Contract extension - 4 Years - Jordan Ponticelli (1 Viewer)

Ranjit Bhurpa

Well-Known Member
Excellent news on top of the many positive steps the Club have taken on field in the last 2 or 3 months.
Just hope it isn't the pre-cursor to any further off field dramas that will kick us all in the teds.
 

Gazolba

Well-Known Member
He'll be gone before the end of the season, so we better play him now.
The contract only means he'll command a higher price.
 

fatso

Well-Known Member
Great news, and it shows some ambition!
I wonder how many of the 18 chances we created last Saturday he would of converted. still as some on hear would say, he's too young and inexperienced to be given a chance, let's carry on with our shit strikers and somehow expect them to change.
Although a cursory glance at their career stats would suggest that's unlikely.
 

mechaishida

Well-Known Member
Well, all I can do is echo similar sentiments to many others, give the lad a chance MR.

A few 30 minute cameos as sub will start him off nicely. It's Ponti's time to shine, before he's inevitably sold.
 

shmmeee

Well-Known Member
It prevents the George Thomas situation, potentially 5 years is a decent amount of time for him to mark his mark as a first team striker and then see what his options are then.

But I keep getting told we are smart to only offer one year deals to kids who aren’t first team regulars and that this is just another David Bell situation where we waste money.
 

ccfcway

Well-Known Member
But I keep getting told we are smart to only offer one year deals to kids who aren’t first team regulars and that this is just another David Bell situation where we waste money.

really ?

Who on earth keeps telling you this is the same as us offering a 4 year deal to david bell ?
 
Last edited:

Grendel

Well-Known Member
But I keep getting told we are smart to only offer one year deals to kids who aren’t first team regulars and that this is just another David Bell situation where we waste money.

Who told you that? Duggins, Mutton, Lucas? You need to get out of the office more.
 

Hobo

Well-Known Member
Good move. Gives the kid some security and means if other teams want him the club are in a stronger bargaining position.

Despite his potential I doubt he is on anything like the wages David Bell was on. So 2, 3 or 4 year contracts for kids who have development and sell on potential, although not void of risk, are a more sensible investment of the budget in my opinion.
 

no_loyalty

Well-Known Member
Now time to give the kid a chance in the first team to see what he can do
 

Warwickhunt

Well-Known Member
Still a 3-year contract, we still have the bargaining power for 2 seasons, so it's not like anybody is gonna get a cheap deal on him unless we say so.
I think length of contract increases value
 

skybluegod

Well-Known Member
I think length of contract increases value

Fair enough if that’s your opinion. As I say though imo length of contract is just bargaining power. So we set our price and they pay. The only time that decreases is in the last 12 months. Which we won’t have to worry about for 2 years
 

higgs

Well-Known Member
Be great to see him given a chance now is that why he hasn't got a chance as there was a contract on the table and now that it's signed will we see him getting some regular action?

Sent from my GT-I9505 using Tapatalk
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top