[Archived] Franny Jeffers

[BlueMonday]

Is Jeffers an improvement on Jansen as he will be numerically the player he is replacing?

I am quietly excited about this signing.

It's as close to a no lose gamble as you can get in Premiership football.

Agreed. He's on a pay as you play deal.

If he comes up trumps--Result

If he's a flop-- small financial loss. Nothing ventured nothing gained.

[Philly Rover ®]

Weren't Jeffers and Roberts one time Souey targets for Rovers?

Not sure about Jeffers, but I managed to dig up a link on Roberts. It's some article on Emerton from June 2003, but at the bottom it mentions Souey's interest in Roberts. If I recall correctly, people on here freaked out when Souey wanted to take him on loan.

http://home.skysports.com/list.asp?hlid=15...&clid=111&cpid=

[Welshrover1981]

Franny Jeffers. Good god. I was speaking to my Cardiff City mate today and he told me that City didn't either bother as he is not worth the money.

I see another Matt Jansen coming on.

If he is on a pay per play basis then thats great.

[McClarky]

Saw him play for Rangers a couple of times last year and to be honest he was abysmal. You've got to trust Hughes though as he's come up trumps with nearly all his signings so far and he does know Jeffers from a few years ago. I suppose that "heavily incentivised" means a fiver a week if he isn't in the team so its probably a good gamble to take that he comes good for us. Still think we need another striker though to replace Belamy (if thats possible).

[ihtd]

If i am honest this signing stinks, he is a crap player who had a few good games for Everton. All these people saying that Arsene Wenger paid 10mil for him so he must be good are kidding themselves. Even good old Arsene makes mistakes in the transfer market and he were bought by him at a time when players of not so good ability were going at highly inflated prices.

His goals per games ratio proves everything IMO and it ain't good.

I'd love nothing more than for Franny to prove me wrong but i just cannot see it happening. I thnik MH may have just made his first bum signing.

I got a feeling that if he doesn't perform he may be getting called Fanny Jeffers by a few of us fans.

[Rainmaker]

Even if Jeffers fails, I wouldn't excactly call it a "bum signing" by MH.

It's a gamble, and we all know it, after all he joins on a bosman. It's not like MH broke the bank for this one....

[Shevchenko]

Another thing that concerns me about Jeffers is his tendancy to dive...

[tcj_jones]

Sorry TCJ I forgot you dealt personally with the contracts of our players.

Even if the guy is on £10k a week, it's not exactly going to break the bank is it? I'm sure Hughesy will know exactly what role Jeffers is going to play next season, and will have advised the board on the appropriate contract offer. I'm also sure that if the club needs all the money it can for a potential 'big' signing, it wouldn't have offered a penny to a player like Franny Jeffers. We must have saved at least £50k a WEEK by flogging Dickov and Bellamy.

I wasn't having a go, just pointing out that this signing is hardly free as, even if his basic wage is as little as 10k, then he will still be earning 450k + a year. I'd say those wages would be better spent on a younger player, but I suppose that Hughes has played alongside Jeffers before and has been trying to sign him for a while now.

EDIT: "younger player" is misleading - I mean a young player as opposed to a player that has been trying to resurrect his career for over 5 years.

Edited July 4, 2006 by tcj_jones

[RevidgeBlue]

Even if Jeffers fails, I wouldn't excactly call it a "bum signing" by MH.

It's a gamble, and we all know it, after all he joins on a bosman. It's not like MH broke the bank for this one....

It's not really a "bum signing" if he can't cut it but seeing that, we aren't actually forced into calling upon him.

It is if we have to throw him into say a crucial UEFA Cup tie and we find out to our cost he can't cut it.

Will people stop saying "it's costing us nothing" though?.

"Heavily incentivised contract" probably means something like 10kp.w. basic for 2 years plus signing on fee, meaning it'll probably still cost us about 1.5m even if it goes belly up.

[tcj_jones]

"Heavily incentivised contract" probably means something like 10kp.w. basic for 2 years plus signing on fee, meaning it'll probably still cost us about 1.5m even if it goes belly up.

Thankyou, that is my point exactly.

[stuwilky]

Im intrigued as to where this figure of £10k per week is coming from.

Our average wage for a first teamer isnt massively above that judging by the figures in the accounts.

Edited July 5, 2006 by stuwilky

[RevidgeBlue]

Im intrigued as to where this figure of £10k per week is coming from.

Our average wage for a first teamer isnt massively above that judging by the figures in the accounts.

"Educated" guess

How can you possibly judge what a "first teamer" is on from the accounts when there are more than thirty members of the first team squad, many of whom will be players on relatively little?

Anyhow what was our total spend on players wages?

[stuwilky]

"Educated" guess

How can you possibly judge what a "first teamer" is on from the accounts when there are more than thirty members of the first team squad, many of whom will be players on relatively little?

Anyhow what was our total spend on players wages?

It was an "educated " guess. Not at all influenced by the use of the word average. and also a definition of "first teamer", but still.... I am not proclaiming an accurate figure incidentally!

We spent circa £31m of the wages on 250+ people.

If a low earner in the first team is on £10k per week that would mean £15m just on 30 lots of that a season. Given the rumoured figures for the kind of earners included in those accounts it isnt that likely.

I clearly dont know, but I reckon £10k per week is a way over the top guess.

Edited July 5, 2006 by stuwilky

[RevidgeBlue]

It was an "educated " guess. Not at all influenced by the use of the word average. and also a definition of "first teamer", but still.... I am not proclaiming an accurate figure incidentally!

We spent circa £31m of the wages on 250+ people.

If a low earner in the first team is on £10k per week that would mean £15m just on 30 lots of that a season. Given the rumoured figures for the kind of earners included in those accounts it isnt that likely.

I clearly dont know, but I reckon £10k per week is a way over the top guess.

Sorry, I meant me with the "educated" guess not you.

I always understood the "75 % of turnover" type figure i.e. 30m ish to relate to players wages only.

Ball park figures that's 1m p.a for every first team squad member and the young kids will be on much much less.

Alternatively (ball park figures again) if the 30 first team squad members take up just 15m of the budget that puts the 220 non playing members of staff on average wages of 70kp.a.

I want a job in the ticket office if that's the case!

[stuwilky]

Its declared in the accounts simply as "salaries" There is no other entry that may cover management/admin/directorate/coaching/academy/commercial/grooby....

Not that its going to be a lot for that little lot, but the point stands that £10k per week is a hell of a lot of a guess for someone who is said to be on a "heavily incentivised" contract.

[philipl]

Here is a real world way of working it out.

What would Coventry have offered? Perhaps the fizzy pop average of £175K a year plus a bit.

Rovers: "you can go to Coventry or come here for a bit less but with the possibility of Premiership striker earnings (£1.5m a year) if you perform like a Premiership striker".

[robborover]

Here is a real world way of working it out.

What would Coventry have offered? Perhaps the fizzy pop average of £175K a year plus a bit.

Rovers: "you can go to Coventry or come here for a bit less but with the possibility of Premiership striker earnings (£1.5m a year) if you perform like a Premiership striker".

if think you're right there. 10k isn't exactly an incentive. but 7kish plus appearances and goals is. then if he scores a few over 2 years then he's got a 3rd with higher wages.

[yawnsie]

Phillip's right; there's no way that Coventry would have offered him anywhere near £10k a week, and MH will have known that when he offered the contract. To make that sort of money, Jeffers will have to perform. And if there's one thing Franny Jeffers loves, it's money, so Sparky might well have found the right way to motivate him.

[EIEIEIO]

These bad boy football rebels like Jeffers, Bellamy and Bentley think their the bees knees. Until they walk into the Rovers dressing room and realise that they aren't as tough as they thought they were.

[stuwilky]

Here is a real world way of working it out.

What would Coventry have offered? Perhaps the fizzy pop average of £175K a year plus a bit.

Rovers: "you can go to Coventry or come here for a bit less but with the possibility of Premiership striker earnings (£1.5m a year) if you perform like a Premiership striker".

Thats more like it! £3k a week!

[rover6]

Not sure about Jeffers, but I managed to dig up a link on Roberts. It's some article on Emerton from June 2003, but at the bottom it mentions Souey's interest in Roberts. If I recall correctly, people on here freaked out when Souey wanted to take him on loan.

http://home.skysports.com/list.asp?hlid=15...&clid=111&cpid=

Souness was scared off by Jeffers' price tag - back then.

[bluebruce]

98-99 Everton 6 Goals, 15 Games

99-00 Everton 6 Goals, 21 Games

00-01 Everton 6 Goals, 11 Games

01-02 Arsenal 2 Goals, 6 Games 2 Games (Champions League)

02-03 Arsenal 2 Goals, 16 Games 5 Games (Champions League)

03-04 Everton 0 Goals, 18 Games

04-05 Charlton 3 Goals, 20 Games

05-06 Glasgow Rangers 0 Goals, 4 Games (Champions League)

The sweat has increased x 10 on my brow and it aint the weather either!!

Got to wonder why the hell Arsenal paid 10 mill for him, his record at Everton wasn't exactly impressive. Seems that when he joins a club, a figure is randomly decided for him to score each season he is with them- he was only capable of 6 a season for Everton, and 2 a season for Arsenal. Wonder what it'll be for us...

[Sanny]

If he gets near 10 then it would have been a v.good deal.

[Exiled_Rover]

Got to wonder why the hell Arsenal paid 10 mill for him, his record at Everton wasn't exactly impressive. Seems that when he joins a club, a figure is randomly decided for him to score each season he is with them- he was only capable of 6 a season for Everton, and 2 a season for Arsenal. Wonder what it'll be for us...

Wenger's dubbing of Jeffers as a 'Fox in the Box' should answer that question. He thought he was getting a young striker capable of bagging 20 goals a season in L'Arse's system.

[des]

I will say it first a think he will get between 10-15 goals next season what does everyone else think that he will get