Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Player Wages

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Qprtanpa1
    Silver Seat
    • Mar 2014
    • 1793

    #16
    The biggest imponderable is how the EFL deals with the COVID effect. Assume it will not be decided til well into the coming season. If you’re a gambler, you would be tempted to roll the dice on easier limits. If you are a long-suffering QPR fan, you must hope we go the other way. The road back has been difficult but deliberate. Stay the course, and we will be competing for the playoffs in two seasons. Violate that, and we should be prepared to join Hull City, Sunderland and others who ignored the signals.

    Comment

    • stanistheman
      Platinum Seat
      • Mar 2009
      • 11151

      #17
      Originally posted by hemelhoop
      If any truth in the wages on that list someone needs shooting for giving Kane £9,500 and Wallace £10,000 pw
      Totally agree. Neither should have had more than 6,000 offered . how can Kane be on more than Manning or Wallace above Rangel.

      Comment

      • Stainrod
        Silver Seat
        • Jan 2018
        • 3162

        #18
        Originally posted by stanistheman

        Totally agree. Neither should have had more than 6,000 offered . how can Kane be on more than Manning or Wallace above Rangel.
        Manning would get a pay rise but he refuses to extend his contract .

        Comment

        • SheepRanger
          Administrator
          • Apr 2018
          • 8331

          #19
          Originally posted by hemelhoop
          If any truth in the wages on that list someone needs shooting for giving Kane £9,500 and Wallace £10,000 pw
          I would guess they got these wages because they were expected to be first team regulars and the fact they were free transfer signings, so no transfer fee was paid as part of the deal. If we paid £1m transfer fee their wages over three years would likely be £6k a week. This looks more of a Bosman issue???

          Comment

          Working...