Adebayor

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
If that is True then Levy is a fool. 100k a week and 5m signing on fee and we have ourselves a class striker. Atm we will not finish top half relying on JD and Kane.

Both games so far the team has looked ok, except for the high line and a complete lack of creativity on the edge of the oppo box.
 
"The Blues are furious that, after agreeing a cut-price £6m deal with Tottenham for a player they valued at £12m, the move is collapsing over personal terms. City were desperate to save Adebayor’s £170,000-a-week wages – and remove a major obstacle stopping them *making a £20m raid for *Arsenal’s Robin van Persie. The champions told chairman Daniel Levy that they would accept a cut-price fee of £6m to help Spurs offer Adebayor a package close to the wages he earns at the Etihad. City feel Levy has now backtracked – a move forcing them to examine the prospect of either allowing the former Arsenal hit-man to leave for free or giving him a pay-off to compensate him for the money he will lose on the final two years of his contract."

leaving aside the fact that if it was 'agreed' it will have been written into a contract and there could be no backtracking, if this is true City don't understand economics. What Ade is currently worth is what Spurs will agee to pay him one way or the other. To faciltate that happening City have to pay Ade the difference between what he is worth and what he is entitled to under his contract. Them getting a transfer fee is unrealistic.
 
£ity have got to accept that they paid silly money for the player and paid him extortionate wages, way above his actual worth, in order to ensure that they secured his services and not some other team. Now that they have subsequently decided that he is no longer worth that to them, £ity have to be prepared to give him away, and to compromise with Spurs as regards paying the balance of this wages.

Why should Ade accept less wages simply because £ity no longer want him? The ball is firmly in £ity's court.
 
PowerSpurs said:
leaving aside the fact that if it was 'agreed' it will have been written into a contract and there could be no backtracking, if this is true City don't understand economics. What Ade is currently worth is what Spurs will agee to pay him one way or the other. To faciltate that happening City have to pay Ade the difference between what he is worth and what he is entitled to under his contract. Them getting a transfer fee is unrealistic.
Click to expand...

The article suggests the deadlock is between the player and us, we probably do have an agreed fee but we don't have to pay it unless Ade agrees terms with us. We're trying to renegotiate the fee City because otherwise we won't be able to agree a deal with Ade. It's not really backtracking. Their problem with Ade isn't dissimilar to us with GDS, we overpaid for him and now the only clubs interested aren't prepared to pay much for him.
 
I thought that the whole point of the transfer was that we were essentially paying Adebayor a big signing on fee, to make up for the difference in wages.
£5m to his club, £5m to him and a pretty substantial wage cut to about £100k pw.
Perhaps we need to chuck a couple of million to his charity or something?

What if we offered to take Santa Cruz on loan for the season, as well?
It'd be worth it if he could stay fit.
 
There's a rumour flying round that if we do get Ade, he'll be the only striker we'll be buying. Meaning we'll have a front 3 of Ade, Defoe and Kane. What happens if Ade gets injured? We'll be totally screwed. Not good enough if you ask me. Kane is nowhere near ready.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...llas-Boas-only-plans-to-sign-one-striker.html

SPURS boss Andre Villas-Boas plans to sign just ONE striker to compete with Jermain Defoe and Harry Kane.

Kane, 19, has yet to play in the Premier League. But AVB said: “Three is enough.”
 
I'd say that three probably is enough, but not those three.
We need three strikers that are all capable of playing the lone role and only one of those can do it.

If we keep Kane in the squad this season, then I'd say that he's back-up and competition for the role that van der Vaart and Sigurdsson are fighting for.
He'd be better off going out on loan to another Premier League side, if he could get regular football, in my opinion.
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
I thought that the whole point of the transfer was that we were essentially paying Adebayor a big signing on fee, to make up for the difference in wages.
£5m to his club, £5m to him and a pretty substantial wage cut to about £100k pw.
Perhaps we need to chuck a couple of million to his charity or something?

What if we offered to take Santa Cruz on loan for the season, as well?
It'd be worth it if he could stay fit.
Click to expand...
I'd seen those numbers quoted too. The only issue is that Ade still loses out by a few £m and that is probably the sticking point.
 
PowerSpurs said:
I'd seen those numbers quoted too. The only issue is that Ade still loses out by a few £m and that is probably the sticking point.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I can't see how he can object if we pay the difference as a donation to his charity.
We'd still be getting him at a pretty good price, but we wouldn't have to break our wage structure, exactly.
 
epilepticfridgeboy said:
There's a rumour flying round that if we do get Ade, he'll be the only striker we'll be buying. Meaning we'll have a front 3 of Ade, Defoe and Kane. What happens if Ade gets injured? We'll be totally screwed. Not good enough if you ask me. Kane is nowhere near ready.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepag...llas-Boas-only-plans-to-sign-one-striker.html

SPURS boss Andre Villas-Boas plans to sign just ONE striker to compete with Jermain Defoe and Harry Kane.

Kane, 19, has yet to play in the Premier League. But AVB said: “Three is enough.”
Click to expand...

I don't know how they got "Three is enough" to mean we'll be signing one striker. It could mean...
* Defoe will be sold and a new striker signed
* Defoe will be sold and Coulibaly will step up
* Kane will be loaned out and a new striker signed
* Kane will be loaned out and Coulibaly will step up
* Defoe will be sold, Kane loaned out, and two strikers will be signed
* Defoe will be sold, Kane loaned out, Coulibaly will step up and another striker will be signed
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
Yeah, but I can't see how he can object if we pay the difference as a donation to his charity.
We'd still be getting him at a pretty good price, but we wouldn't have to break our wage structure, exactly.
Click to expand...

I suspect both City and ourselves hoped Ade would put up with being a few £m down and the issue now is who coughs up now that he isn't.
 
PleaseNotPoll said:
I'd say that three probably is enough, but not those three.
We need three strikers that are all capable of playing the lone role and only one of those can do it.

If we keep Kane in the squad this season, then I'd say that he's back-up and competition for the role that van der Vaart and Sigurdsson are fighting for.
He'd be better off going out on loan to another Premier League side, if he could get regular football, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree but Spain would have won the Euros with those three in their squad (although only Ade would have been used probably). VdV and GDS can both score goals if properly used!
 
There are lots of complaints about Ade on here. Not performing, not interested and so on, and many citing his history with Arsenal and Man C. as evidence that we can expect no more. Perhaps we should take into account his lack of starts this season.

Spurs have played 22 league games and Ade has started in just 9. Injury, illness, and suspension account for for much of that. He has appeared in 14 league games in all but 5 have been as substitute playing for half an hour or less.

Taking this into account coupled with Defoe's fine form, the change in personnel and management style I think it's a little harsh to be over critical of him at this stage. We have not seen the best of him so far this season that's for sure but we have to cut him some slack when you consider the intermittent nature of his appearances don't we?
 
He left us guessing whether he was coming to us or not in the close season and then there was all the uncertainty about AFCON Spurf. He'd better start doing something soon for us. As you mentioned Defoe,how many has he scored recently?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back