Raheem Sterling

[Fulham Tup North]

Raheem Sterling like Willian is being written off.... Willian turned up with a point to prove...and boy (in his first season) did he prove it....as calculated gamble's go - this could be a good one

Silva does seem to have a knack of bringing the best out of players who seem to be either past their best or seriously under performing... a Sterling of 6 years ago would be an amazing asset... IMHO...
COYW

[bencher]

Let's not forget players like Berbatov, Murphy, Duff, who were also supposedly past it but joined us and were rejuvenated.

However, my main concern with Sterling, aside from whether he has lost his burst of pace, is the position he would be played in. He found success playing very high up the pitch, in teams that dominated possession in the opponent's half, and most of his goals were scored within 12 yards of the goal. When I watched him play for Arsenal, he was playing quite a bit deeper, almost as an orthodox right sided midfielder, and he didn't have the quality of Saka to beat his fullback and create openings. At Fulham, he wouldn't have the luxury of playing so high up the pitch, unless we change our team shape a little bit. On the other hand, maybe his penalty box nous is just the thing we need for all the times we are in a decent crossing position with only 1 player in the box.

[onecupsoon]

Prefer someone above 5'7' for that role....

[FFC1987]

Chelsea's preference sounds like a permanent deal but willing to cut the fee down to £20m....then it's just between clubs and Sterling to agree wages. If that's true, that won't work for us anyway.

I'd be surprised if it works for any clubs to be honest. Even if he takes a 50% reduction, that's still 175k a week....i can see him sitting on wages despite all the 'motivated' rumours.

[Fulham Tup North]

Chelsea's preference sounds like a permanent deal but willing to cut the fee down to £20m....then it's just between clubs and Sterling to agree wages. If that's true, that won't work for us anyway.

I'd be surprised if it works for any clubs to be honest. Even if he takes a 50% reduction, that's still 175k a week....i can see him sitting on wages despite all the 'motivated' rumours.

It's all about the numbers... if Chelsea just want him off their books and let him walk away (big ask I know as they spent £47m on him), and we agree to pay him 50% wages, for two years he would end up costing us about £18m... the question then is will Fulham get £18m worth of return from him over those two years?...
Every final table position in the EPL is worth about £1.5m... so we would need to finish 5 or 6 places higher than we did last season... twice... although that doesn't account for European Money received from years 2 and 3 ... so one could argue that finishing in a European spot means Sterling becomes cost neutral 
Obviously an argument could be made in the complete opposite direction too 🙄
COYW

[FFC1987]

Chelsea's preference sounds like a permanent deal but willing to cut the fee down to £20m....then it's just between clubs and Sterling to agree wages. If that's true, that won't work for us anyway.

I'd be surprised if it works for any clubs to be honest. Even if he takes a 50% reduction, that's still 175k a week....i can see him sitting on wages despite all the 'motivated' rumours.

It's all about the numbers... if Chelsea just want him off their books and let him walk away (big ask I know as they spent £47m on him), and we agree to pay him 50% wages, for two years he would end up costing us about £18m... the question then is will Fulham get £18m worth of return from him over those two years?...
Every final table position in the EPL is worth about £1.5m... so we would need to finish 5 or 6 places higher than we did last season... twice... although that doesn't account for European Money received from years 2 and 3 ... so one could argue that finishing in a European spot means Sterling becomes cost neutral 
Obviously an argument could be made in the complete opposite direction too 🙄
COYW

175k breaks our wage ceiling, and opens up the can of worms for all players requesting that sort of money...... I appreciate what your saying, but that's only going to lead to headaches down the line for both existing contract renewals and signing new players.

[Coastwalker]

How does everyone seem to know that he is on £350,000 a week at Chelsea.?
Sky,Talkpoo,Papers.

[Fulham Tup North]

How does everyone seem to know that he is on £350,000 a week at Chelsea.?
Sky,Talkpoo,Papers.

I read it on HERE!!..   

[FFC1987]

How does everyone seem to know that he is on £350,000 a week at Chelsea.?
Sky,Talkpoo,Papers.

I read it on HERE!!..   

That's a slight on my part....looking at wider sources, its slightly lower at £325k.

[Coastwalker]

How does everyone seem to know that he is on £350,000 a week at Chelsea.?
Sky,Talkpoo,Papers.

I read it on HERE!!..   

That's a slight on my part....looking at wider sources, its slightly lower at £325k.

Why would players disclose what they earn to the public.
If we're really interested I shouldn't think he is on anywhere near that amount.

[FFC1987]

How does everyone seem to know that he is on £350,000 a week at Chelsea.?
Sky,Talkpoo,Papers.

I read it on HERE!!..   

That's a slight on my part....looking at wider sources, its slightly lower at £325k.

Why would players disclose what they earn to the public.
If we're really interested I shouldn't think he is on anywhere near that amount.

Whilst I agree, it's fairly routine this gets leaked or put on to sites that archive it. Varied accuracy, but I think the details after the Arsenal detail came to light to appease Arsenal fans (they were paying a portion amounting to reportedly 162.5k a week of his 325k, Chelsea footing the rest, things all became quite public.

If we're looking at him, its clear we won't be fishing anywhere near those sums though. Unless the conversation is, 'Are you interested in playing for Fulham? Yes. How does reducing your salary sound to 100k a week or less? Dreadful, no thanks...'....Its why I'm dubious some ITK's seem to think being 'motivated' means a deal can be struck when there's eye watering sums of wages being left off Sterling's table if the deal is permanent. Something doesn't stack up to me.

[Coastwalker]

How does everyone seem to know that he is on £350,000 a week at Chelsea.?
Sky,Talkpoo,Papers.

I read it on HERE!!..   

That's a slight on my part....looking at wider sources, its slightly lower at £325k.

Why would players disclose what they earn to the public.
If we're really interested I shouldn't think he is on anywhere near that amount.

Whilst I agree, it's fairly routine this gets leaked or put on to sites that archive it. Varied accuracy, but I think the details after the Arsenal detail came to light to appease Arsenal fans (they were paying a portion amounting to reportedly 162.5k a week of his 325k, Chelsea footing the rest, things all became quite public.

If we're looking at him, its clear we won't be fishing anywhere near those sums though. Unless the conversation is, 'Are you interested in playing for Fulham? Yes. How does reducing your salary sound to 100k a week or less? Dreadful, no thanks...'....Its why I'm dubious some ITK's seem to think being 'motivated' means a deal can be struck when there's eye watering sums of wages being left off Sterling's table if the deal is permanent. Something doesn't stack up to me.

I think it was Mo Salah,when he signed new contract,the numbers were  way over the top to what he was actually earning.Something like 120,000 less than what was quoted.

[bill taylors apprentice]

Sterling at any price just doesn't do it for me.

[Woolly Mammoth]

I'm not exactly thrilled about this as I thought his legs were gone whenever I watched him. But if Silva wants and can work with him so then so be it.

I don't want him with us he's already a bit of a has been but marco seems to go for older experienced players but I still don't want him . Prolific cheat.

If true I trust Marcos judgement more than anyone on here.

Marco's judgement is probably Raheem has a couple of good seasons left in him, after which Marco will move elsewhere and Raheem will be rubbish. Macro has a massive conflict of interest, he is mostly interested in signings immediate impact and rather than long-term value.

But it is about making an immediate impact if we want to not only stay in the Premier League but advance and win a Cup or two on the way. Take one season at a time.
Of course I want to see our quality academy players retained and given an opportunity to have a decent run.
Due to money rearing its ugly head in football since the Premier League commenced, making players millionaires overnight.
The days of planning longer term are diminishing due  to all the uncertainty as the gravy train continues to spread its tentacles.
Managers and players want to win silverware and have something to show for their labour, and the need to survive short term is due to so many club owners not being football supporters and football people, and I am sure a huge percentage of them would not find the club they own if they did not have access to a Sat Nav.
So we are not in a position to turn our nose up at players like Sterling, assuming he would be interested in Fulham in the first place, and Silva like all football followers  knows that results count above everything else.
Let us not kid ourselves.
It is a ruthless business where players via there agents are in a strong position these days to orchestrate clubs to march to the beat of their drum, and you add the lack of genuine interest by far away owners and D of F  to what actually happens on the field of play, and the difficulty managers have managing a club 24/7, because that's what managers do, it takes up their whole life day in and day out.
Every minute of the day chewing over the fat, making sure every single player is happy and content to how the team is run, and has to keep the players not starting happy also.
Because once he loses the dressing room he is a dead man walking.
Some of the club owners these days wouldn't know the difference between a football and a snowball.
But they will sack a manager without a second thought to make him a scapegoat for their own shortcomings and ignorance of football and what makes the loyal supporter continue to follow his beloved club in all weathers no matter what the results.
So for me if Marco Silva wishes to sign Sterling, then he has my blessing.

That's an easy one...a snowball is an ice cream

Thank you, and there's me thinking a snowball is a cocktail containing advocaat and carbonated lemonade in approximately equal parts. It may have other ingredients, to taste. It typically contains a squeeze of fresh lime juice, which is shaken with the advocaat before pouring into a glass and topping up with lemonade.

[Lordedmundo]

How does everyone seem to know that he is on £350,000 a week at Chelsea.?
Sky,Talkpoo,Papers.

I read it on HERE!!..   

That's a slight on my part....looking at wider sources, its slightly lower at £325k.

Why would players disclose what they earn to the public.
If we're really interested I shouldn't think he is on anywhere near that amount.

Whilst I agree, it's fairly routine this gets leaked or put on to sites that archive it. Varied accuracy, but I think the details after the Arsenal detail came to light to appease Arsenal fans (they were paying a portion amounting to reportedly 162.5k a week of his 325k, Chelsea footing the rest, things all became quite public.

If we're looking at him, its clear we won't be fishing anywhere near those sums though. Unless the conversation is, 'Are you interested in playing for Fulham? Yes. How does reducing your salary sound to 100k a week or less? Dreadful, no thanks...'....Its why I'm dubious some ITK's seem to think being 'motivated' means a deal can be struck when there's eye watering sums of wages being left off Sterling's table if the deal is permanent. Something doesn't stack up to me.

I think it was Mo Salah,when he signed new contract,the numbers were  way over the top to what he was actually earning.Something like 120,000 less than what was quoted.

Various sources across the internet suggest he is earning between £300-£350k per week. Who knows is if it is accurate or not.  Again, various sources suggest Arsenal were only paying 30% of that when he was on loan (which amounts to around £100k per week) and with zero loan fee.  I don't see any reason why Fulham should go beyond that for a player who contributed very little on his last loan. In fact - we should offer to pay less if we are interested! Personally, I would prefer Adama to stay and sign Nelson on loan, with the attacking budget spent on a 3rd choice striker to challenge for a starting stop and have the versatility to play on the wing.

[Neutral Zone Ultra]

I'm not exactly thrilled about this as I thought his legs were gone whenever I watched him. But if Silva wants and can work with him so then so be it.

I don't want him with us he's already a bit of a has been but marco seems to go for older experienced players but I still don't want him . Prolific cheat.

If true I trust Marcos judgement more than anyone on here.

Marco's judgement is probably Raheem has a couple of good seasons left in him, after which Marco will move elsewhere and Raheem will be rubbish. Macro has a massive conflict of interest, he is mostly interested in signings immediate impact and rather than long-term value.

Is it a massive conflict of interest for the club to sign people who they believe can make us finish higher in the table right now and possibly get us over line into europe?

Considering it sounds like they will sign Nelson as our 25yr old (who could have plenty resale value if he has a great couple seasons) + Raheem possibly signing on a free (bar considerable wages)...cos in that instance, they could well see Raheem as a squad element that could help us take the step up that allows us to qualify for europe and in turn....attract good young players, like - Fofana, who reportedly doesn't want to go to Everton (and probably us) because he likely wants a club in Europe.

Making moves that the club and manager feel can help us finish higher in the table *right now*, is not a conflict of interest, it's in all our interests. It is an outcome that in itself would allow the club to make more money and attract better talent. With NO transfer fee for Raheem - if he managed 2 years of good service and it helped take us up a level, it's good thing for everyone involved.

Totally agree, I remember people judging Willian on what happened at Arsenal, and he didn't turn out too bad.

He played a massive part in keeping us in the league and finishing top 10 and taking the club up a level.
Now we're trying to take that next step with a settled and better squad all round from that.

This theory might carry more weight if we weren't also singing another 25 year old winger at the same time. We've had zero FFP issues to date, and managed 2 club record sales in recent years. If this weren't the case I'd perhaps be more concerned with our approach too.

I get the sentiment of comparing Willian and Sterling, but its not one I think is apples and apples. Willian didn't look broken to me at Arsenal. Struggling yes, but I think you could still see he was working hard and showed glimpses of class. Sterling just looked cooked to me. Legs gone. Mind working, but legs not willing. Yards of pace gone. What made Sterling excellent, was his reading of the game along with his pace to anticipate pockets of space that bagged him a lot of goals. If his legs aren't up to it anymore, he'll be a passenger.

If he comes, I'd wager the fitness coaches and Silva et all have seen a lot more than me so I trust the process. I'm personally just saying, on the eye, his legs looked gone. 

This is the issue for me - Willian was able to leverage his technical ability, which is why he was able to play at the top level until he was 37 (unlike most wingers). Sterling, however, doesn't have this to the same extent and has you highlight, relied on his agility and reading of the game to exploit holes in defences, which now seems to be gone.

[Neutral Zone Ultra]

Also key issue for me is I'm just really a bit sick of our signings/targets being heavily weighted towards Arsenal and Chelsea rejects in recent years (in the case of Sterling, he's both). I think our scouts need to be doing a bit more than that to earn their wage.

[alfie]

Also key issue for me is I'm just really a bit sick of our signings/targets being heavily weighted towards Arsenal and Chelsea rejects in recent years (in the case of Sterling, he's both). I think our scouts need to be doing a bit more than that to earn their wage.

Do you really think it was the scouts that suggested these players, I think you may find it was Marco that wants them.

[Neutral Zone Ultra]

Also key issue for me is I'm just really a bit sick of our signings/targets being heavily weighted towards Arsenal and Chelsea rejects in recent years (in the case of Sterling, he's both). I think our scouts need to be doing a bit more than that to earn their wage.

Do you really think it was the scouts that suggested these players, I think you may find it was Marco that wants them.

Perhaps, but the scouts should at least be putting alternatives forward. Maybe they are who knows, but the lack of chat in the press is telling.

[alfie]

Also key issue for me is I'm just really a bit sick of our signings/targets being heavily weighted towards Arsenal and Chelsea rejects in recent years (in the case of Sterling, he's both). I think our scouts need to be doing a bit more than that to earn their wage.

Do you really think it was the scouts that suggested these players, I think you may find it was Marco that wants them.

Perhaps, but the scouts should at least be putting alternatives forward. Maybe they are who knows, but the lack of chat in the press is telling.

I would imagine the scouts are putting players to the recruiters, it's up to them if they wish to look at them. If the club show an interest then that's when the press pick it up.