Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Our model a total failure!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SheepRanger
    replied
    I dont think its right to say Bidwell wasn't rated and was released. Some fans might not have rated but im confident the club did. From memory i think Warbs wanted wing backs but Bidwell might have been too slow for that role?

    I think he left us for more money while we were trying to reduce costs, or he wasnt quick enough for a WB. We've got Paal now and hes as good, but cheaper.

    Perhaps?

    Leave a comment:


  • Darkranger
    replied
    Not a failure of our model as such, but I did watch Jake Bidwell play for Coventry at the weekend. I checked his stats and he barely missed a game when playing for us and Swansea and hasn't missed a game for Coventry since he left. Wasn't particularly rated here and was released. We could have certainly used his reliability this season and he could be on the verge of the Premier League with Coventry.

    Leave a comment:


  • SheepRanger
    replied
    The whole BOS was very frustrating but I dont think the club did anything wrong.

    We accepted a Club Brugge for 4.7m in July 2020 but BOS refused to go and instead decided to run his contract down. He eventually agreed to sign for Fenerbache for 400k six months later. He could have refused to sign then snd leave on a free but at least we got some money out of it.

    This situation was not the fault of the club but a player who wanted to cash in personally. Its a football problem not our model. Not sure what we could have done dufferently if he refused to go to Belgium?

    Leave a comment:


  • LoftusRoadLad
    replied
    For me our joke was Bright Osayi-Samuel

    Leave a comment:


  • SheepRanger
    replied
    Originally posted by topperharley View Post
    Let's pretend GA's style of football, shown in only the gales we drew or won since he came here, is what we go with next year. Let's also imagine we have a young Eze, a fresh Willock and Armstrong as he is now. Arguably our 3 most talked about players outside of the club, we will shelve Chair.

    In that scenario, does Eze show the potential that caught the eyes of Palace? Does Willock have a shot at being noticed? I think Armstrong will get suitors regardless bu the lad needs to start finding the net asap.

    There is trouble here in discussing this model with our current setup.
    Yes they would, but what would be missing is the endless passing leads to nothing other than possession for the sake of possession. Premiership clubs still want players who score and assist others.

    GA's style does not involve launching the ball from defence to the oppositions corner flags at every opportunity. He plays counter-attacking football and the ball does go through the midfield.

    The key difference is that we dont play out from the back and the midfield need to win possession from goal kicks and have a defensive midfield that does its job and protects our two CBs.

    Leave a comment:


  • topperharley
    replied
    Let's pretend GA's style of football, shown in only the gales we drew or won since he came here, is what we go with next year. Let's also imagine we have a young Eze, a fresh Willock and Armstrong as he is now. Arguably our 3 most talked about players outside of the club, we will shelve Chair.

    In that scenario, does Eze show the potential that caught the eyes of Palace? Does Willock have a shot at being noticed? I think Armstrong will get suitors regardless bu the lad needs to start finding the net asap.

    There is trouble here in discussing this model with our current setup.

    Leave a comment:


  • QPROslo
    replied
    I seem to recall having read somewhere that clubs are not allowed to include one sided options beyond one year.

    Leave a comment:


  • SheepRanger
    replied
    Originally posted by Martinmalta View Post
    We did well by selling Eze. And we could even do better if he is sold by Palace. However, I am afraid that if one compare how much money we lost on bad deals to successful ones, I' m afraid we are not much profitable. One thing I suggest, maybe it is difficult or cannot be done, is to offer 3 year contracts with an option of TWO years extension and not just one. My reason is that most of the times a new player take his first season to adjust himself with club. The second year will be the one that shows if the player is a success or not. As things stand, the third year the player will start having suitors, however, it is the year when all losses are made. Knowing that he can have better deal elsewhere, he refuse an extension and his value start going down. That's the time when the option comes into effect. If the club only have the option of one year, the player is a very healthy position to do whatever he likes. If the option is of two years, well, it gives the club a healthy position to negotiate.
    Good shout and it would work if all clubs did it.

    But would it cause a problem in signing players if other clubs offered less restrictive terms? Dont know....? I would guess that the players we sign dont have too many options of which clubs to go too. Where buying from the bottom of the barrel......?

    Leave a comment:


  • Martinmalta
    replied
    We did well by selling Eze. And we could even do better if he is sold by Palace. However, I am afraid that if one compare how much money we lost on bad deals to successful ones, I' m afraid we are not much profitable. One thing I suggest, maybe it is difficult or cannot be done, is to offer 3 year contracts with an option of TWO years extension and not just one. My reason is that most of the times a new player take his first season to adjust himself with club. The second year will be the one that shows if the player is a success or not. As things stand, the third year the player will start having suitors, however, it is the year when all losses are made. Knowing that he can have better deal elsewhere, he refuse an extension and his value start going down. That's the time when the option comes into effect. If the club only have the option of one year, the player is a very healthy position to do whatever he likes. If the option is of two years, well, it gives the club a healthy position to negotiate.

    Leave a comment:


  • SheepRanger
    replied
    Originally posted by QPROslo View Post
    My problem is that we never sold players such as Jack Robinson, Willock, Dykes, Dieng etc at the right point in time. The right time is often when there are two years left of their contract, as for Eze. Of this reason, Field, Chair and Armstrong have to be sold this summer, unless they sign contract extensions. If I was in charge, I would set a deadline of 30 June. If new contracts aren't signed at that point in time, they will be sold.
    Would it be fair to say the loss of income from COVID shut down and now those debts that need repaying severely dented the number of buying clubs? I still dont think there is too much money about.

    Was our timing wrong or is it that circumstances hammered the number of buyers? You cant sell without a buyer and you cant stop players running down their contracts either.

    Leave a comment:


  • QPROslo
    replied
    The strategy to develop players and sell for a profit isn't wrong. However, the execution has been poor.

    Without knowing all the details, I believe we are falling short in many departments: Scouting, analysis, development and contract management, and not at least timing of sales.

    However, there are often thin lines between success and fiasco, and luck plays a part. Had Willock not been injured in February 2022 and we had sold him for 10m during summer of 2022, many people would say we did quite well, with two big size transfers in a matter of a few years.

    Failures are part of the game. You find them in every club. If 1 out of 3 recruitments are successful, leading to a good profit, I think it would be considered a success. My problem isn't a list of players such as Bonne, Washington etc that left without ever fulfilling our expectations. That is part of the game. My problem is that we never sold players such as Jack Robinson, Willock, Dykes, Dieng etc at the right point in time. The right time is often when there are two years left of their contract, as for Eze. Of this reason, Field, Chair and Armstrong have to be sold this summer, unless they sign contract extensions. If I was in charge, I would set a deadline of 30 June. If new contracts aren't signed at that point in time, they will be sold.

    In hindsight, I am quite sure we should have done differently with BOS and Manning, but I acknowledge that it is very hard to deal with good players that simply refuse to prolong contracts. They cannot be sold against their will and they cannot be forced to sign extensions. However, to let them warm the bench for two years isn't an easy decision either. But clubs need to do that every now and then, to give a signal to other players that deals cannot only be made based on the players terms. It needs to be balanced. Players cannot hold clubs to ransom and slowly run down their contracts as for BOS.

    However, it will be stupid to scrap the strategy of developing for profit, even though we have not executed this strategy well in recent times. I suppose we need to initiate a complete overhaul of our system, so we can execute it with success. I suppose it needs new faces in key positions.

    Leave a comment:


  • topperharley
    replied
    Originally posted by SheepRanger View Post

    Good arricle here about Eze. It would be great to see Palace sell him for 60m as we'd get another 15m out of the deal.

    https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/po...former-player/
    Would be like selling him all over again and make a huge difference to us.

    He is a top tier player under the right structure, very happy for him.

    Leave a comment:


  • SheepRanger
    replied
    Originally posted by topperharley View Post
    Eze has proven that if timed right, this model can indeed work.

    Willock is no Eze, but he's prem standard, or at least has shown he could be. Difference is Eze looked good most of the time.
    Good arricle here about Eze. It would be great to see Palace sell him for 60m as we'd get another 15m out of the deal.

    https://footballleagueworld.co.uk/po...former-player/

    Leave a comment:


  • topperharley
    replied
    Eze has proven that if timed right, this model can indeed work.

    Willock is no Eze, but he's prem standard, or at least has shown he could be. Difference is Eze looked good most of the time.

    Leave a comment:


  • 222lepo
    replied
    Originally posted by Isleworth116 View Post

    Completely, Kelman joined 2020. Gubbins debut Jan 2020. How long do coaching staff need to make a decision.
    Forgot Gubbins there is just to many of them. Good post.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X