Should Grant Hall be offered a new contract?

[Kit]

Listening to Hoo's this morning on Talksport and he says Football is going to have to change alarmingly after it gets going again, if it is to survive, as the current scenario is not sustainable for ANY club. Sound like we are in a better position to most though with Hoo's and Warburton at the helm, as they have Financial backgrounds. Players though I think are going to have to take hefty pay cuts to keep their clubs a float, so not sure players are going to be able to dictate terms so much going forward.

[lymehoop]

the biggest problem in the game are the Agents. Parasites

[davieqpr]

the biggest problem in the game are the Agents. Parasites

They have been but now the power is with FFP. If a club can't afford it they won't get new contracts and will be very lucky to get one elsewhere even for less money. They need to be young with a resale potential now.

[QPROslo]

This is not a yes/no question. As said by other posters above it is linked to what he will cost us. If he is cheap enough we should certainly sign him up for a new period but with part of the contract based on pay-as-you-play, to mitigate the risk connected to his injury record. However, the question is what "cheap enough" means in the new world of football. There will be lots of clubs wanting to offload players and both transfer fees and salaries will go through the floor. Clubs will reduce their squads to a bare minimum and rely more on youngsters, leaving lots of players unemployed. Players without contracts by 30 June will find themselves in a very difficult position.

I think Grant Hall is on minimum 15k a week now. His new contract will likely have to be no more than 3k a week as a fixed element plus an amount per match on top, if even that. This will be a massive wake up call for Hall and other players in similar situation; particularly players that will never be able to command any significant sell on value due to age.

Hall has been a good servant to us so I hope we will sign him up again but it must be on sustainable terms.

[SheepRanger]

This is not a yes/no question. As said by other posters above it is linked to what he will cost us. If he is cheap enough we should certainly sign him up for a new period but with part of the contract based on pay-as-you-play, to mitigate the risk connected to his injury record. However, the question is what "cheap enough" means in the new world of football. There will be lots of clubs wanting to offload players and both transfer fees and salaries will go through the floor. Clubs will reduce their squads to a bare minimum and rely more on youngsters, leaving lots of players unemployed. Players without contracts by 30 June will find themselves in a very difficult position.

I think Grant Hall is on minimum 15k a week now. His new contract will likely have to be no more than 3k a week as a fixed element plus an amount per match on top, if even that. This will be a massive wake up call for Hall and other players in similar situation; particularly players that will never be able to command any significant sell on value due to age.

Hall has been a good servant to us so I hope we will sign him up again but it must be on sustainable terms.

I think he re-signed when we were at the start of our cost cutting and I'd be amazed if he's on more than £10k a week. I think our average wage in the first team is now £7k a week. I doubt he'd get much more than this. Time to go shopping in Scotland again, £4k a week, can of lager and a bag chips.

[Abseits]

Injury prone players always manage to get themselves fit for the run-in of their contract. Any club dumb enough to award these sick-notes a new contract immediately regret it cos as soon as the player gets a new contract he immediately reverts to form and reacquaints himself with the medical room.
Its all well and good saying give him a pay-as-you-play deal but he ain't gonna sign it.... He'll find a club somewhere muggy enough to stump up a 2/3 year deal.
To be clear... I do like Grant but it's just that business is business and we cannot afford to commit to a player that is likely to miss at least 20% of games through injury.

[qpr]

Injury prone players always manage to get themselves fit for the run-in of their contract. Any club dumb enough to award these sick-notes a new contract immediately regret it cos as soon as the player gets a new contract he immediately reverts to form and reacquaints himself with the medical room.
Its all well and good saying give him a pay-as-you-play deal but he ain't gonna sign it.... He'll find a club somewhere muggy enough to stump up a 2/3 year deal.
To be clear... I do like Grant but it's just that business is business and we cannot afford to commit to a player that is likely to miss at least 20% of games through injury.

Spot On

[Bill]

Yes

[SheepRanger]

According to wiki he has made 119 appearances since 2015. That's four seasons with 9 games of this one remaining. So, on average hes making 23 first team appearances a season.

I would offer him a two year deal, or a one year one, that reflects that he will play half a season. I dont know anything about his personality, but surely he would be provide additional support to Masterson's development.

There is value in keeping him, as the right price, circa £6-7k a week. Or, £5k with £2k per appearance.

[Stainrod]

According to wiki he has made 119 appearances since 2015. That's four seasons with 9 games of this one remaining. So, on average hes making 23 first team appearances a season.

I would offer him a two year deal, or a one year one, that reflects that he will play half a season. I dont know anything about his personality, but surely he would be provide additional support to Masterson's development.

There is value in keeping him, as the right price, circa £6-7k a week. Or, £5k with £2k per appearance.

Agree , he should be offered a deal on the clubs terms , take it or leave it . I think this pandemic and it’s effects on every club financially may narrow his options.

[Abseits]

Jesus wept! When you're limited to a 25-man squad (which is more or less 2 players per position) you cannot pee one of those places away on a player who misses half the games. We're not talking about an appearance record that has been skewed by a one-off long-term injury, say a leg break, either - it's just one thing after another with Grant.
If you were chucking your CV in the hat for a new job, how far d'ya reckon you'd get in the selection process if you had missed half your rostered shifts over last 4 years due to a catalogue of illnesses/injuries????
Beyond his injury record, Grant's been a component of a leaky defence that concede's bucket loads of goals. How far he's to blame for that is debatable but It's not like we'd be letting go The Impregnable Rock of The Bush is it?

[Stainrod]

Jesus wept! When you're limited to a 25-man squad (which is more or less 2 players per position) you cannot pee one of those places away on a player who misses half the games. We're not talking about an appearance record that has been skewed by a one-off long-term injury, say a leg break, either - it's just one thing after another with Grant.
If you were chucking your CV in the hat for a new job, how far d'ya reckon you'd get in the selection process if you had missed half your rostered shifts over last 4 years due to a catalogue of illnesses/injuries????
Beyond his injury record, Grant's been a component of a leaky defence that concede's bucket loads of goals. How far he's to blame for that is debatable but It's not like we'd be letting go The Impregnable Rock of The Bush is it?

He’s played 30 games so far this season , that’s a fair amount .Decent championship player and we are hardly in a financial position to splash the cash on a replacement. Maybe a 1 year deal on reduced wages with the incentive of a 2nd year should he play a certain amount of games would be sensible.

[SheepRanger]

From this article he seems to have a solid medical history to assure the club he's not swinging the lead. You dont put yourself through an operation that might end your career just to have a jolly time at harlington rather than playing.

https://www.westlondonsport.com/qpr/football-wls-qpr-grant-hall-contract-future-170420-html

[qprted]

personally i would re sign him but apparently we are bringing yet more brilliant youngsters through which ia amazing so maybe he will be let go to create a place for another ferdinand babe