Lothar Matthäus criticizes Uli Hoeneß’s statements about Jamal Musiala. In the salary debate, he counters the Bayern honorary president’s argument by drawing a comparison with Olise.
Lothar Matthäus disagrees with Uli Hoeneß in the discussion about Jamal Musiala’s contract. The all-time leading scorer for the German national team places the responsibility for the agreed-upon terms with FC Bayern—and cites Michael Olise as a counterexample. He argues that if the pay of an injured player is being questioned, the same standard must also apply to professionals who are showing particularly strong development.
However, in his column for Sky, Matthäus first criticizes the honorary president’s public remarks: “If someone else had made these statements, Hoeneß would probably have been the first to jump to his feet in protest. I don’t think FC Bayern is happy about this, because the club has other issues to deal with right now,” Matthäus wrote.
On BR’s “Sonntags-Stammtisch,” Hoeneß had expressed doubts about Musiala’s return to his former level of performance and also addressed his contract. Matthäus now clarifies: “I can understand Uli’s thoughts, but none of us know exactly what he meant by that. He’s fueled speculation in all sorts of directions.”
Matthäus counters the Musiala debate with an Olise comparison
For Matthäus, the key point remains that Bayern deliberately signed Musiala’s contract, which runs through 2030: “FC Bayern agreed to the salary and the term when extending Musiala’s contract. That’s why the contract was signed in the first place.”
If Hoeneß is referring to the relationship between salary and on-field performance, Matthäus counters with the example of Olise. In that case, “on the other hand, the salary—especially that of a Michael Olise—would have to be at least doubled, if not tripled,” writes the former Bayern pro. He now estimates the Frenchman’s market value at 150 to 200 million euros. This is Matthäus’s assessment.
His fundamental argument: “It’s a risk for a club—and also for a player—that when a contract is signed, you don’t know where the journey will take you.”
In Olise’s case, his development has shown a steady upward trend over the past year and a half. Matthäus uses this to support his objection to a one-sided view of Musiala’s salary: “If Musiala is earning too much simply because he’s currently unavailable, then Olise or other Bayern players who are overperforming would, on the other hand, be earning too little.”
Matthäus had previously taken a critical view of Hoeneß’s public statements, though he did understand some of his concerns. With the Olise comparison, he now clarifies his position in the contract debate: For Matthäus, the risk of unfavorable development is just as much a part of a long-term agreement as the chance that a player will exceed expectations.