Bielik at Brum

[jimtastic56]

18 hours ago, Big Trav said:

Bellingham deal will be a big factor in what happens with Bielik i presume

No inside information? Of course Brum are happy to keep him, they haven’t had to shell out a crippling £10 Million !!!They would love to keep him on a percentage of his wages and he can stay for Free in 18 month.
 

[europia]

On 05/12/2022 at 13:53, Magicman said:

Hope we sell him clear our original fee and all  move on. 

Regarding the (over inflated) original fee, we are likely to take a big hit when we eventually move Beilik on. He looks more of a championship player and for that reason we shouldn't be expecting a very high transfer fee. If the player doesn't want to be at Pride Park, it's important to get a deal done and at least remove an unhappy player from the wage bill. 

[SKRam]

On 05/12/2022 at 17:47, Woodley Ram said:

Nothing wrong with being bald ?‍? 

Unless you’re a tyre….. or re’tyred’ ……see what I did there 

[Oldben]

A player Bielik’s quality in the centre of the park in League One could be a significant improvement for our club, and ultimately, as much as we might want him to be happy, we have to think about our own best interests and ambitions for the season.

 

 

 

There is no doubting that his talents lay beyond the third tier.

 

 

 

If we sold him we couldn't use the transfer fee under current restrictions, and would the fee go to creditors?

 

 

 

In any case we are likely to be looking at bargain basement freebies in the transfer window, the best of whom aren't guaranteed to come to us. Bieliks a significant upgrade on that.

 

 

 

In a transfer window that might see us lose knight, so that we at least get a small fee for him, bielik appears a decent replacement to knight.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Tamworthram]

1 hour ago, Oldben said:

A player Bielik’s quality in the centre of the park in League One could be a significant improvement for our club, and ultimately, as much as we might want him to be happy, we have to think about our own best interests and ambitions for the season.

 

 

 

There is no doubting that his talents lay beyond the third tier.

 

 

 

If we sold him we couldn't use the transfer fee under current restrictions, and would the fee go to creditors?

 

 

 

In any case we are likely to be looking at bargain basement freebies in the transfer window, the best of whom aren't guaranteed to come to us. Bieliks a significant upgrade on that.

 

 

 

In a transfer window that might see us lose knight, so that we at least get a small fee for him, bielik appears a decent replacement to knight.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Presumably, the only creditor that would benefit from any transfer fee would be Arsenal as that is still a remaining liabilities. All others have settled by way of us exiting administration. As far as I understand it, previous creditors can’t come knocking on the door asking for more money post administration just because a business sells one of it’s remaining assets.

Having said that, we probably still owe Arsenal more than we’d receive so the effect would be the same - his sale wouldn’t add anything to our transfer kitty but  it would help clear the debt to Arsenal and get his wages off our books.

Note:

1) I’d rather keep him if we could

2) I’ve lost track of how much we still owe Arsenal

[vonwright]

No point having an unhappy player around but part of me does think a) he'd be really useful to us just now and plug a few gaps, b) he has experience at this level, c) we were understanding about letting him go to Birmingham so he could play in the World Cup, and d) we have supported him throughout two long rehabilitations. 

The reality is that he's playing well in the Championship and won't want to come back - he will want to be playing at that level or higher from now on. But it's a shame: would playing half a season in League One really have such a negative effect on his future prospects? 

 

 

[RoyMac5]

1 hour ago, vonwright said:

No point having an unhappy player around but part of me does think a) he'd be really useful to us just now and plug a few gaps, b) he has experience at this level, c) we were understanding about letting him go to Birmingham so he could play in the World Cup, and d) we have supported him throughout two long rehabilitations. 

The reality is that he's playing well in the Championship and won't want to come back - he will want to be playing at that level or higher from now on. But it's a shame: would playing half a season in League One really have such a negative effect on his future prospects? 

 

 

How much would it cost us if he got injured, he's got another season at the same cost too?

 

[Rich3478]

Is it just me that thinks whatever we paid originally and still owe Arsenal doesn’t affect his fee now?

we paid that and owe them regardless. It’s not taking a hit as such, would say the damage done on those. Just trying to get as much back as we can.

[Carnero]

17 minutes ago, Rich3478 said:

Is it just me that thinks whatever we paid originally and still owe Arsenal doesn’t affect his fee now?

we paid that and owe them regardless. It’s not taking a hit as such, would say the damage done on those. Just trying to get as much back as we can.

Not it's not just you.

We owe Arsenal what we owe them.

Anything we can get for Bielik can help to contribute towards that, or in fact towards any other running costs of the club.

I don't know why people continually link the two.

If we don't get anything for Bielik and he leaves on a free in 2024, we still owe Arsenal the exact same amount.

[Magicman]

Get £ 1 million plus add on and be done with it.

[Reggie Greenwood]

8 minutes ago, Carnero said:

Not it's not just you.

We owe Arsenal what we owe them.

Anything we can get for Bielik can help to contribute towards that, or in fact towards any other running costs of the club.

I don't know why people continually link the two.

If we don't get anything for Bielik and he leaves on a free in 2024, we still owe Arsenal the exact same amount.

Less any instalments paid in the mean time 

[Rich3478]

19 minutes ago, Carnero said:

Not it's not just you.

We owe Arsenal what we owe them.

Anything we can get for Bielik can help to contribute towards that, or in fact towards any other running costs of the club.

I don't know why people continually link the two.

If we don't get anything for Bielik and he leaves on a free in 2024, we still owe Arsenal the exact same amount.

Exactly.

on bielik, I think we helped him with his World Cup dream, we also paid him for two years whilst injured. If we want him to play in league one for six months then he’s going to have to suck it up.

unless Birmingham or someone can come up with a decent bid, his World Cup wasn’t impressive at all so not done much for demand. 

[Carnero]

38 minutes ago, Rich3478 said:

Exactly.

on bielik, I think we helped him with his World Cup dream, we also paid him for two years whilst injured. If we want him to play in league one for six months then he’s going to have to suck it up.

unless Birmingham or someone can come up with a decent bid, his World Cup wasn’t impressive at all so not done much for demand. 

I'd leave him where he is to save on his wages, hope he stays fit and try to sell him in the summer for anything approaching a reasonable offer (£1m+).

[Rich3478]

41 minutes ago, Carnero said:

I'd leave him where he is to save on his wages, hope he stays fit and try to sell him in the summer for anything approaching a reasonable offer (£1m+).

Yeah. Up to clowes and warne to work out the sums and what is off more benefit to us. But would definitely be basing it around our wants rather than his

[VulcanRam]

14 hours ago, Oldben said:

A player Bielik’s quality in the centre of the park in League One could be a significant improvement for our club, and ultimately, as much as we might want him to be happy, we have to think about our own best interests and ambitions for the season.

 

 

 

There is no doubting that his talents lay beyond the third tier.

 

 

 

If we sold him we couldn't use the transfer fee under current restrictions, and would the fee go to creditors?

 

 

 

In any case we are likely to be looking at bargain basement freebies in the transfer window, the best of whom aren't guaranteed to come to us. Bieliks a significant upgrade on that.

 

 

 

In a transfer window that might see us lose knight, so that we at least get a small fee for him, bielik appears a decent replacement to knight.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

agree.

[Carl Sagan]

1 hour ago, Carnero said:

I'd leave him where he is to save on his wages, hope he stays fit and try to sell him in the summer for anything approaching a reasonable offer (£1m+).

I don't think Brum are paying that much of his wages. Given we can't buy any players, the extra portion that may be down to them is surely worth paying to be able to bring the sort of player in we wouldn't otherwise be able to.

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

Brighton had this problem with Dale Stephens when other clubs - including us were interested.  Bournemouth had it with Simon Francis - us again . On both occasions they told the player suck it up buttercup your staying.  Both got promoted

I don't give a s*** about Bieliks wants and needs.  They been well serviced with an eye watering salary over 5 years for a player who came here with a full season in League 1 under his belt and a 5 month holiday to let him play a couple of hours at the world cup.  Time to get your arse back and do your job, unless a financial package comes in at the relevant amount to bring this b******* to a grinding halt and allow us to strengthen in January.

[Oldben]

https://the72.co.uk/2022/12/13/the-4-players-linked-with-derby-county-ahead-of-january-and-the-likelihood-of-each-deal-happening/

the kind of players we are rumoured to be interested in signing in January, don't inspire me.

We can sign free agents and loan players, great.

free agents, usually are by definition, not wanted by their clubs and at the end of their careers and are seeking a final pay day. They are platers without much resale value and who require large wages to come. Large wages because there will be other clubs interested in signing them, if they are half decent.

loan players, are mostly young players from higher league clubs, looking to get experience through regular first team playing. By definition their an unfinished article, and a risk because they take time to develop.

bielik is another knight. A player ready to play at a higher level, that if they play well, is an improvement to what we currently have. Knights contract ends next summer, bieliks contract ends in may 2024.

we allowed bielik to play for birmingham and therefore, play at the world cup. We will not get enough money from his sale to cover the money we owe arsenal. We will not get a better replacement for him, because players of his calibre and age are not going to drop to league 3, without a transfer fee.

birmingham are not paying his full wages, they are however, playing him regularly in the first team.

in my opinion, its time for bielik to return to our club.

in honesty, how many of the free agents that we signed in the summer actually play both effectively and with a desire to do more than just not be on the bench. Why is that any different to bielik playing for us, and if bielik does return, i cant see him wanting to just sit on the bench every game.

bielik will most likely, want to play well for us, to earn a transfer away at some point

[Tamworthram]

13 hours ago, Rich3478 said:

Exactly.

on bielik, I think we helped him with his World Cup dream, we also paid him for two years whilst injured. If we want him to play in league one for six months then he’s going to have to suck it up.

unless Birmingham or someone can come up with a decent bid, his World Cup wasn’t impressive at all so not done much for demand. 

Just in the interest of balance so as not to imply he should be our debt for ever more:

I suspect part of the motivation behind “helping him with his World Cup dream” was to put him in the shop window and enhance his value should we decide to sell him on.

Yes we paid his wages whilst he was injured but, what was the alternative, cancel his contract and lose any potential value he might have? Also, I may be wrong, but don’t clubs take out some kind of insurance against players getting injured? Mind you, if we did we probably defaulted on the premiums.

Finally, do we really have to turn him into a Nathan Byrne like pariah? Has he actually said he doesn’t want to return to Derby or has he just shared is longer term ambition and made all the right noises for the club he is currently playing for?

[RoyMac5]

How many full seasons playing has he actually managed? I'm sure he'd be useful but would he be reliable?

1 hour ago, Tamworthram said:

Finally, do we really have to turn him into a Nathan Byrne like pariah? Has he actually said he doesn’t want to return to Derby or has he just shared is longer term ambition and made all the right noises for the club he is currently playing for?

Has there been lots of that? Most Derby fans rate him.