Ndidi signs new six year deal with LC
Moderators: Moderator Team, phpBB2 - Administrators
- cic old boy
- Flying Eagle
- Posts: 64226
- Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 7:59 pm
Re: Ndidi signs new six year deal with LC
You have a problem with simple English comprehension. Ndidi can earn £100,000 a week on a year’s contract or 3 year contract. Where did I suggest otherwise? It is clear that your so-called problem with 6 years is based on ignorance. You talked about relegation and that was ridiculous b/c if Leicester got relegated, the majority of their players would be shipped out b/c the club would be unable to sustain the wage bill on reduced income.1naija wrote:
You pass a lot of gibberish as fact. Are you suggesting Ndidi would not have been eligible for the supposedly minimum £100,000 per week if he signed a 3 years contract as opposed to a 6 year contract? My problem is with the length of the contract and not that he stayed with Leicester.
The issue here is you are making same assumption that people who think is a bad idea to sign such a long term contract made, yet you think your position is superior. You have not seen the contract so everything you are saying is mere assumption. There have been several Nigerian players whose careers were ruined because they signed these long term slave contracts and later discovered they were stuck. If all long term contracts were so great why didn't theirs work out?
I maintain that unless he has an escape clause in the contract, it's not necessarily a good idea. Your argument suggests it's a good idea even if he has no exit clause in it because he would be making £100,000 per week. That's silly and taken from a "hungry man" position!
A 6 year deal is favourable for both sides. If Ndidi gets a long-term injury or drop in form, he is still on megabucks for 6 years. If he continues to improve, his pay will be uprated. If he attracts the big clubs, the transfer fee would be huge, and he will get even more money.
I don’t need to see the contract b/c some things are standardised in the game in England – something you are not aware of. You can’t compare Nigerian players stuck with slave contracts in backwater leagues with this situation. Apart from the fact that such contracts are not with clubs in major leagues paying top dollar, they are usually signed when a player first moves to Europe. None of which applies here.
You keep talking about “exit clause” b/c you don’t understand the game. All this contract means is that Ndidi is unlikely to leave Leicester for a club of similar stature – b/c they won’t pay him more and they won’t be able to afford the transfer fee. If a new coach that doesn’t want Ndidi comes in, they can sell him, regardless of the length of the contract. I suspect the club would have covered this by including a mid-term review stage in the contract, where the contract continues if both parties are satisfied. If they get relegated, they have to sell him. If a big club comes along with a huge transfer fee and bigger pay, he will go.
This contract just improves Leicester’s negotiating position. In its 4th year, they may choose to sell him b/4 he goes into his 5th year b/c the transfer fee would start getting lower as he approaches the last year of the contract, when he can leave for free. All this while, the boy is guaranteed megabucks that would continue rising for 6 years regardless of all the vagaries that come with the game. So what again is your problem? I think it is ignorance!
http://www.naijiant.com/
Re: Ndidi signs new six year deal with LC
cic old boy wrote:You have a problem with simple English comprehension. Ndidi can earn £100,000 a week on a year’s contract or 3 year contract. Where did I suggest otherwise? !1naija wrote:
You pass a lot of gibberish as fact. Are you suggesting Ndidi would not have been eligible for the supposedly minimum £100,000 per week if he signed a 3 years contract as opposed to a 6 year contract? My problem is with the length of the contract and not that he stayed with Leicester.
The issue here is you are making same assumption that people who think is a bad idea to sign such a long term contract made, yet you think your position is superior. You have not seen the contract so everything you are saying is mere assumption. There have been several Nigerian players whose careers were ruined because they signed these long term slave contracts and later discovered they were stuck. If all long term contracts were so great why didn't theirs work out?
I maintain that unless he has an escape clause in the contract, it's not necessarily a good idea. Your argument suggests it's a good idea even if he has no exit clause in it because he would be making £100,000 per week. That's silly and taken from a "hungry man" position!
As I have said many times, it's clear you don't understand what you write most of the times.cic old boy wrote:
To tie Ndidi down to a long term deal, means he is now earning the going rate for a first teamer in the EPL outside the big clubs - that's at least £100,000 a week basic.....
The Lord is my Shepherd. I shall not be in want.
- cic old boy
- Flying Eagle
- Posts: 64226
- Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 7:59 pm
Re: Ndidi signs new six year deal with LC
More comprehension deficit. That's one thing the long-term deal means. It means more - which I explain in the next sentence! It doesn't mean that a short term deal doesn't mean more money (esp if it improves on a previous deal). A long term deal means money AND......1naija wrote:As I have said many times, it's clear you don't understand what you write most of the times.cic old boy wrote:
To tie Ndidi down to a long term deal, means he is now earning the going rate for a first teamer in the EPL outside the big clubs - that's at least £100,000 a week basic.....
http://www.naijiant.com/
Re: Ndidi signs new six year deal with LC
But you just said you did not suggest that. Now, it's one of the things you suggested. Which is it? If You are confused by your own statements, imagine what others go through.cic old boy wrote:More comprehension deficit. That's one thing the long-term deal means. It means more - which I explain in the next sentence! It doesn't mean that a short term deal doesn't mean more money (esp if it improves on a previous deal). A long term deal means money AND......1naija wrote:As I have said many times, it's clear you don't understand what you write most of the times.cic old boy wrote:
To tie Ndidi down to a long term deal, means he is now earning the going rate for a first teamer in the EPL outside the big clubs - that's at least £100,000 a week basic.....
The Lord is my Shepherd. I shall not be in want.
- cic old boy
- Flying Eagle
- Posts: 64226
- Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2003 7:59 pm
Re: Ndidi signs new six year deal with LC
I suggested a long term deal means more money (and more). I didn't suggest only a long term deal means more money! Damn!!!1naija wrote:
But you just said you did not suggest that. Now, it's one of the things you suggested. Which is it? If You are confused by your own statements, imagine what others go through.
http://www.naijiant.com/
Re: Ndidi signs new six year deal with LC
Give it up already bro...1naija wrote:But you just said you did not suggest that. Now, it's one of the things you suggested. Which is it? If You are confused by your own statements, imagine what others go through.cic old boy wrote:More comprehension deficit. That's one thing the long-term deal means. It means more - which I explain in the next sentence! It doesn't mean that a short term deal doesn't mean more money (esp if it improves on a previous deal). A long term deal means money AND......1naija wrote:As I have said many times, it's clear you don't understand what you write most of the times.cic old boy wrote:
To tie Ndidi down to a long term deal, means he is now earning the going rate for a first teamer in the EPL outside the big clubs - that's at least £100,000 a week basic.....
CIC has broken it down and you are now just clutching at straws... why cant people just accept when they are wrong?
The contract as CIC says is ok for all parties. What would you have had him do?
LC don't pay the highest wages in the EPL so for them to agree to pay Ndidi 100k a week they would want to cover themselves by giving a long contract so that if any big club comes along they will be able to ask for a huge fee.
YNWA
Re: Ndidi signs new six year deal with LC
Where did they agree to pay him $100,000 weekly? What i said was that a 6 year contract is not necessary a good deal for Ndidi unless it contains an exit clause. I take you think it's a great deal for Ndidi, a player that has shown to be among the best at his position in the league to be tied down by LC for such long period without any exit clause.heavyd wrote:Give it up already bro...1naija wrote:But you just said you did not suggest that. Now, it's one of the things you suggested. Which is it? If You are confused by your own statements, imagine what others go through.cic old boy wrote:More comprehension deficit. That's one thing the long-term deal means. It means more - which I explain in the next sentence! It doesn't mean that a short term deal doesn't mean more money (esp if it improves on a previous deal). A long term deal means money AND......1naija wrote:As I have said many times, it's clear you don't understand what you write most of the times.cic old boy wrote:
To tie Ndidi down to a long term deal, means he is now earning the going rate for a first teamer in the EPL outside the big clubs - that's at least £100,000 a week basic.....
CIC has broken it down and you are now just clutching at straws... why cant people just accept when they are wrong?
The contract as CIC says is ok for all parties. What would you have had him do?
LC don't pay the highest wages in the EPL so for them to agree to pay Ndidi 100k a week they would want to cover themselves by giving a long contract so that if any big club comes along they will be able to ask for a huge fee.
The Lord is my Shepherd. I shall not be in want.
Re: Ndidi signs new six year deal with LC
Ndidi is happy and had no qualms inking the deal. It's a win/win for both parties. If Ndidi's stock keeps rising and a big money offer is tabled, LC will simply cash in + Ndidi gets to earn more cheddar. If that doesn't happen, or he gets injured, then he has the security of a long term contact to fall back on.
Ndidi is literate enough to know what he is signing and the club know how valuable he is to them (the OPTA stats are there for all to see), losing Mahrez, there is no way they would put bread crumbs on the table.
Ndidi is literate enough to know what he is signing and the club know how valuable he is to them (the OPTA stats are there for all to see), losing Mahrez, there is no way they would put bread crumbs on the table.