Bednarek is in an interesting spot right now. I don't think that a move is to his benefit if he is the pathologically ambitious sort, because if played in a good situation (alongside a consistent partner and with a defensive midfield in front of him that doesn't regularly leave the back four completely exposed) he could get a serious move in a year's time, but he isn't going to get it now. From his perspective, the best thing would be to tick another year off his deal, play his absolute best and be in a great bargaining position. Problem is that the team should have little interest in letting him run another year off. And Bednarek is now wildly underpaid. I have no idea what he's making, but he's still on the original contract signed when he joined the club...I'd be surprised if he was making more than a third of the average salaries of our regulars. That he hasn't signed a second contract after being a regular starter for two years would seem to suggest that he is more motivated by keeping his options open rather than the money, because (unless we're utterly negligent) I'm sure that we have offered better wages on a longer term. I don't want to sell him, but if he isn't willing to sign this summer, we have to be very open to offers, because the odds that he signs in the future are really low.
That's like saying that the Donner party wasn't so bad, just had some substandard catering. In the last five seasons, he has played 20% of his teams' minutes.
Which would explain why he is going for about 20% of his probable value. EDIT: And, what percentage of Liverpool games did Danny Ings play before we signed him?
Danny Welbeck does offer height, can hold the ball up allowing Ings greater freedom to run at defences and is awkward to mark. So it isn't as a terrible signing as may appear. If he does come no one will expect many goals from him so what goals he does score will be a bonus
So you regret the signing of Danny Ings then? Unfortunately we don't have much money, and you're not gonna get much else for £5m these days. Maybe a League One striker.
Ings was a massive, massive risk. The primary difference was that, when healthy, he was actually good. The issue with Welbeck is that, when healthy, he's okay. A useful squad player. If Welbeck was able willing to take 20% of the wages of the player he is when healthy, it'd be a consideration. That's not going to happen, though. Sign Welbeck for £5.7m and you're really making a commitment of ~£20m in order to have Danny Welbeck over 3 years. That's still a fair amount of money, and there's little financial upside...you aren't selling Welbeck on for any great sum.
I would think Welbeck would be given a 2 year contract. Unless he performs well it will be his last in the Premier League.
Welbeck will be on the same wages as most other first team squad members; £60-80k. This is what we pay Elyounoussi even. Welbeck made 20 appearances for Watford last season, which isn't bad.
Sure, but we'd very much rather not be paying Elyounoussi that (and I'm guessing that Celtic pays at least half his wages). And Welbeck did make 18 PL appearances. Most were off the bench, however, and he still played a mere 24% of Watford's minutes. He played fewer minutes for Watford last year than Cuco Martina did in his first season at Saints.
Yeah, and that's why I'd prefer not to sign him. But if we're discussing the player's ability alone, I don't think he's as bad as people are making out. He's just unfashionable because he's been around for a while, and we'd be signing him from a relegated club.
You just shot yourself in the foot with the Cuco comparison. So you're saying Welbeck could become a club legend also? Seriously though, even an off-the-bench type player is an important component of any squad these days. If we want a Premiership-quality, 30 games a season, injury-free striker, gonna cost £25 million, most likely. Sometimes you gotta take a risk.
I just don’t think we need him though; Ings is imperious, Adams is starting to hit his stride, Long is a good option off of the bench and Obafemi needs game time. Welbeck would be like paying for an obstacle and would prevent us from addressing weaker areas (CM mainly).