Sorry but you dont know other teams didnt, there were newspaper reports at the time of others interested. To think we were the only ones that were interested in signing him is unrealistic. The reason we went top of the list was the AB connection.
We bought damaged goods and paid accordingly. Simply put it was a contract for supply of services of finite length entered into willingly by both parties for a set sum of remuneration. There is no contractual obligation for loyalty, you could argue a moral one but why should he be a different case to anyone else employed in this country? We paid below the going rate because of his reputation and off pitch record ......fair contract fair price owes us nothing.
For the record I argued long and loud against King being signed because of his personal life..... detested the idea. Do you really think that in years to come that the overwhelming majority of people will actually care we signed him if he is long gone ? There wont be the chants if he is gone, there has never been a chant about us signing him. Was watching Sky sports at weekend they raved about him, go to other forums there are other fans commenting on his form .... of course his reputation precedes him would not argue otherwise but a
growing number of people appreciate the ability if not the man.
How is that King can control the chants of fans in order to repay us just exactly?. He has to take responsibility for his actions but not for the actions/chants of others surely. We knew there would be bad press when we signed him thats why we got him cheap, we could have said no, so how does that mean he owes us because groups of fans chant revolting songs about him...... does that mean Bellamy owes, Dublin owes Savage owes etc?
At a crucial time of the season King scored 6 goals in April, often an important goal too. We would have been worse off without those goals and you cant rule out the possibility of being in a relegation dog fight but agree it was unlikely. What his goals did do was increase the confidence of the team which helped us play the football we have. It takes more than one man be it AT or King and a whole lot of luck to be even moderately successful
AT is the manager not the coach....... more likely to be Harrison that influenced Jutkiewicz than ATin terms of how he used his skills ...... although I know AT's attitude/character had a big effect on all players. But read the comments made by Jutkiewicz himself, he credits King with making him a better player. Juke played far more games than King including in the bad period. Of course King was getting a game he was head and shoulders above most other players we had in ability what ever the system played. As you say it is a team effort ........ good or bad so you cant lay the dire straights at only King
Perhaps we may have asked for the option of another year...... perhaps it was asked for not agreed...... but it would only be an option King could still say no thanks and be off...... still wouldnt mean we got a fee for him...... we would still be in the same financial situation and still offer him what we have already..... not sure how people think an option would make much difference, both sides could walk away from it, an option only gives you first shot at an offer.
I accept AT has done a great job in turning things around........... bottom line is the team got us in the mess in the first place just as much as they got us out of it...... yes a big chunk was AB but once the players step over the white line as they say...... I totally understand the sentiment you are putting forward and in truth would wish it was like that ..... that players teams managers directors and owners had some loyalty....... fact is they dont, it is business and all about the money. What ever his history he owes us no more loyalty than any other player etc
I suspect we are going to have to agree to differ on this one sotv1987
