Krystian Bielik

[Ghost of Clough]

16 minutes ago, Gee SCREAMER !! said:

Do you think.  He's a good player at championship level.  For a relegated premier league club at championship level to pick up 3 or 4 million in set payments to Arsenal is a no brainer.  If they get ten games at a decent standard from him that's probably enough for promotion with other players of high standard around him.   Can't see any reason why he won't get that move. 

As you rightly pointed out, he stated a desire to be in the PL after 2 seasons with us.
However, during those first two years he spent 66% of that time out with two major injuries. It is beyond doubt that he adjusted his plans as a result. That 2nd injury also covered half of his 3rd season. Tallied up, it's as if he's played 1 whole season for us.

He'll still have two goals. 1) to play at the World Cup, and 2) to play in the PL.
As he's good enough for the Poland squad now, he should be even after playing in L1 for a few months. It depends on whether the new Poland manager is a bit of a league snob or not. Bielik has played at CB twice since the new guy took over in January, the same position as Helik who got relegated with Barnsley. It'll be interesting to see if he's also told to find a new club if he's to be in the final squad.
It's possible, that Bielik's willing to give the club 2 years to earn promotion to the PL. It would be the same target even if he joined a newly relegated side from the PL.

[atherstoneram]

3 hours ago, Ghost of Clough said:

They definitely were speculating as there has been no suggestion of that being the case. In fact, all evidence from Kirchner suggests the opposite. Taking money away from the club for that purpose would impact our chances of returning to the Championship. It's impossible to push for promotion, pay creditors, fund the academy, pay wages and maintain the stadium and training group whilst breaking even.
Therefore, to cover all of these costs Kirchner will be injecting money into the club or loaning the club money. 

I'll be extremely surprised if our wage bill isn't top 6 next season, regardless of what else our revenue goes towards.
Even if £6m of revenue went towards creditors (leaving us with about £12m), there'd only be Sheff Weds, Sunderland, Portsmouth and Ipswich who will have similar or greater incomes - and one of those will likely be playing in the Championship next season.

Unless all creditors are paid in full exiting administration the EFL will impose a business plan for the 3 years if we are paying 35% over 3 years. I think that means a wage/transfer fee cap,they are not going to allow a club to sign anybody for whatever salary/transfer costs when creditors have not been paid in full.

[Ghost of Clough]

2 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

Unless all creditors are paid in full exiting administration the EFL will impose a business plan for the 3 years if we are paying 35% over 3 years. I think that means a wage/transfer fee cap,they are not going to allow a club to sign anybody for whatever salary/transfer costs when creditors have not been paid in full.

What you're referring to is a completely different matter to what @Gee SCREAMER !! was talking about.

Gee Screamer is saying we can't keep Bielik, ON HIS EXISTING CONTRACT because he has the ambition of playing in the PL and expected to be there after two seasons with us (we're entering the 4th season).

What you're referring to is possible transfer/contract restrictions. The very important thing here is those restrictions can't say we must sell player X because he's currently earning more than the limit we're applying. Those restrictions may be a set max per player, or overall as a percentage of revenue. If it's per player, then it doesn't matter as he's already our player, it would only impact if we wanted to offer him a new deal. If it's overall for the club, then I'd expect sacrifices elsewhere - some players will be above the average, some below

[RoyMac5]

3 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

If it's per player, then it doesn't matter as he's already our player, it would only impact if we wanted to offer him a new deal. If it's overall for the club, then I'd expect sacrifices elsewhere - some players will be above the average, some below

Tricky then, as he's only two seasons left on his contract?

[Ghost of Clough]

1 minute ago, RoyMac5 said:

Tricky then, as he's only two seasons left on his contract?

Like I said, that's one of two ways they could restrict wages being offered, and the limit would be different in l1 than it would when we return to the Championship. The other would not stop us offering him £50k a week if the wage bill for the rest of the squad was small enough. 

[atherstoneram]

1 hour ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Like I said, that's one of two ways they could restrict wages being offered, and the limit would be different in l1 than it would when we return to the Championship. The other would not stop us offering him £50k a week if the wage bill for the rest of the squad was small enough. 

In the business plan the EFL can force a ceiling on the amount we can offer in a new contract. The business plan would override the regulations appertaining to L1 clubs, there is no way the EFL will allow us to offer a contract of £50K per week whilst we are under the business plan as they will want to make sure we comply with the plan by not overspending.

[Leeds Ram]

Personally, I think we'll really struggle to hold onto Bielik. He's a great player but his manager hasn't got a completely unfounded belief that playing in the third tier of english football will not knock him into shape for the world cup. If he wants to play for his country at the world cup (which I'd be amazed if he didn't) then he's either going for a loan at a second-tier club or moving on completely. 

Edited May 19, 2022 by Leeds Ram

[Ghost of Clough]

7 minutes ago, atherstoneram said:

In the business plan the EFL can force a ceiling on the amount we can offer in a new contract. The business plan would override the regulations appertaining to L1 clubs, there is no way the EFL will allow us to offer a contract of £50K per week whilst we are under the business plan as they will want to make sure we comply with the plan by not overspending.

You've missed my point. 

Firstly, you're assuming what the business plan will be. If it was too strict, Kirchner simply would have walked away. The business plan isn't a punishment for going into administration, it's to ensure the club doesn't re-enter administration in the future. It is an agreed business plan, not an imposed one.

Secondly, in the example I gave, I stated the wage restriction could be a percentage of revenue. This would not preclude offering a single player a disproportionate wage compared with the rest of the squad.

Thirdly, even if we did pay someone £50k+ pw, it wouldn't go hand in hand with overspending as you seemingly think. Other outgoings would be sacrificed to make it work.

[jimtastic56]

Any updates on the latest injury to Krystian?Reported to be the same knee as his latest ACL. I was suprised he came back from holiday to play a behind closed doors game. He is insured by Poland I assume?

[RoyMac5]

In quotes that were attributed to Jaroszewski by journalist Bartek Kubiak, Bielik is expected to join the squad for their session on Friday. "He has minor problems, but really minor issues," said Jaroszewski. "He will definitely go out to training on Friday. And after the warm-up, we will see if he will continue with the team or individually."

[B4ev6is]

9 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

In quotes that were attributed to Jaroszewski by journalist Bartek Kubiak, Bielik is expected to join the squad for their session on Friday. "He has minor problems, but really minor issues," said Jaroszewski. "He will definitely go out to training on Friday. And after the warm-up, we will see if he will continue with the team or individually."

Thanks a lot poland we had him for just about and now he is injuried how minor it is or not.

[Boycie]

4 minutes ago, B4ev6is said:

Thanks a lot poland we had him for just about and now he is injuried how minor it is or not.

Just a knock, no drama.

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

He won't be playing for us next season so we need him to stay fit so we can sell him.

It's a world cup year, and he's already been told he needs to move to go to said world cup.

No point making him force the move, because I suspect he will if he has to.

[Boycie]

6 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

He won't be playing for us next season so we need him to stay fit so we can sell him.

It's a world cup year, and he's already been told he needs to move to go to said world cup.

No point making him force the move, because I suspect he will if he has to.

Maybe just a little knock so he has to stay with us next season?

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

24 minutes ago, Boycie said:

Maybe just a little knock so he has to stay with us next season?

I genuinely think we need to get shot of him whilst we can still get a fee or we are going to end up with an injury prone, unhappy player that resents the club for stopping him going to a WC, on big wages (by L1 standards) that isn't giving 100%.

None of this is a dig against him really, it's just where I think we'll end up if we don't sell him.

[Rammy03]

33 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

He won't be playing for us next season so we need him to stay fit so we can sell him.

It's a world cup year, and he's already been told he needs to move to go to said world cup.

No point making him force the move, because I suspect he will if he has to.

Loan him out for a season? 

[Dimmu]

Superb player but I think best scenario for us is to loan him out until January and hope he'll have a cracking World Cup. Then we might get most of the money back by selling him to one of the Turkish giants or similar.

[jimtastic56]

1 hour ago, Dimmu said:

Superb player but I think best scenario for us is to loan him out until January and hope he'll have a cracking World Cup. Then we might get most of the money back by selling him to one of the Turkish giants or similar.

One of the first things for Ck to sort out. Keep paying him £1 mill a year in div1? Loan him out for a year , he comes back and runs down the last year of his contract. Gets another ACL and £10 mill in fee and wages go up in smoke. Perhaps advice will come from Stretford.

[RipleyRich]

On 19/05/2022 at 19:06, Ghost of Clough said:

You've missed my point. 

Firstly, you're assuming what the business plan will be. If it was too strict, Kirchner simply would have walked away. The business plan isn't a punishment for going into administration, it's to ensure the club doesn't re-enter administration in the future. It is an agreed business plan, not an imposed one.

Secondly, in the example I gave, I stated the wage restriction could be a percentage of revenue. This would not preclude offering a single player a disproportionate wage compared with the rest of the squad.

Thirdly, even if we did pay someone £50k+ pw, it wouldn't go hand in hand with overspending as you seemingly think. Other outgoings would be sacrificed to make it work.

How does £2m a year in Stadium rent affect the plan?

(Genuine question)

[RodleyRam]

3 hours ago, Dimmu said:

Superb player but I think best scenario for us is to loan him out until January and hope he'll have a cracking World Cup. Then we might get most of the money back by selling him to one of the Turkish giants or similar.

Whilst he is a talent, our track record on such matters isn't great, so I think a loan and then a January sale is a good shout for all parties. If he genuinely wants to stay and commits 100% then I'd take him at his word but you'd think he will want to give himself the chance of going to the WC. 

The player will almost certainly dictate what happens here.