7 - Ferran Torres

J

JamDav1982

Senior Member
delancey said:
Of course there would have been a hit. A 50,000,000 euro hit per annum. It?s not about whether we could have extended Messi?s contract; it?s about it being blatantly irresponsible to do so. Add the salary cap into the equation with an additional 50,000,000 salary expenditure. We can hardly manage as it stands right now.
Click to expand...

No it would not be a hit when consider what he would bring this season in particular.

Again... you make out having Messi brings no additional income.

Bums on seats, sponsorship deals, CL money, prize money in league where last season there was 40m Euros difference in finishing second or third for example, deduct whatever anyone in squad in place of him is on.

Messi in this Barca team in this league with way Atletico are performing could easily be in second and close to Real in title race.

More than enough ways to clear the 50m with Messi profile and improved performances.

Agree to disagree and he was not let go due to a financial decision taken by club anyway. Other than CVC being an option.

The club wanted to extend him and saw it as a positive for finances.

Would it have been best thing for long term and rebuilding of playing squad is another question but financially 50m a season made sense in short term.
 
Last edited:
delancey

delancey

Senior Member
JamDav1982 said:
No it would not be a hit when consider what he would bring this season in particular.

Again... you make out having Messi brings no additional income.

Bums on seats, sponsorship deals, CL money, prize money in league where last season there was 40m Euros difference in finishing second or third for example, deduct whatever anyone in squad in place of him is on.

Messi in this Barca team in this league with way Atletico are performing could easily be in second and close to Real in title race.

More than enough ways to clear the 50m with Messi profile and improved performances.

Agree to disagree and he was not let go due to a financial decision taken by club anyway. Other than CVC being an option.

The club wanted to extend him and saw it as a positive for finances.

Would it have been best thing for long term and rebuilding of playing squad is another question but financially 50m a season made sense in short term.
Click to expand...
You are making a decision to extend a 50,000,000 euro player based on hypotheticals which may or may not occur. We finished 3rd last year with Messi! What makes you think that we would have finished 2nd with him this year? There is no guarantee that we would have qualified for the Champion?s League either with Messi. As far as sponsorship deals are concerned, I?m sure we?ll be satisfied with the crypto money and naming rights for the stadium coming our way to support the next generation under Laporta.

In addition, had we added Messi?s 50,000,000 to the wage bill, how would that have affected our ability to acquire players in the future under financial fair play?

Laporta made the right decision.
 
J

JamDav1982

Senior Member
delancey said:
You are making a decision to extend a 50,000,000 euro player based on hypotheticals which may or may not occur. We finished 3rd last year with Messi! What makes you think that we would have finished 2nd with him this year? There is no guarantee that we would have qualified for the Champion?s League either with Messi. As far as sponsorship deals are concerned, I?m sure we?ll be satisfied with the crypto money and naming rights for the stadium coming our way to support the next generation under Laporta.

In addition, had we added Messi?s 50,000,000 to the wage bill, how would that have affected our ability to acquire players in the future under financial fair play?

Laporta made the right decision.
Click to expand...

Every signing and contract ever is hypothetical but plenty legitimate and fairly easily achievable ways to cover the 50m and more.

Messi was not let go as club believe the 50m was too much. It was opposite they wanted to keep him on that.

Laportas decision was to keep him and pay him 50m a season as made sense finacially. So you are wrong on that.

The league wouldnt approve it and Barca decided CVC deal too much of a long term impact.
 
Last edited:
delancey

delancey

Senior Member
JamDav1982 said:
Every signing and contract ever is hypothetical but plenty legitimate and fairly easily achievable ways to cover the 50m and more.

Messi was not let go as club believe the 50m was too much. It was opposite they wanted to keep him on that.

Laportas decision was to keep him and pay him 50m a season as made sense finacially. So you are wrong on that.

The league wouldnt approve it and Barca decided CVC deal too much of a long term impact.
Click to expand...
Regardless of all coulda woulda shoulda hypotheticals, there are two constants that you keep neglecting. 1. The salary cap. 2. 481m loss in 20/21 and forecasted loss of 112m euro in 21/22.

Giving out contracts worth 100s of millions to a single player in hopes that we?ll perform is fantasy football desire, especially during a pandemic.

Let?s agree to disagree mate. Haha
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Home of Barca Fans

Top