Mason Holgate and Conor Wilkinson

Mason Holgate - rejects the contract offered. Not enough money, presumably. No longer trains with the first team. Not in the squad for our first pre-season game.

Some people believe that's the right course of action. To put it bluntly, if he doesn't want to play for Barnsley then **** him. Others believe that rather than ostracising him, we should be treating him right in an attempt to convince him to stay and what we're doing just makes his departure inevitable.

Conor Wilkinson - Fee agreed with Bolton, contract offered, but he rejects it. Not enough money. Exactly the same as Holgate. But we go back and bring him in on loan, on a contract that we can't afford. He's straight in the team for our first pre-season game.

WTF happened to only signing players who want to play for Barnsley? This lad doesn't. He couldn't have made that any clearer. What he wants is a certain amount of money. That doesn't necessarily make him a bad person; we all have an idea of our own worth and how small a wage we're prepared to work for. Very few, if any, of us would swap jobs for a wage cut. But by signing him on loan after he has rejected our contract offer makes a mockery of everything the current regime have said about our recruitment policy.

I don't know the best way to handle Mason Holgate. Maybe what the club are doing is right and the best way forward. But to do that and then sign Wilkinson under the circumstances we have is rank hypocrisy. Even if the club believe we can woo Wilkinson while he's here and convince him to sign on reduced terms, then why aren't we adopting the same approach with one of our own? And that's before you highlight the flaw in such a plan - Wilkinson will either be **** and we'll not want him or we'll provide the shop window and some other club, who will match his wage demands, will come in and sign him from under our noses.

 

Not strictly true. Money wasn't the issue, it was the length of contract. He was on a four year contract with Bolton and he wanted the same security with us. We couldn't stretch to offering four years so it seems that the loan is a compromise to run down the contract he is on.

To be honest I would find it hard to knock a year of any security I had.

 

But looking at it from the clubs perspective rather than the player we have to build a team of players willing to commit to the plan and cause for this season. Holgate says he wants away, Wilkinson says he want to play. Personally i think this is simply how the game is going, i'm in the camp of the club committing to players that want to play. Remember Holgate has allegedly been offered a lucrative contract to stay while i wouldn't be surprised if Wilkinson has an option to sign here permenantly given the 'initial 5 month loan' comment. Seems to me that the contract and salary here plus more game time isn't what Holgate wants. I would cash in as much as we can and wish him well in his future aspirations.

 

Very different in my opinion.

Wilkinson has 4 years of security on a good wage. With the option of going out on loan if he won't break into the 1st team. Why realistically would he drop wages, and lower security? He probably has bills and mortgages to pay like rest of us. I wouldn't quit my job to move to another one with less security and less money!

Holgate, and this is speculation as from what I've seen the guy seems genuine and a decent lad, has the opportunity to earn more money, lots more. And so is unwilling to commit to a lower wage and longer contract when that may scupper his long term future.

Whilst I think they are both different situations, I dont blame either lad for what they're are doing. A 10 year career is very short. And certainly don't think they are some of the names being spouted around. To us it's a game, to them it's their livelihood.

 

I thought I had read Holgate had been a second half substitute yesterday. Which I thought was a positive move from Johnson. However, this post suggests he wasn't

 

Can't see how Holgate committing to a contract would scupper his future. Quite the opposite. If the club don't think any offer for him is acceptable then he will end playing a bit part in the team until his contract expires and by then other clubs will have moved on. Any contact he signs now would keep him in the shop window and as we know he could sign one tomorrow and be gone next week.

 

I went and I didn't see him at all.

 

Any idea who we would consider "the best young players in recent years" that holgate has been offered a contract similar to?

 

no he wasn,t there yesterday . who was the bloke with no number on his shirt

 

I'm with Jay on this one. Seems blatantly hypocritical. Select your team based on ability not whether or not you are squabbling with them or if you are taking the moral high ground make sure you apply the same rules to everybody.

 

I think both cases are entirely separate and should be treated so.. we don't know hardly any of the facts

 

John Stones.

 

But the circumstances are completely different.

Stones was offered (and signed) a contract after just 2 first team starts as a totally unproven player. Holgate has been offered a similar contract after proving himself a first team regular and young player of the year.

 

What if he would sign a contract but wanted something in it that was unacceptable to us...

People have been moaning for years about us being a pushover...

 

Holgate doesn't want to stay no matter what deal we offer as he can get quadruple and more in the Premier League
Wilkinson would sign if contract was long enough.

Totally different

 

They are. We were in the Championship and can probably offer more wages than we can now so it's difficult that we could offer him more than Stones.

We tried to offer him a new deal in less than a month after he made his debut in December.

 

When have the two players stated that?

 

You,ve just answered your own question, and you,re right. Don,t pussyfoot around these prima donnas, if they don,t want to play for us, or agents are turning their heads then **** em off and get as much money as you can. Always been the case, and Iv,e had some right heroes in my time, but the day when they don,t want to play for us, they can **** straight off.

 

I just want it confirmed now. And fingers crossed it allows LJ to recruit a handful of new laikers because we're going to need them if we intend on challenging for the top 6. Hourihane injured already, Evans did his hamstring, if we lost Winnall again or Nyatanga even, then what?

 

the whole loyalty wanting to play for Barnsley thing seems a crock of **** to me anyhoo. Yes we want committed players who give their all every time they play for us and its nice if they acknowledge the privilidged position they are in. At the same time if you asked any registered player currently available do you want to play for Barnsley earning 2/3 grand a week in front of 8/900 crowds or sign for a premuershit club and earn 10/20000 playing in front of 30000 plus how many do you think we would have.