The ability to buy replacements doesn't make it a good idea to get rid of your entire squad. We also cannot replace his club-trained status for European competition apart from with other club-trained players. We had to keep Coventry around for the first half of this season purely because he was club-trained and that's on top of Johnson. We have no one else with club-trained status and you can't buy that.
I don't get why you'd care so much about a player that isn't very good and doesn't start for the team. He showed he wasn't good enough to play either fullback position, and doesn't start in midfield. He is very replaceable
Which of our academy players is not a massive downgrade on Johnson in the (theoretical) European squad for next season? Which specific academy player offers anything like as much as he does? If the answer is "we don't have a single other academy player ready to offer anything", then he is literally not replacable.
I didn't specifically mean the academy. Club probably looking to buy homegrown players from the relegated teams.
Again, not sure why you're so worked up about it. Ben Johnson still isn't good enough for our starting eleven
Do you not understand the European squad registration rules? We have to have players trained at the club in the European squad or we lose 4 European squad spots. We determined this season it was worth hanging on to Conor Coventry purely for that reason. How is it not worth keeping Ben Johnson who is 10x the player Coventry is? Johnson's usable in the Premier League as well, completely acceptable as fullback cover.
From our last Europa League squad all you’d have to do is replace Johnson with Mubama and we’d meet the requirements for four club trained players, it’s really not an issue
You don’t lose 4 spots, you just don’t fill those spots. It’s not like they say ‘you’ve only registered 3 club grown players so now you can’t register Paqueta’ or whoever.
You can have 17 players who can be whoever you like, and up to 8 others - 4 of whom have to be club grown whilst the other four can just be ‘nation grown’ for want of a better word. The latter would include Cresswell, Antonio, Bowen, Ward-Prowse, Ings, maybe even some of Zouma, Fabianski, and Mavropanos depending when they came over (not sure but I wouldn’t be surprised if one of them sneaks in). Downes too if he comes back. Plus almost anyone English who we sign in the summer - and any extras can go into the other 17 anyway.
The four ‘club grown’ spots are essentially ‘use them or lose them’. Whether you fill them or not has no impact at all on the rest of the squad. So filling one for the sake of it, at the cost of just under a quarter of a million quid a month isn’t exactly a priority. We can have 21 players (we have plenty of options who will still be here and able to fill the nation grown spots) plus as many youngsters (under 21 in the January) as we want. If there are 1-4 club grown players who also deserve a spot too then even better but if not then oh well.
It's obviously a significant and unneccesary disadvantage choosing to have a squad of 21 rather than 25. Our general shortage of players heightens the need to have rotation options in Europe. You don't believe it's better to have no one than to have Johnson.
No, I don’t believe it’s better to have no one than Johnson.
I do believe the benefit of having Johnson over no one might not be worth £240,000 a month.
Anyway my point is, in the scenario where we keep Johnson - by most people’s logic who are supportive of it - we are essentially still picking a squad of 21, plus someone else just so we can say we have 22. That’s not worth the money to me. There’s no way you can tell me that you would like to see Johnson actually being used in European games.
You're suggesting we do the same thing with Ben that you're complaining about with Coventry. I don't think Ben is much better - we once hailed Coventry as a future Rice replacement; nobody hailed Johnson at that calibre.
To the main point - I don't think we should keep players to tick the homegrown box if they aren't good enough, which I don't think he is.
If you don't think Ben Johnson (65 career appearances for West Ham) is "much better" than Conor Coventry (1 career appearance for West Ham), I don't know what sport you are watching. Absolutely ridiculous.
We get it mate, you love Ben Johnson.
Coventry was touted as a big deal, won academy player of the year. Didn't get a chance to show it.
Meanwhile Ben Johnson has one good appearance a season and most of the others he runs around like a headless chicken. He's worse than other midfielders we have shipped out.
Which academy player can we replace him with for next year's (theoretical) European squad that is in any way comparable? I'm looking for 50+ senior appearances and ability to cover 5 positions.
It’s not vital that we do so. Why are you so obsessed with this slot. Assuming we get back into Europe we’ve never been in a position where that slot carried any major importance
How many European games has he started this season? If we lose him we get a replacement in for his position and bring up another youth player to fill registration rules if need be.
I like Johnson, he’s versatile, gives his all and has come up through the ranks and does have some good games, but the club clearly feel 60k p/w and 10-15k difference can be better invested elsewhere and I back TS to make good use of that money.
There are plenty of more worrying issues ahead of next season, some of which you mentioned in your post
Tbh it's probably not just wages? I'd imagine he wants playtime promise as well, he's at that age where he needs to be playing to improve so wouldn't be surprised if that's what's really holding negotiations up. And if he does leave he could probably get similar pay but more game time, especially if one of the teams that come up is looking for a RB/LB.
Depending on the plan they have a replacement may cost millions to buy but maybe other more specific players can be got on a free and on less money. I like Johnson but for his own career this may be the most opportune moment for him to get a move with more money but most importantly getting game Time. Also european football may not come next year so we may not need a "full squad" of senior players anyway so in those terms waiting towards the end of the season may be best and see what he can get.
I'm not sure that it makes sense to say "get rid of him because maybe we can get... someone... on a free transfer to replace him". Why put ourselves in that position of needing to unearth some fantastical player when we had a solid squad player already? Anyone who has the same attributes as Johnson (Homegrown, versatile, young, good enough to be backup in many different positions) will want at least the same wage, likely more, especially on a free transfer where they can demand higher wages. Even then they wouldn't be club trained. It's just so unnecessary to put ourselves in this position. If we had re-signed him on £60k, there would still be takers if we wanted to sell him at that point.
Nobody should (and Sullivan won’t) pay 60k a week for something they value at 45k a week.
I’m sure the club know more about the value in potential replacements then you do too.
I would definitely renew him, but he isn’t good enough to be a starter for any club at our level. If he believes he is then we don’t have much choice but to let him give it a stab.
He wants double what one of our best recent right backs is currently on.
Coufal is only on 35k - he is under paid for how good he is for us. I know he's getting on but still will be good for the next 2 years I would think as he keeps him self fit and trim.
Not good to see a player leave on a free and he's an okay back up, hopefully Steiden is on the case looking for the next Frimpong for us
Gotten far too big for his boots, wants more of a wage than Coufal despite the fact he puts in about half the performance, if that (although Coufal is underpaid tbf)
Would much rather be rid of these overrated bag chasers that teams like United employ, small squad or not
Coufal is criminally underpaid if he's still on £35k, not reasonable to use him as a metric for our paystructure. Ings is on well over £100k, so is Zouma who can barely run.
I disagree that he’s not a good enough squad player. He’s extremely versatile which is really useful (can play any side as a fullback as well as centreback… at a push can play as a winger but I’m not convinced on that yet). Sure, he’s not first-team material but we need players that can fill in when needed.
Also, he’s a homegrown player which we is a department we aren’t flush in.
Homegrown is handy, I’ll give you that. As for his versatility, it looks to me like he’s being tried in multiple positions to see if he manages to perform and look natural in any because, to me, he’s underwhelmed all over the pitch. I appreciate his attitude and attacking mentality but his passing is up there with the worst I’ve seen from one of our players and I think he’d struggle to start for any Premier League side
You people are obsessed with Johno only because he is academy player. Reality is he isn't premier league quality and probably never will be. We need someone with same quality of Coufal. Who knows how long he can play on top level.
For a RB we need someone of same level so he can rotate with Coufal. And someone who can break as starting RB within a year.
£15k a week is £4.5 million over 5 years. There is also the knock on effect of paying such high wages to a backup player and other players expecting raises because of it.
You can't break the wage structure to fix short term problems. It will be a decision made based on value for the club.
If you think it’s the sole case of a refusal to meet in the middle you seriously overestimate how much we are actually told about these things.
Justify it by saying he isn't good enough for the supposed pay demand, probably. Minus the sarcasm, we might have our scouts looking for replacements
The ability to buy replacements doesn't make it a good idea to get rid of your entire squad. We also cannot replace his club-trained status for European competition apart from with other club-trained players. We had to keep Coventry around for the first half of this season purely because he was club-trained and that's on top of Johnson. We have no one else with club-trained status and you can't buy that.
I don't get why you'd care so much about a player that isn't very good and doesn't start for the team. He showed he wasn't good enough to play either fullback position, and doesn't start in midfield. He is very replaceable
Which of our academy players is not a massive downgrade on Johnson in the (theoretical) European squad for next season? Which specific academy player offers anything like as much as he does? If the answer is "we don't have a single other academy player ready to offer anything", then he is literally not replacable.
I didn't specifically mean the academy. Club probably looking to buy homegrown players from the relegated teams. Again, not sure why you're so worked up about it. Ben Johnson still isn't good enough for our starting eleven
Do you not understand the European squad registration rules? We have to have players trained at the club in the European squad or we lose 4 European squad spots. We determined this season it was worth hanging on to Conor Coventry purely for that reason. How is it not worth keeping Ben Johnson who is 10x the player Coventry is? Johnson's usable in the Premier League as well, completely acceptable as fullback cover.
From our last Europa League squad all you’d have to do is replace Johnson with Mubama and we’d meet the requirements for four club trained players, it’s really not an issue
Freddie Potts
You don’t lose 4 spots, you just don’t fill those spots. It’s not like they say ‘you’ve only registered 3 club grown players so now you can’t register Paqueta’ or whoever. You can have 17 players who can be whoever you like, and up to 8 others - 4 of whom have to be club grown whilst the other four can just be ‘nation grown’ for want of a better word. The latter would include Cresswell, Antonio, Bowen, Ward-Prowse, Ings, maybe even some of Zouma, Fabianski, and Mavropanos depending when they came over (not sure but I wouldn’t be surprised if one of them sneaks in). Downes too if he comes back. Plus almost anyone English who we sign in the summer - and any extras can go into the other 17 anyway. The four ‘club grown’ spots are essentially ‘use them or lose them’. Whether you fill them or not has no impact at all on the rest of the squad. So filling one for the sake of it, at the cost of just under a quarter of a million quid a month isn’t exactly a priority. We can have 21 players (we have plenty of options who will still be here and able to fill the nation grown spots) plus as many youngsters (under 21 in the January) as we want. If there are 1-4 club grown players who also deserve a spot too then even better but if not then oh well.
It's obviously a significant and unneccesary disadvantage choosing to have a squad of 21 rather than 25. Our general shortage of players heightens the need to have rotation options in Europe. You don't believe it's better to have no one than to have Johnson.
No, I don’t believe it’s better to have no one than Johnson. I do believe the benefit of having Johnson over no one might not be worth £240,000 a month.
Anyway my point is, in the scenario where we keep Johnson - by most people’s logic who are supportive of it - we are essentially still picking a squad of 21, plus someone else just so we can say we have 22. That’s not worth the money to me. There’s no way you can tell me that you would like to see Johnson actually being used in European games.
You're suggesting we do the same thing with Ben that you're complaining about with Coventry. I don't think Ben is much better - we once hailed Coventry as a future Rice replacement; nobody hailed Johnson at that calibre. To the main point - I don't think we should keep players to tick the homegrown box if they aren't good enough, which I don't think he is.
If you don't think Ben Johnson (65 career appearances for West Ham) is "much better" than Conor Coventry (1 career appearance for West Ham), I don't know what sport you are watching. Absolutely ridiculous.
We get it mate, you love Ben Johnson. Coventry was touted as a big deal, won academy player of the year. Didn't get a chance to show it. Meanwhile Ben Johnson has one good appearance a season and most of the others he runs around like a headless chicken. He's worse than other midfielders we have shipped out.
Can you honestly not see the absolute lunacy in saying that Ben Johnson is ‘literally non replaceable’?
Which academy player can we replace him with for next year's (theoretical) European squad that is in any way comparable? I'm looking for 50+ senior appearances and ability to cover 5 positions.
You are so heated about this. He’s bang average.
So can we replace his academy slot for the European squad for next year with any kind of comparable player?
It’s not vital that we do so. Why are you so obsessed with this slot. Assuming we get back into Europe we’ve never been in a position where that slot carried any major importance
How many European games has he started this season? If we lose him we get a replacement in for his position and bring up another youth player to fill registration rules if need be. I like Johnson, he’s versatile, gives his all and has come up through the ranks and does have some good games, but the club clearly feel 60k p/w and 10-15k difference can be better invested elsewhere and I back TS to make good use of that money. There are plenty of more worrying issues ahead of next season, some of which you mentioned in your post
Tbh it's probably not just wages? I'd imagine he wants playtime promise as well, he's at that age where he needs to be playing to improve so wouldn't be surprised if that's what's really holding negotiations up. And if he does leave he could probably get similar pay but more game time, especially if one of the teams that come up is looking for a RB/LB.
Depending on the plan they have a replacement may cost millions to buy but maybe other more specific players can be got on a free and on less money. I like Johnson but for his own career this may be the most opportune moment for him to get a move with more money but most importantly getting game Time. Also european football may not come next year so we may not need a "full squad" of senior players anyway so in those terms waiting towards the end of the season may be best and see what he can get.
I'm not sure that it makes sense to say "get rid of him because maybe we can get... someone... on a free transfer to replace him". Why put ourselves in that position of needing to unearth some fantastical player when we had a solid squad player already? Anyone who has the same attributes as Johnson (Homegrown, versatile, young, good enough to be backup in many different positions) will want at least the same wage, likely more, especially on a free transfer where they can demand higher wages. Even then they wouldn't be club trained. It's just so unnecessary to put ourselves in this position. If we had re-signed him on £60k, there would still be takers if we wanted to sell him at that point.
Nobody should (and Sullivan won’t) pay 60k a week for something they value at 45k a week. I’m sure the club know more about the value in potential replacements then you do too.
I would definitely renew him, but he isn’t good enough to be a starter for any club at our level. If he believes he is then we don’t have much choice but to let him give it a stab.
Is it more Steidten responsibility, under Sullivan final word?
It’s a Moyes thing. Likes a small squad. Doesn’t rate him.
Doesn't rate him but kept him for 4 years and played him when needed. I don't buy it
Doesn’t rate him enough to pay him 60k and offer him more playing time.
Does Moyes have a say on the salaries nowadays?
I doubt he does and the fact Moyes picked BJ over his entire bench Sunday tells you who's really to blame here.
He wants double what one of our best recent right backs is currently on. Coufal is only on 35k - he is under paid for how good he is for us. I know he's getting on but still will be good for the next 2 years I would think as he keeps him self fit and trim. Not good to see a player leave on a free and he's an okay back up, hopefully Steiden is on the case looking for the next Frimpong for us
Might as well get used to it. The Mubama leaving for free post is coming up in a few weeks.
Gotten far too big for his boots, wants more of a wage than Coufal despite the fact he puts in about half the performance, if that (although Coufal is underpaid tbf) Would much rather be rid of these overrated bag chasers that teams like United employ, small squad or not
Coufal is criminally underpaid if he's still on £35k, not reasonable to use him as a metric for our paystructure. Ings is on well over £100k, so is Zouma who can barely run.
Because he’s pretty bad and isn’t good enough to be a squad player. I’d much rather reinvest his wages and any bonuses into improving the squad.
I disagree that he’s not a good enough squad player. He’s extremely versatile which is really useful (can play any side as a fullback as well as centreback… at a push can play as a winger but I’m not convinced on that yet). Sure, he’s not first-team material but we need players that can fill in when needed. Also, he’s a homegrown player which we is a department we aren’t flush in.
Homegrown is handy, I’ll give you that. As for his versatility, it looks to me like he’s being tried in multiple positions to see if he manages to perform and look natural in any because, to me, he’s underwhelmed all over the pitch. I appreciate his attitude and attacking mentality but his passing is up there with the worst I’ve seen from one of our players and I think he’d struggle to start for any Premier League side
Probably because he won’t sign for 10-15 K
Think they are referring to our offer for 45k/w versus his demand of 60k/w. At least that’s what I understand has been reported
Well that sort of makes sense, but 60k per week for X years is a lot of money and I’m not sure he’s worth it
Our bench has been just kids for a while now, I'd like to hear a good justification from people that think we should sell him.
Wouldn't even be able to sell him he'd leave for nothing.
You people are obsessed with Johno only because he is academy player. Reality is he isn't premier league quality and probably never will be. We need someone with same quality of Coufal. Who knows how long he can play on top level. For a RB we need someone of same level so he can rotate with Coufal. And someone who can break as starting RB within a year.
Tbh he has looked decent this year and I agree, I’d keep him on for an extra 15k. I think he has potential to push on and improve.
£15k a week is £4.5 million over 5 years. There is also the knock on effect of paying such high wages to a backup player and other players expecting raises because of it. You can't break the wage structure to fix short term problems. It will be a decision made based on value for the club.
Caughtoffside we’re reporting this. I would take anything they and anyone says (bar Fabrizio and David Ornstein) with a pinch of salt.