We've offered Steele reduced terms

I can assure you it wasn't when I used to run it. Yes there were opinions but neither they, nor guesses were stated as fact when I was in charge. My opinions were there as it's a "fan site" and as the overall owner would say "to spark debate and increase hits".
Gave it up as they lost all my hit stats for the busiest 3 months of the year and paid me peanuts instead.
Plus it's difficult to put your own spin on news from the Official Site and still sound fresh.

 

We've known this for 12 months. It's not news.

We're not paying the wages we did 5 years ago. Foster took one, assume Hassell will have to and Steele is the last on these types of contract.

 

I understand that, but resorting to making stuff up is a bit annoying - I'd have a bit more respect for it if they wrote in more of a blog style rather than claiming to be 'in the know' when they aren't.

 

agree

 

Didn't Foster sign for 2 years when Hill came? In fact all 3 of them will have signed a contract in the last 3 years.

 

Interesting, as Higgie was saved from a bad situation at Aberdeen, whereas Sheron came for a big fee from QPR fire sale, while in good form. No disrespect to John Dennis but I think he would be reticent to say just how much Sheron cost BFC for very little return. Higgie's appearance and goal bonuses would likely take him to top earning stakes.

 

No. Foster signed a one year contract summer 2012

 

I think we can confidently say no current player is on no more than 5k basic.

 

So my point still stands then, he won;t have been on massive wages anyway. Neither will Steele or Hassell.

 

He signed reduced terms last summer.

 

I'd say Sheron is probably the most disappointing signing we've had in all the time I've been going to Oakwell - considering what we paid for him and what he was allegedly being paid.

I remember people raving about him when he had that one good season at Stoke, didn't set the world alight at QPR and was distinctly average when he came to us.

 

That's what I have been saying.

 

You're wrong Phil, balancing the books isn't just about reducing wages; you have to consider other factors or it could end up costing you more. I agree that wages must be affordable but wages can't be calculated in isolation of other costs such as signing on fees or transfer fees.

 

Maybe your right. without having the 100% facts it's hard to say though.

 

So why do you keep on saying it then ?
Just asking like.

 

True and I'm not stating facts, I just think that a saving of £3k per week (for example) could be insignificant compared to the cost of bringing in a championship quality keeper.

 

True but the club have to keep in a wage budget because if it gets out that he's earning over that then every player will want it.

 

So everybody's guessing then. All bluster and no fact.

A reduction is required and there is no need for sentiment.

 

Phil, any job you will hit peak earning, as players like Bobby Hassell have on our level of business. It's not something a young player would dispute at BFC. If a player performs well they will be rewarded, usually by moving to a wealthier club. That's football.

 

Luke Steele hit peak earning before he came to us. He was on 8k at West Brom so will have had to take a pay cut to join us. He'll be taking another pay cut again to stay with us. I don't think you can really compare the football business with ordinary jobs.

I agree that the younger players won't mind the fact that he's on higher wages but we have some senior players in the squad who offer just as much as Steele but could be on significantly less than him. Perkins will not be on a lot given that he signed from Colchester, but not only is he older than Steele, he's also had a better season. Understandably, he will think that he should be on the same wages.

This is where I agree with Hemsworth. I think it's fair that Steele should have to take a wage cut if he wants to stay because we cannot afford to be giving out similar lucrative deals to all our top, senior players when we cannot afford it. I believe Perkins has as much right to demand the sort of package Steele is on and if we can't provide him with that then we have little chance of getting him to sign a new contract next summer.

We have no idea of knowing how much Steele is on so I don't think we can argue that the club isn't handling this well, we'll just have to trust them.