Joe Hart incoming ?

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:45 pm

Must be a big fee for Tom Heaton.

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:47 pm

Thought we had a £37m budget

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:47 pm

mkmel wrote:No you haven't

I was asking if any other club have ever had 3 goalkeepers in their squad who have played for England at any time
And all 3 have

Not quite 80 games between them..... but only Tom and Nick have gained their caps as Burnley players.

UTC

GodIsADeeJay81 · Post by **GodIsADeeJay81** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:52 pm

CatonClaret wrote:No way we’re paying him 60k a week. Maybe because we’re apparently only paying City £4m he’s getting a sizeable signing on fee.

City will probably pay him some to leave and help cover his wages.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:56 pm

IanMcL wrote:Thought we had a £37m budget

Hi Ian, information from Companies House beta: (free to search and access all the info).
BURNLEY FC HOLDINGS LIMITED
Company number 08335231

Page 9 of Annual Report and Consolidated Financial Statements Year-ended 30-June-2017:

Staff costs (excluding exceptional promotion costs) 2017: £61,198; 2016 £27,100.
Exceptional promotion costs 2017: £nil; 2016 £13,184. (all figures, of course, in £000s).

UTC

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:00 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:City will probably pay him some to leave and help cover his wages.

If he's got a contract and City want to sell him they have the obligation to make up his wages - so long as he gets the best deal (from Burnley) that is available to him. (It may be different if there were competing offers and Hart could sign for a club offering a higher wage).

Really no different than a club sacking a manager....

piston broke · Post by **piston broke** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:04 pm

Touchline wrote:This appears to be happening.
So, Heaton or Pope must be leaving??
We can t have three fit England keepers come January.

One of them will be leaving in January

duncandisorderly · Post by **duncandisorderly** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:07 pm

He's taking a 50% wage cut - i.e 35k per week standard, 25k per week transfer fee (3.9m), city will probably pay him 30k per week too because they'll then save 30k per week. The only way this transfer makes sense is if it looks like Burnley have paid a fee - hence 35k p/w wage and £4m fee.

dsr · Post by **dsr** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:10 pm

Paul Waine wrote:If he's got a contract and City want to sell him they have the obligation to make up his wages - so long as he gets the best deal (from Burnley) that is available to him. (It may be different if there were competing offers and Hart could sign for a club offering a higher wage).

Really no different than a club sacking a manager....

Not quite. If he has a contract and City want to sell him, it's up to Hart whether or not he wants to leave. He can sit tight and carry on turning up for work and collecting his wage, or else he can agree to leave - and a large part of making him agree to leave may well be that City agree to pay the difference in the wage.

If City were telling him "you're out, goodbye, no question" it would be different - but that's virtually impossible to do with a player.

COBBLE · Post by **COBBLE** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:12 pm

Oh well. If Sean and Mike think spending a few quid makes it more likely to stay in the Premier league, then, I guess we should support it!??

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:16 pm

dsr wrote:Not quite. If he has a contract and City want to sell him, it's up to Hart whether or not he wants to leave. He can sit tight and carry on turning up for work and collecting his wage, or else he can agree to leave - and a large part of making him agree to leave may well be that City agree to pay the difference in the wage.

If City were telling him "you're out, goodbye, no question" it would be different - but that's virtually impossible to do with a player.

I think that's exactly what I meant to say, dsr.

aggi · Post by **aggi** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:40 pm

Paul Waine wrote:Hi Caton, how does that work? We don't want to pay a player £XX,000 per week, so we pay him less, but make up the difference with a big signing on fee? Clubs that do that "must be made of money." Why would Burnley push up our costs by paying out up front?

Yes, it happens when a player is "in demand" - put how many were competing for Hart's signature?

I suspect £60,000 per week isn't a bad shout for Burnley's "maximum wage."

Wages in the 2016/17 season £61 million. Let's take £10 off for all employees, including SD outside the 1st team squad.

For simplicity: lets assume 24 players in squad, and on average, the squad can be split into "entry level" "mid-level" and "star players" (I know it's not really that simple...

Let's set "stars" at £60,000 per week = £3 million (for simplicity) per season x 8 players - £24 million.

Mid-level: £40,000 per week = £2 million x 8 players = £16 million.

Entry level: £20,000 per week = £1 million x 8 = £8 million.

That gives us £48 million - then add in employer's national insurance @13.8%. We aren't too far away.

And, don't forget that £61 million wages was for 2016/17 - and wages have increased in 2017/18 season. My guess is we will learn of £80 million wages when the 2017/18 accounts are released in (late) March 2019.

I'm not saying my calculations are correct, but £60,000 per week for Joe Hart is easily within the framework for 2018/19.

I just hope there's enough in the kitty to get Ben Mee signed up for a few more seasons.

UTC

It will be interesting to see how the wages play out next year. We're potentially reaching the point where we may breach the premier league FFP rules (although I'm not sure if there are penalties).

CatonClaret · Post by **CatonClaret** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:44 pm

Paul Waine wrote:Hi Caton, how does that work? We don't want to pay a player £XX,000 per week, so we pay him less, but make up the difference with a big signing on fee? Clubs that do that "must be made of money." Why would Burnley push up our costs by paying out up front?

Yes, it happens when a player is "in demand" - put how many were competing for Hart's signature?

I suspect £60,000 per week isn't a bad shout for Burnley's "maximum wage."

Wages in the 2016/17 season £61 million. Let's take £10 off for all employees, including SD outside the 1st team squad.

For simplicity: lets assume 24 players in squad, and on average, the squad can be split into "entry level" "mid-level" and "star players" (I know it's not really that simple...

Let's set "stars" at £60,000 per week = £3 million (for simplicity) per season x 8 players - £24 million.

Mid-level: £40,000 per week = £2 million x 8 players = £16 million.

Entry level: £20,000 per week = £1 million x 8 = £8 million.

That gives us £48 million - then add in employer's national insurance @13.8%. We aren't too far away.

And, don't forget that £61 million wages was for 2016/17 - and wages have increased in 2017/18 season. My guess is we will learn of £80 million wages when the 2017/18 accounts are released in (late) March 2019.

I'm not saying my calculations are correct, but £60,000 per week for Joe Hart is easily within the framework for 2018/19.

I just hope there's enough in the kitty to get Ben Mee signed up for a few more seasons.

UTC

I was under the, quite possibly misguided, impression that our highest weekly wage was around the £45,000 mark. Not a ridiculous amount in the context of the PL but for us a pretty significant sum. I thought this was topped up for players on squad bonuses, performance related pay etc to get to the £61m figuire.

I could be completely wrong but my impression was when we signed Brady he had become our highest earner (at the £45,000) and all the recent contract extensions (Barnes, Tarky, Lowton, Wardy etc) were to bring them more in line with those wages. I also thought that was part of the reason we'd failed to get Mawson and a few others through the door this summer because their wage demands were too high and we didn't want to break our wage structure. I'm sure I've read somewhere that Clucas is on £50,000 a week at Swansea and that could "complicate" his potential move here. At the end of the day it is all completely based on mumblings, paper talk and FM so I really don't have the foggiest.

Your breakdown there also makes perfect sense and in terms of calucalations could well be pretty bob on! I suppose part of it is that I just find it mind boggling that we as a club can be giving Joe Hart a 3 year deal at £60,000 a week! What a bloody turnaround from 4 years ago even!

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:45 pm

Paul Waine wrote:Hi Ian, information from Companies House beta: (free to search and access all the info).
BURNLEY FC HOLDINGS LIMITED
Company number 08335231

Page 9 of Annual Report and Consolidated Financial Statements Year-ended 30-June-2017:
UTC

Thanks Paul.
In an interview about Aberdeen, j am sure he compared their wage of £3m + to ours and said £37m, they had also quoted the £60m+ figure. Perhaps bonuses are huge!

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:53 pm

Probably in a minority. But very very happy with this signing.

Forster would have been good. But hart on a permanent is much better.

He has always been a very good keeper. But with mistakes in him. Mainly since Guardiola destroyed his confidence. Hes been under constant scrutiny since.

Imagine we get him back in the England squad -which is highly likely given pope and heatons injury, forster being dropped and butland being in the championship.

Dyche and Mercer will sky rocket his confidence.

He has bags of experience. Is still a good age for a keeper and will have so much to prove.

Taking a pay cut too.

I hope Burnley fans back him from day one. Some of his performances for City and England were exceptional.

starting_11 · Post by **starting_11** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:56 pm

It's not his skill that worries me, I think he can re-find some form if not most of it.

It's his ego.

I think the club should make him live in the town as a condition of his contract to make him a bit more grounded

CatonClaret · Post by **CatonClaret** » Fri Aug 03, 2018 11:58 pm

cricketfieldclarets wrote:
He has bags of experience. Is still a good age for a keeper and will have so much to prove.

Taking a pay cut too.

I hope Burnley fans back him from day one. Some of his performances for City and England were exceptional.

Absolutely spot on. If Dyche has got him in the building he knows he has to earn his spurs and that he has the competition around him pushing him all the way. Could be the signing of the summer if it all falls into place.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:08 am

And when Heaton and Pope are fit we will sell one for 8 figures. One will probably end up back number one. And we will have a 75 cap England keeper competing with him.

If all three are fit and on form we probably have 50 to 60m worth of keepers all for a combined 6m.

Imploding Turtle · Post by **Imploding Turtle** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:11 am

There'll be some people who'll never accept him, no matter how well he performs.

mybloodisclaret · Post by **mybloodisclaret** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:12 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Probably in a minority. But very very happy with this signing.

Forster would have been good. But hart on a permanent is much better.

He has always been a very good keeper. But with mistakes in him. Mainly since Guardiola destroyed his confidence. Hes been under constant scrutiny since.

Imagine we get him back in the England squad -which is highly likely given pope and heatons injury, forster being dropped and butland being in the championship.

Dyche and Mercer will sky rocket his confidence.

He has bags of experience. Is still a good age for a keeper and will have so much to prove.

Taking a pay cut too.

I hope Burnley fans back him from day one. Some of his performances for City and England were exceptional.

Good post CFC, the key thing is Mercer is probably our most valuable coach, look at the work he has done with 2 relegated keepers. Both are now outstanding. If he can Hart back to where he was.....unreal. You could argue we have the strongest goal keeping set up in Europe!

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:14 am

He’s ****. Has been for a few years now. All this he’s won this, he’s won that he’s got england caps is a load a crap.

Pele won the world cup 3 times, and used to be a bit areyt should we wack him on bench?

DCWat · Post by **DCWat** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:16 am

If he was 31 then yes!

HiroshimaClaret · Post by **HiroshimaClaret** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:16 am

"England`s No.1. England`s England`s No.1!" F*****g hypocrites all of you!!!!

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:17 am

Englands number 3.

FactualFrank · Post by **FactualFrank** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:19 am

I think its a good signing and think he's just needed a manager who believes in him. Certainly a confidence player and reckon he'll be happy here and do well.

Dyched · Post by **Dyched** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:20 am

DCWat wrote:If he was 31 then yes!

Im sure a 70/80 odd year old Pele would be more useful than that clown

Edit.
Sorry all clowns out there, you all seem to be able to catch. Sorry.

mybloodisclaret · Post by **mybloodisclaret** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:20 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Englands number 3.

Burnleyareback2 · Post by **Burnleyareback2** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:25 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:There'll be some people who'll never accept him, no matter how well he performs.

The same people who want a bigger ground and expected us to sign nobody?

Same everyear with the negative nobheads!

Long Time Lurker · Post by **Long Time Lurker** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 12:39 am

I think everything has to be taken into account.

His loan to West Ham didn't work out well for him last season and it would be difficult to arrange another loan for him with the short time remaining in this window. Especially if he doesn't want to go out on loan again, which would be understandable.

If he is on 120K a week that equates to £6.25m that City would have to pay over the course of next season. In addition to his basic wages you also have to take into account any performance bonuses that are in his current contract and the likelihood that they will be triggered even if he isn't an active first team player. From the players perspective you have to account for the bonuses he will be missing out on if he doesn't play.

His contract is due to expire at the end of the coming season which would allow him to leave on a free. However, if he were to spend this season not playing his chances of a decent permanent move would be very limited.

Now add in the fact that we are supposedly paying City £4m for his services. By moving him on City will be £10.25m up, based on the incoming amount and the wages they will be saving. So they can happily afford to write off that amount in a wage subsidy over the course of his contract with us. If that contract is for two years it could equate to 98.5K. per year or 65.5K per year over 3 years.

On top of all that we have to factor in that a move to us would be a very good way for him to get his career back on track. As a goalkeeper he still has a lot of years left in him. Coming to a club that has turned out two England keepers, with the potential for first team football, is perfect for him.

It is so good that a wage reduction on his part, considering his City wages are in accordance with his peak valuation, appears very realistic. So we can chip a bit more off his wages.

120K - 98.5K = 21.5K minus any wage reduction on his part

120K - 65.5K = 54.5K minus any wage reduction on his part

These are all rough speculative figures, but I can certainly see enough wiggle room to lower his wage to the point where it fits into our structure.

This late in the window, and in response to an emergency situation nobody could have predicted at the outset, it looks like it could be a good bit of business for everyone. Like I said earlier, my financial calculations are purely hypothetical with no supporting evidence what so ever.

However, we all know for certain that we only pay what we can afford and we won't risk breaking our wage structure for any individual player. If we can restore his confidence and get him back to somewhere near the player that he used to be then this could be a very good signing.

ElectroClaret · Post by **ElectroClaret** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 1:16 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:There'll be some people who'll never accept him, no matter how well he performs.

Correct. Boneheads to a man. (Or woman.)
Ably demonstrated by quite a few fu*k-wits further up the thread.

Vegas Claret · Post by **Vegas Claret** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:07 am

Joe Hart has without question been the best English keeper for the majority of the last decade, if anyone doesn't welcome him they need to give their head a ******* wobble - if Mercer can work his magic then we could have the absolute bargain of the season. I remember Messi going to him at the end of a Champions League game to congratulate him on an incredible performance (and it was). He's lost his way no doubt, get him back to form and we've signed a 40 million quid keeper for 4 million

CharlieinNewMexico · Post by **CharlieinNewMexico** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:23 am

I hope the first thing Mercer does is ban him from chewing gum while playing. Drives me nuts! No wonder he drops things when he's spinning that **** around in his mouth

Siddo · Post by **Siddo** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 5:45 am

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Englands number 3.

This board went mental when Pope became England number 3.
I believe Hart will be a great signing and I also believe he is the best of the 3 keepers.

Pimlico_Claret · Post by **Pimlico_Claret** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 7:46 am

Whilst remaining on the fence until I see him play for us, does anyone really think Pope or Heaton would have looked much different behind West Ham's defence last season.

RocketLawnChair · Post by **RocketLawnChair** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 8:03 am

It sounds to me like we’ve effectively given City £4million to pay up Harts contract then fit Hart into our pay structure.

I would expect Dyche as used Mercer’s input before concluding the deal, and judging on Mercer’s record so far with our keepers this could work out quite well.

burnleymik · Post by **burnleymik** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 8:21 am

RocketLawnChair wrote:It sounds to me like we’ve effectively given City £4million to pay up Harts contract then fit Hart into our pay structure.

I would expect Dyche as used Mercer’s input before concluding the deal, and judging on Mercer’s record so far with our keepers this could work out quite well.

Like others have said, I think Hart could be a real asset for us if he can regain his confidence and I think a manager like Dyche and his team, might just have that ability to bring the best out in him.

RingoMcCartney · Post by **RingoMcCartney** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 8:24 am

In our Lancashire homes.

We speak with an accent exceedingly rare.

If you want an England keeper, we've got TWO to spare!

JohnMcGreal · Post by **JohnMcGreal** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 8:25 am

Dyche will give him all the confidence he needs and Mercer will give him great coaching. If he's ever going to get back to his best, it will be under those two.

If he finds some of his old form this will be a masterstroke at £4 million.

Hipper · Post by **Hipper** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 8:30 am

Where does this leave Tom Heaton. Is his injury worse then we know?

bfc1984 · Post by **bfc1984** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 8:48 am

No doubt he was a top goalkeeper in his time.remember him on loan at brum he was outstanding.Just worried about his confidence he has thrown some right howlers in recently and when a gk loses is confidence then you simply have a good chance of losing the match.Got to give him a chance and I have warmed to him coming more overnight,yesterday I thought it was mad now I kind of understand it.Hopefully a good signing

FactualFrank · Post by **FactualFrank** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 8:57 am

Hipper wrote:Where does this leave Tom Heaton. Is his injury worse then we know?

Touch and go.

WazzaClaret · Post by **WazzaClaret** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:02 am

FactualFrank wrote:Touch and go.

That bad?

mybloodisclaret · Post by **mybloodisclaret** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:11 am

RingoMcCartney wrote:In our Lancashire homes.

We speak with an accent exceedingly rare.

If you want an England keeper, we've got TWO to spare!

Good effort, just take the S off homes and you've nailed it.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:16 am

FactualFrank wrote:I think its a good signing and think he's just needed a manager who believes in him. Certainly a confidence player and reckon he'll be happy here and do well.

Hi Frank, I think you've got that exactly right.

The Times (4-Aug) reports as below.

I've underlined the indication that "play for Dyche" is what motivates Joe Hart to join Burnley. (I'll excuse that they repeat the same - lazy editing/space filling I guess).

I've also underlined The Times view on Joe Hart's wage last year, total £4.5 million - £2.5 million paid by WHU and £2 million paid by City. That works out as £90k per week.

Joe Hart set to leave Manchester City for Burnley

Joe Hart is to undergo a medical at Burnley after the Premier League club agreed a £4 million deal with Manchester City (Paul Joyce writes).

Hart, 31, is expected to sign a two-year deal with the option for a further 12 months. Burnley moved quickly after the shoulder injury sustained by Nick Pope, which could rule him out for up to six months.

Galatasaray had shown interest in Hart but the chance to remain in the Premier League and play for Dyche was too good to turn down. Hart told City he would only leave on a permanent deal this summer and would rather have seen out the final year of his contract than go out on loan.

Hart, 31, looks set to sign a two-year deal, with the option for a further 12 months, following an agreement between the two sides.

Burnley moved for the England international after the shoulder injury sustained by Nick Pope, which could rule him out for up to six months. He suffered the injury during the first leg of the second-round qualifier against Aberdeen last week.

Turkish side Galatasaray had shown interest in Hart, but the chance to remain in the Premier League and play for Dyche is viewed as too good an opportunity to turn down.

Hart had told City he would only leave the Etihad on a permanent deal in this window and would rather see out the final year of his contract than make a third successive loan move after spells at Torino and West Ham United.

He endured a difficult season and he lost his starting place to Adrián when he was ineligible to play against his parent club in December. Three months later Hart regained his place but could not play against City and Adrián remained in goal for the final three matches. The east London club paid Hart £2.5 million in wages, plus £2 million to his parent club as a “loan fee”. City then paid Hart £2 million to ensure that the deal did not cost him or City any money.

Colburn_Claret · Post by **Colburn_Claret** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:16 am

Imploding Turtle wrote:There'll be some people who'll never accept him, no matter how well he performs.

some people said the same about Joey Barton, but there were very few left when his stay ended.

Ive voiced my doubts about Hart, but if he signs Ill be behind him 100 per cent.

Paul Waine · Post by **Paul Waine** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:26 am

CatonClaret wrote:I was under the, quite possibly misguided, impression that our highest weekly wage was around the £45,000 mark. Not a ridiculous amount in the context of the PL but for us a pretty significant sum. I thought this was topped up for players on squad bonuses, performance related pay etc to get to the £61m figuire.

I could be completely wrong but my impression was when we signed Brady he had become our highest earner (at the £45,000) and all the recent contract extensions (Barnes, Tarky, Lowton, Wardy etc) were to bring them more in line with those wages. I also thought that was part of the reason we'd failed to get Mawson and a few others through the door this summer because their wage demands were too high and we didn't want to break our wage structure. I'm sure I've read somewhere that Clucas is on £50,000 a week at Swansea and that could "complicate" his potential move here. At the end of the day it is all completely based on mumblings, paper talk and FM so I really don't have the foggiest.

Your breakdown there also makes perfect sense and in terms of calucalations could well be pretty bob on! I suppose part of it is that I just find it mind boggling that we as a club can be giving Joe Hart a 3 year deal at £60,000 a week! What a bloody turnaround from 4 years ago even!

Hi Caton, I'm sure you are right that players basic wages are topped up by performance bonuses - and, I think, topped up in a big way by where the team finishes much more than appearances, winning games and maybe goals/assists.

John B business is in the commodity trading world, performance bonuses are a big part of the comp (wage) in that world (same as IBankers). I'm sure John B and Mike Garlick (with his recruitment business) know how to get the best out of Burnley's financial resources and pay bonuses for success.

Report in Times - quoted in post above - suggests Joe Hart was on £90k a week last season. Would make it easier for him to fit the Burnley framework.

UTC

Murger · Post by **Murger** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:30 am

Whoever said he's better than David Seaman in his prime have obviously been on the sniff.

IanMcL · Post by **IanMcL** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:38 am

Hipper wrote:Where does this leave Tom Heaton. Is his injury worse then we know?

Everton, any time now.

RMutt · Post by **RMutt** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:41 am

Has anyone said ‘ Oh deer’ yet? If not you can have that one from me because I think it’s a decent enough signing if it happens.

cricketfieldclarets · Post by **cricketfieldclarets** » Sat Aug 04, 2018 9:52 am

Hipper wrote:Where does this leave Tom Heaton. Is his injury worse then we know?

To me it's obvious. Heaton will get a lot of niggles after 12 months out and we dont know if he will actually recover to the level he was at. You can't afford to take risks with goalkeepers. And with Heaton and Pope injured we want a first choice goalkeeper not untested 3rd choice.

We will see the extent of both injuries when we register our squad.

I think we will have Heaton and Pope until Jan at least.