anyway) will have the advantage, making football more predictable than ever. And more pointless. If the whole FFP means clubs won't be able to gamble in an attempt to stay up anyway (they should be living within their means), then parachute payments should end.