Burnley urge Sunderland to drop Wickham demands Submitted by tribalfootball.com on Sat, 09/08/2012 - 10:32 Burnley are eyeing a move for Sunderland striker Connor Wickham. But Sunderland must lower their demand for clubs to pay three-quarters of the 19-year-old’s reported £25,000-a-week wages. Wickham’s previous club Ipswich Town expressed an interest, but were scared off by the cost. Read more at http://www.tribalfootball.com/articles/burnley-urge-sunderland-drop-wickham-demands IF we want him to gain experience surely its in our interest to drop the wage demands
To be fair mate the team wanting him should pay his wages, they are getting a player for nowt so can't see the problem with 25K a week. If he was on double that then fair enough we pay some of it. I can see Whickham playing more this season for us mind so if Burnley don't want to pay that's their lookout.
This guy is in danger of ruining any potential he has, as if you're so highly rated as a young player around the ages of 17/18 and then make a big move which doesn't work out well, players can get lost, he should be playing week in, week out, not sitting around your club doing fuk all on match days. Hopefully for the lad he gets a chance, otherwise Sunderland should send him on loan, even if they pay all his wages, as they are paying his wages to sit on the bench so why not pay his wages so he can actually play football and improve as a player.
Didn't Burnley get some of the cash we paid for Fletcher from a sell-on clause? Let them spend some of that x
2 way street. They want an £8million player for nowt for a year, then they should be happy to cough up 36 weeks at 25k. On the flipside, we need the lad to go, play, grow in confidence and develop. Catch 22.
You don't learn in the reserves Bobby. Lad needs to play in front of crowds, TV cameras, against first XI quality opposition. It's as simple as that.
But why should we be held to ransom? He can go - if they pay the bulk of his wages, in my opinion. Crowds at Burnley? I don't think they are more than 15k tops in that division. I may be wrong. I agree that defences will be better in the fizzy than the reserves, but he has already proved (hence his price) his ability in that league. Is this another 8, 9m wasted, like Gordon? x
Vince I agree, but I often think.... the lad is nearly 20 now. He aint developed. He's not scoring for fun. We paid 8 or 9m for him and I expect more than what he's done for that sort of money. Sess cost 6.5m He isn't Rooney ( who I think is on the wayne anyway (bum-bum)). He isn't Walcott. We paid that money for a POTENTIAL striker. Just happy that those desperate days have gone. x
Roger, It would be bloody fantastic if it worked.............. I hope I'm wrong. I don't think it will x
No, wasn't suggesting you wanted an argument just curious as to why you said that, as I mentioned the above in relation to the lads potential going stale so Sunderland need to work out what is best for the guys progress, otherwise you will be left with an expensive young player that didn't fulfil his potential, or wasn't given a proper chance.
Now't to worry about lad's the bin dipper's will put a 25mill. offer come xmas. shhhhhhhhhhhhh ..ktf it will get sorted.
