Hammers want £100,000-a-week star
- Thread starter BBC Sport
- Start date
- Replies 40
- Views 2K
Yeah I heard it was N'Gog
No but seriously, it's going to be someone ****, obviously van Nistelrooy, who isn't worth £100,000 a week! Oh well, poor West Ham fans stuck with an overpaid past-it striker.
<)
What should worry Hammers is that Sullivan is quite blunt about their prospects if they go down. Can honestly say that I wouldn't like that to happen, but you've got to wonder at the hypocrisy at throwing blame at previous owners for blowing the money on wages, and then doing exactly the same thing...
Rumours are that it's Van Nistelroy. Any hammers fans heard any different to that?
If it is RVN then that are over paying him i think.
Btw Zeb, the pm you sent me the other day was blank, can you re-send it please.
vieiras on 100k a week isnt he? hes past it, but no-ones batted an eyelid because man city wont go down.
if RVN comes on a 6 month or one year contract for a nominal transfer fee or even on loan, and keeps them up, 100k per week is an absolute bargain
if RVN comes on a 6 month or one year contract for a nominal transfer fee or even on loan, and keeps them up, 100k per week is an absolute bargain
Last edited:
It is only until the end f he season.
Whoosh
fat ronaldo is a pretty good shout. although i have seen reports quoting him wanting to finish his career at corinthians. Adriano is another name i'd like to throw into the mix, at least he is the right side of 30. whether flamengo will sell at a reasonalbe price is another matter
Last edited:
I am about 80% sure it is Van Nistlerooy.
Lets be realistic about West Ham's situation for a moment.
West Ham could sign a £4m striker on a £40k a week wage over a 3 year contract. That's over £10m.
They sign RVN on a free/loan paying £100k a week for 4 months. Costing £1.6m and a signing fee.
Which option is likely to get more fans through the gates?
Which is more likely to be a proven striker at PL/International level?
Well worth the risk IMO.
Lets be realistic about West Ham's situation for a moment.
West Ham could sign a £4m striker on a £40k a week wage over a 3 year contract. That's over £10m.
They sign RVN on a free/loan paying £100k a week for 4 months. Costing £1.6m and a signing fee.
Which option is likely to get more fans through the gates?
Which is more likely to be a proven striker at PL/International level?
Well worth the risk IMO.
Sullivan said that there wasn't a transfer fee involved so it'll be someone on a fat contract somewhere which another club wants to offload and don't care if they don't get a transfer fee. Viera's gone to Manchester City, so I guess Van Nistelrooy is the only one left. Although fat Ronaldo is intriguing, I'm not sure that he fits definition of the player Sullivan gives (pretty much that of one able to adapt straight away to life in the Premiership.
Ronaldo wouldn't command a £100k a week nowadays.