Charoo 11:20 Thu Jan 6
Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
|
As much as Mickey has done great for us - A 3.5 year contract at 31 years old on 100k per week seems madness from the club.
Good for Antonio it’s a great deal that sets him up for a nice retirement but that length of contract for any player of that age seems a strange business decision.
|
|
|
Replies - In Chronological Order ( Show Newest Messages First)
On The Ball
11:24 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
For owners as tight as ours, they do make some odd contract decisions at times. The Reid one instantly springs to mind.
That's EASILY Antionio's current value to us, but in three years.... who knows. There's half a chance that won't be a huge wage by then.
|
Johnson
11:24 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
Absolutely fucking ridiculous decision for a player who looks knackered after 65 minutes if he’s not injured before.
The cunts do not learn.
And neither do the fans, this will clearly be this year’s lob a load of money at an existing player (see Masuaku previously) instead of actually buying a proper striker.
If they ever attempt to stitch Rice up over salary demands via their friends in the press, remember this sort of bullshit.
|
Vexed
11:24 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
Well negotiated by Antonio's agent. Not sure if it's a good deal for the club but they've put themselves in this position by not buying any competition for him.
|
LJC
11:31 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
https://westhamfans.org/content/real-reason-antonios-new-deal
It is the transfer window and all the media hacks know it is open season to tell whoppers and get away with it, one of the least reliable sources of 'genuine news' is that bastion of (sic) honesty, the Sun! So their article relating to Michail Antonio's contract extension doesn't let the truth get in the way of a good story, this is their usual modus operandi.
The 'Antonio handed new three and a half year deal' headline of their article instantly kicks off with an inaccuracy and continues in the same vein. For a start Antonio has been handed a TWO year extension to his EXISTING deal, which has another 18 months to run, his wages have gone up in accordance to the deal he ALREADY had in place.
In other words Antonio was due an increase that kicked in towards the end of his contract in order to keep him at the club, any contract extension that was going to be offered was to be based on Mikey's level of fitness, which has improved significantly this season due to a couple of lifestyle and fitness regime changes.
Michail Antonio is 31 years old and will be 34 years old by the time his new contract extension expires, Leicester City's Jamie Vardy is 35 years old in five days time as a point of reference, he signed a 4 year / £29,120,000 contract with the Foxes, including an annual average salary of £7,280,000 which equates to around £140,000 per week.
Strikers have ALWAYS attracted higher wages and premiums than other positions, an extra TWO year extension might seem generous, some will say foolhardy given Hammers experience with Winston Reid who was handed a SIX year deal that had to be paid off in the end, but it is market value for a top striker, even an old one!
We heard that Antonio's agent had been approached by 'another London club' who were possibly about to sell their main striker a few months ago with regards to Mikey's availability for a transfer, they were prepared to pay a big fee and substantial wages in the region of £130,000 per week in order to get the Jamaica International on board.
Ironically it was big Mikey's insistence on playing for the country of his parents birth that helped scupper the deal, no one really wants one of their star players jetting off round the World to play in games that are almost pointless due to the paucity of quality players available to the reggae boyz.
So to sum things up, Hammers have just protected their investment for the next couple of years, it is true that Hammers have a dreadful track record when it comes to giving injury prone players long contracts, but the club had little choice other than to stump up. Perhaps this is the residual price for not having secured an additional striker after Haller had been sold? -Ed
|
Hermit Road
11:32 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
Don’t begrudge him a penny of it but I don’t expect his body to be holding up much in two years time. He’s had a lot of injuries and is very physical. A potent combination for an ageing player
|
Hermit Road
11:35 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
“ So to sum things up, Hammers have just protected their investment for the next couple of years, it is true that Hammers have a dreadful track record when it comes to giving injury prone players long contracts, but the club had little choice other than to stump up”
A 12 yr old must have written that gibberish. Given the article started by saying his current deal has 18 months to run, I’d say the club had a choice to…..wait 18 months and see what state a 33 yr old Antonio was in.
|
1964
11:37 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
100k. per WEEK. Crazy, not just Antonio but any footballer.
Jimmy Hill got players 100 quid a week.
|
Dr Matt
11:39 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
Horrendous decision.
Brain dead is the only way to describe it.
|
AKA ERNIE
11:39 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
If it helps hes not on 100k a week
Im surprised its been extended now but it was in place its not a new deal.
|
ak37
11:40 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
If he’s earning more than Declan Rice then this is madness.
|
Dr Matt
11:42 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
Someone needs to stop this before it happens!
|
LJC
11:49 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
Someone needs to stop this before it happens?!?!? Hahahahahaha!
|
kylay
11:50 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
I honestly think this is good business for both sides, IF we get in a striker soon. We are already managing his minutes, so it provides immediate opportunity for minutes and competition. He's a proven goal-scorer that would allow time for a newcomer to develop and assimilate. In 2 years, Antonio could become a very lethal option off the bench when chasing a game. It may stretch out his shelf-life some too.
Of course, there's also the possibility his body goes to shit and we're buying out another contract.
|
Texas Iron
11:53 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
Obviously negotiated by Sullivan’s 2 young sons…
Ridiculous for an old injury prone Antonio…
😨😨😨😨
|
Texas Iron
11:53 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
Obviously negotiated by Sullivan’s 2 young sons…
Ridiculous for an old injury prone Antonio…
😨😨😨😨
|
Lee Trundle
11:54 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
Yeah, I couldn't care less if we do get a decent striker to compete with him that we've needed for so fucking long.
|
AKA ERNIE
11:56 Thu Jan 6
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
Fuck knows why youre moaning weve just signed our only striker up for a couple of more yrs.
Rice has already been offered a new deal worth more than 100k a week and rejected it
Even if ant was on 100k which hes not its still less than some of our squad
|
BBondsBootlaces
12:06 Fri Jan 7
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
was it negotiated by Sullivans 2 young sons?
|
OneAll
12:11 Fri Jan 7
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
Are all time premier league top scorer getting a contract that matches his ability , he deserves it so fuck knows why people are against it
|
OneAll
12:11 Fri Jan 7
Re: Antonio signs 3.5 year contract on 100k pw
|
Our*
|
| 
