Current Player #10 Sam Baldock

I wonder if Baldock could be an insurance pay off? I agree Henry and Bodin will be tricky/expensive to offload.
I thought Bodin only had a one year extension last Summer?

Whatever, if we can afford it I’d pay them off.
 
And Murphy’s
My stance on Murphy is to start over and I think that would be a healthy attitude for all fans. I was making digs at him as much as anyone when Karl was here. We’re not blessed with options and if Manning believes there’s a good lad in there that’ll run for us then I believe him more than I did KR. Let’s see what he can get from him.

At the end of the day he’s very likely here next season as one of the clubs best paid players. On that basis alone, I understand why LM is giving it a chance. If he can strike up a relationship there and find some form in these remaining games, who knows, he could end up key to a promotion push next year.
 
Why would he though unless he gets paid off. He’s got a nice “Karl” contract that runs for next season as well so financially he’d be crazy to pack it in unless he’s financially rewarded.

Didn’t a red haired a**e trumpet try to pull a stunt on us where he retired and then tried to claim the full amount for the final year he was contracted to us? I can’t recall the outcome of that …

We will only be able to terminate their contracts by paying them out in full, or coming to an agreed settlement.

Do it. We’ve got loads of cash. Flip Henry off to Gillingham, Bodin will sign for Swindon and Baldock can retire.

No passengers. No crocks. No aging pros squeezing two year contracts out of this club any more.
 
Last edited:
Didn’t red haired a**e trumpet try to pull a stunt on us where he retired and then tried to claim the full amount for the final year he was contracted to us? I can’t recall the outcome of that …



Do it. We’ve got loads of cash. Flip Henry off to Gillingham, Bodin will sign for Swindon and Baldock can retire.

No passengers. No crocks. No aging pros squeezing two year contracts out of this club any more.
Thing is with a balanced squad having a couple of old pros about won't be a bad thing to play here and there , see out a few games .
Of course if you are playing them both as your wide , pacy wingers there is a problem!
 
No squad fillers. No passengers. No mercy.*

*(there's your next crowd surfer).
No passengers. No crocks. No aging pros squeezing two year contracts out of this club any more.

Yours is very good also, but may need the length of the South Stand to fit it all on a surfer (and I'm not sure Tim Williams and co will willingly hold it aloft from Block 12).
 
Still no word of any kind on Baldock from the club or in any media pieces.

No squad number.
Not trained.

Could we be stuck in negotiations around a payoff?
The Dub (BBC Podcast) picked up on this after the squad numbers were announced as something that was notable by its absence, but otherwise no word on any official channels (that I have seen/heard).
 
It’s pretty obvious he will never play again so I can’t see why he would take a pay off that’s less than his full contract? If we are going to pay him the full amount then I doubt we would rather do it as a lump sum than monthly?

The interesting bit is why we don’t seem to be going through the charade of pretending he is a player anymore, he is never mentioned as injured, never seems to train and has no squad number but is obviously still being paid as we have not heard about him leaving, either he is to injured for even very light training or he has been told to stay at home and we are just not going to bother pretending he will play this season, maybe Manning doesn’t want to waste his and our staffs time on a lost cause.
 
If he is still on the pay roll and will never kick a ball for us again, surely it would be beneficial to use his vast experience to coach the youth about the correct way of hopping on and off the physio treatment table?
 
Correct. He hasn’t / wont do a deal. The only thing left to decide is whether the club wants to pay him off in a lump sum or let it play out for the next year.

Cheers Karl.
If this is the case, if we either pay in full or let him play out his contract, dies this still contribute to our player salary outgoings? If so, probably worth keeping him on the books to play or should I say sit out his contract!
 
If this is the case, if we either pay in full or let him play out his contract, dies this still contribute to our player salary outgoings? If so, probably worth keeping him on the books to play or should I say sit out his contract!

Paying him off in one go or monthly equates to exactly the same thing and does come out of our playing budget either way.

I believe conversations are ongoing about Sam doing a different role around the club whilst studying, and if this was the case then it might be possible to attribute his wages to non-playing staff and it not be counted.

But either way, I'm not sure that it will make a huge difference to our plans and would have been included in our forecasts.
 
Paying him off in one go or monthly equates to exactly the same thing and does come out of our playing budget either way.

I believe conversations are ongoing about Sam doing a different role around the club whilst studying, and if this was the case then it might be possible to attribute his wages to non-playing staff and it not be counted.

But either way, I'm not sure that it will make a huge difference to our plans and would have been included in our forecasts.
But presumably, until that’s sorted, he occupies a good portion of the positional budget discussed yesterday? So, until that situation is resolved officially and he’s struck off the playing budget one way or another, it makes it near impossible to reallocate his wage to another striker?
 
But presumably, until that’s sorted, he occupies a good portion of the positional budget discussed yesterday? So, until that situation is resolved officially and he’s struck off the playing budget one way or another, it makes it near impossible to reallocate his wage to another striker?
There’s still room for a ‘forward’ as Tyler Smith hasn’t been replaced.

Seddon, Taylor and Jones left in January and were replaced by Fleming, Smith and Konate. There was no overlap as January was one in, one out, so we let go of three players this summer, not six. To claim that all six just left would be to double count.

Konate has been replaced with Rodrigues. Fleming and Smith haven’t been replaced, so that’s a left back and a forward that are still missing.

Of the others who departed, Bate has been replaced with McEachran and Joseph has been replaced with Harris.

Gorrin technically hasn’t left despite his previous contract ending - he’s merely been moved to a rolling monthly deal. Until that is no longer the case there’s nobody to replace.

Beadle is technically an additional body as Stevens was already out of the building at Vale before he went to Cambridge, so until Eastwood or McGinty goes then the squad is heavier as we’ve gone from two available keepers to three.

Findlay has been replaced with Thorniley.

Anderson has been replaced with Fin Stevens.

Baldock hasn’t been replaced because he hasn’t actually left.

A few youngsters had technically already left before this summer as they’d gone on loan before their deals ended (Spasov, Davis etc) but Manning might be able to make a case to sign a better and more advanced youngster, such as Woltman, in lieu of having a development side littered with garbage like Yoav Sade.

However, the development squad being scrapped means that Mfuni is now classed as a fully fledged first teamer regardless of the size of his pay packet, and the likes of O’Donkor, Golding and Johnson are no longer youth team players regardless of whether or not they had also been appearing for the first team, and are therefore full senior pros like Mfuni, which they technically weren’t before.

Welcome to Tim’s World. I hope you like Microsoft Excel and hiding under your desk.
 
But presumably, until that’s sorted, he occupies a good portion of the positional budget discussed yesterday? So, until that situation is resolved officially and he’s struck off the playing budget one way or another, it makes it near impossible to reallocate his wage to another striker?

I don't accept the premise of a "positional budget".

Do you honestly think that we'd turn down the chance to sign a quality striker because it would mean we're over a few quid in our "goal scorers" pot whilst saving £5k a week in our left back fund?
 
Back
Top Bottom