Jump to content

#SWFC Summer 2018 Transfer Window Rumours Thread


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Watson said:

 

Seem to remember quite a biggish thread but then I have a terrible so could be wrong.

 

I’m sure there was a thread, but not many of them, over months, with accompanying twitter abuse and meltdowns.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, steelcityowlsfan said:

If Hirst goes on to be a top player and goes on to play in the PL and for England, will it hurt more than Vardy?

Not for me. Very different in that the club want Hirst to stay. We rejected Vardy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SallyCinnamon said:

 

You never know with football. But they are two players we should have tied down on the long term years ago. Hopefully the club has learnt it's lesson. 

 

The club was so focused on getting to the Premier League it neglected youth. We are seeing the fallout of that with Clare and Hirst. Two very talented footballers who could have gone for big money.

 

Unfortunately other clubs come sniffing and we didn't do enough to keep them here. What happens when you have good youngsters on the books. Call them greedy or whatever, they have no loyalty to the club and if they believe they can get a better deal elsewhere you can't fault them.

 

But in my opinion, the club needs to be proactive and let them realise that there is a route to the first team. There is now. Unfortunately it came too late for these two.

It didn't for Clare. He was tried in the first team. By investing in them both from a early age, I would say the club have done more than enough to aid their development. I agree there isn't any loyalty as both appear to have demonstrated. Im sure their advisor's know what they are doing. There was always a door open for young Hirst but he chose not to go through it. He still isn't proven on the big stage, is he. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HITC report, Max Clark, Hull City LB, refused a new contract. Similar situation to Clare, aged 22, so will go to tribunal if fee not agreed. Millwall and Forest linked. Has played 30 times at Championship level and did well. Should we be interested? Fits Jos' transfer profile, perfectly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, SallyCinnamon said:

 

You never know with football. But they are two players we should have tied down on the long term years ago. Hopefully the club has learnt it's lesson. 

 

The club was so focused on getting to the Premier League it neglected youth. We are seeing the fallout of that with Clare and Hirst. Two very talented footballers who could have gone for big money.

 

Unfortunately other clubs come sniffing and we didn't do enough to keep them here. What happens when you have good youngsters on the books. Call them greedy or whatever, they have no loyalty to the club and if they believe they can get a better deal elsewhere you can't fault them.

 

But in my opinion, the club needs to be proactive and let them realise that there is a route to the first team. There is now. Unfortunately it came too late for these two.

how many years ago would you have recommended  nailing them down ? Hard to see either of them being offered more than two years and not talking daft money either.

 

Claire is much easier to deal with, he knows he has a way to travel. Yet, Hirst believes what he has been spoon fed, with no senior goals to his credit he is demanding of super star status, the boy is heading for a big let down IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, joelswfc said:

Not for me. Very different in that the club want Hirst to stay. We rejected Vardy.

Exactly right. Hirst has done himself no favours.

 

Look at 2 examples of up coming youngsters.

 

Ryan Sessignon - Get's his head down at Fulham, Plays 48 games, 16 goals, plenty of assists, stand out player in championship

 

George Hirst - Sits on his backside all season cos Sheffield Wednesday won't pay him megabucks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, sweetsheri said:

Exactly right. Hirst has done himself no favours.

 

Look at 2 examples of up coming youngsters.

 

Ryan Sessignon - Get's his head down at Fulham, Plays 48 games, 16 goals, plenty of assists, stand out player in championship

 

George Hirst - Sits on his backside all season cos Sheffield Wednesday won't pay him megabucks.

Did he actually refuse to play then?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, gurujuan said:

Did he actually refuse to play then?

Don't know but he was happy to allow the circumstances to happen that meant the club decided not to play him.

 

He should have just accepted the "derisory" record offer we gave him and proved himself worthy of a big move

Like Sessignon has done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Watson said:

 

 

Agree with most of what you say but if you were to tie down every talented player with good contracts then you are going to end up with players who don't live up to their early promise.   I'm sure OT would have plenty to say about that.

 

At this moment we don't know how good or bad the contracts are, so it's difficult to judge whether the players are justified in declining them.  But for me, they look after number one, as we all do regarding jobs if anyone was offered better terms for doing the same job they would jump at the chance.  If they have been offered a contract with a Premier club then whatever we offer we going to ultimately fail in attracting them.

 

Having said that I would hope that behind the scenes we are still being proactive and that deals can still be worked out.

 

This episode illustrates to me how difficult it is bringing youngsters to fruition, must be one of the most rewarding and also upsetting tasks of football management.

There is a very simple way to do this but we simple don't do it, we sign the players to standard 3 year contract when they join the development squad on what ever is the going wag be that only £500 a week, we should have the coaches with enough about them to see after a season of working with them how they are developing. If they look like first team future players you renegotiate an improved deal but with an option for the club to extend at the end of it. If not then they stay with the development squad to hopefully develop, or we get rid to teams lower down the league structure. £500 a week is £26,000 a year + coach lets say £100,000 you only need 1 or 2 players to make the first team step up every season to more than cover the costs of developing 15-20 players each year.

 

Look this season Thorniley has stepped up meaning we don't need to replace Loovens and this could save us millions in the next few years, Dawson/Wildsmith have stepped up we could get rid of Westwood and not need to replace him save £20k+ a week on his salary and a sizable fee to replace a player of his standard.

 

This is how other teams do it, we have for 10 years+ been very short sighted with youth and not given them a chance to develop but not rewarded them for it. the Hirst saga has been an embarrassment for everyone but what we need is the club to learn from it. £5,000 a week would cost us £260,000 a year, £10,000 a week - £520,000 a year. But we might get a million in compensation for him but you only have to look at the like of Sheff United and Barnsley how much we could have missed out on Barnsley had a 17.5% sell on in the Stones deal that netted them nearly £9m from the sell on after selling him for £3m, Sheff Utd sold Maguire for £3m and have received another £5m from the sell on fee.

 

When you are under the cosh with FFP, having a productive youth team that provides players and also helps to balance the books is the difference between the teams that do well and the teams that get caught out by FFP.

 

The best example I can see in our league at the moment is Brentford, they have a conveyor belt of good young players and great scouting from the lower league they sold £20m+ of players last season and improved their team narrowly missing out on the play offs. We are penny pinching in the wrong areas, then giving out silly contracts to players like Fletcher £40k, Abdi £30k, Matia £25, Jones £25k. These 4 players off the wage bill would save £5m+ a year in salaries - this is the reason the finance are in a mess not the £10,000 a week Hirst and Clare may have wanted.   

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, akitaowl said:

Nothing to do with not been good enough why he was let go

Yes it was, we let him go then he went to stocksbridge for about 8 years, then halifax and fleetwood. So he wasnt good enough back then , and he wasnt good enough for another 8 or 9 years!

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, CLswfc said:

It didn't for Clare. He was tried in the first team. By investing in them both from a early age, I would say the club have done more than enough to aid their development. I agree there isn't any loyalty as both appear to have demonstrated. Im sure their advisor's know what they are doing. There was always a door open for young Hirst but he chose not to go through it. He still isn't proven on the big stage, is he. 

Does loyalty not work both ways though the club did not start negotiating with Clare until he had 6 months left of his contract. So for the kid and his advisers to get to January and the club not bother to tie him down to a new deals it is not his fault for looking elsewhere,

 

The problem with Hirst was basically Carlos - when Hirst started coming through beginning of last season he was tipped to get a chance in the first team at which point Carlos came out and said he would not get a chance for 18 months. Your a young player scoring 40 goals in a season, playing for your country and developing and you look at the first team and Hirst had scored more goals that Hooper, Joao, Nuihu, Winnall and Fletcher put together but he doesn't get a chance even when players ahead of him were not performing week in week out.

 

Look the whole saga has been a complete clusterfuck by all sides, but for me the thing that will be remembered most is when we get Karien comes in and we invited GH to come back and train with the club and play we get told in a press conference that he is not allowed to play any games - for me this said everything I needed to know about who was the main issue in the negotiations. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, room0035 said:

Does loyalty not work both ways though the club did not start negotiating with Clare until he had 6 months left of his contract. So for the kid and his advisers to get to January and the club not bother to tie him down to a new deals it is not his fault for looking elsewhere,

 

The problem with Hirst was basically Carlos - when Hirst started coming through beginning of last season he was tipped to get a chance in the first team at which point Carlos came out and said he would not get a chance for 18 months. Your a young player scoring 40 goals in a season, playing for your country and developing and you look at the first team and Hirst had scored more goals that Hooper, Joao, Nuihu, Winnall and Fletcher put together but he doesn't get a chance even when players ahead of him were not performing week in week out.

 

Look the whole saga has been a complete clusterfuck by all sides, but for me the thing that will be remembered most is when we get Karien comes in and we invited GH to come back and train with the club and play we get told in a press conference that he is not allowed to play any games - for me this said everything I needed to know about who was the main issue in the negotiations. 

 

You can’t really compare how many goals he had scored against the first team lads record can you really,  however many he had scored they were all at academy level football 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...