Im baffled by the news about Kane signing a new contract because according to the media and pundits who knew our finances inside out, we wouldnt be able to pay our players top money and they were rushing to leave?
So apparently Bale would accept the same sort of money as Kane.
So, at 29 what would he be given - it won't be a 6 year contract. 4 longest? Would we pay Bale the same amount pro-rated over the length of the contract? So using the unlikely tabloid figure for Kane - £90m over 6 years, we pay Bale £90m over 4 years that's £432k a week Vs Kanes £288k a week but, at the end of each of their contracts, they earn the same.
Does this solve the "he earns X so I want X too" argument?
Can't see it personally as it's not £90m in wages. It's £90m in wages and that again to sign him and I suspect that's why Kane, essentially a free asset, can be paid so much in wages.
A reminder to those browsing without an account, it's quick and easy to Register Here. Come and join the fun!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.