Lee Gregory

[andrew1974]

2 hours ago, Blergh said:

When was the last time, if ever, a pro player signed a pay as you play deal? Folk routinely trot it out as a way of balancing the risk of a dubious signing but I can’t remember such an deal ever happening. 

there literally is no such thing

[Blergh]

21 minutes ago, blueandwhitematt said:

I would imagine that any problem didn’t reside with this guy finding people for us (which is his job) but more with the guy who micromanages every decision and would have trouble negotiating his way out of an open door. 

And do folk honestly think the recruit team gets to 1 January and the  thinks ‘right then, who are we going to sign’? Well run teams are planning their recruit strategy windows in advance, conversations begun with potential loan teams begun ahead of time. Getting the guy in during December was real last minute stuff. Very little time for preparations. Under the circumstances he likely did a decent job. 

[Jwowl]

6 hours ago, Miffed said:

Why would he?? 
 

Why would or should anyone do that?

 

The win win scenario is that he goes out on loan, the other team pays a percentage of his wage and everyone is happy. 
 

Blame the club not the player 

Well he doesn’t have to, he can stay and A) try and get back into the team or

B) end his career not playing much 

 

My point is if he was desperate to play and for the the move to happen he could have taken a pay cut for the move, like normal life - if you aren’t happy in your job and your current employer doesn’t think much of you, if you get a job offer elsewhere on less money your current employer doesn’t pay a contribution? I mean, they could pay you off but it isn’t the norm. 

 

It’s not the same as loaning a lad out for a percentage of his wage where he’s gaining experience / transfer value so you’re getting sone for’ of return on your investment.

 

I have no idea what the offer was, maybe it was a considerable amount of his wages and definitely worth consideration, maybe it was a tiny fraction - if it’s a tiny fraction then it’s probably worth him staying in case we have a couple of injuries up top?

 

like always in these scenarios, very few people know the details

[jonnyowl]

Lose to team 2nd in league.

 

Solution, bring in a 36 year old to chase everything down!

[oneeyedmilkman]

The Heffernan effect (2010) is still a psychological phenomenon rife in football it seems

[TrickyTrev]

2 hours ago, akbuk said:

I thought it was Röhl's decision, maybe got it wrong 

It was Röhl decision to drop him, it was Chansiri’s decision not to let him leave.

[DIPPS_S.W.F.C]

Gregory love fest thread again.....

He's past it,he was last year too in a division below and year before he didn't pull up trees..

Agree that he should have been gone in Jan for him to continue his football and yes DC is a t w a t for not letting him go or maybe he's on to good a wage here he didn't want to go,fact is we don't know but,a static 35 year old forward is not the answer,let it go ffs.....

UTO....

Edited March 10 by DIPPS_S.W.F.C

[darra]

52 minutes ago, TrickyTrev said:

It was Röhl decision to drop him, it was Chansiri’s decision not to let him leave.

And you know that statement is 100% true and if so what's your source? You're probably right about Röhl so maybe 50% true.

Or could it be that Gregory thought it might be nice to get paid a ton of money to spend Saturdays with the family? 

Who knows he might be planning on retiring at the end of the season? 

Like you I'm guessing.

[Miffed]

15 minutes ago, Jwowl said:

Well he doesn’t have to, he can stay and A) try and get back into the team or

B) end his career not playing much 

 

My point is if he was desperate to play and for the the move to happen he could have taken a pay cut for the move, like normal life - if you aren’t happy in your job and your current employer doesn’t think much of you, if you get a job offer elsewhere on less money your current employer doesn’t pay a contribution? I mean, they could pay you off but it isn’t the norm. 

 

It’s not the same as loaning a lad out for a percentage of his wage where he’s gaining experience / transfer value so you’re getting sone for’ of return on your investment.

 

I have no idea what the offer was, maybe it was a considerable amount of his wages and definitely worth consideration, maybe it was a tiny fraction - if it’s a tiny fraction then it’s probably worth him staying in case we have a couple of injuries up top?

 

like always in these scenarios, very few people know the details

Most people, in the normal life you’ve quoted, would look for another job with equal if not better pay if they were unhappy.

 

But football isn’t the same, the club have committed to a contract to pay his wages until the end of the season. Wages that you imagine would be much much higher than the league one teams he was in loan negotiations with. 
 

As you’ve said, he is coming towards the end of his career and with his contract up at the end of the season, he won’t get a transfer fee, so the remaining 5 months wages might actually make a big difference. 
 

No one knows the monetary values involved but an educated guess suggests that he would be far better off 

 

He will be keeping fit, he’ll get an offer from a club in the summer and have a full preseason to maintain his fitness and work towards match fitness.

 

If reports are to be believed, the club shouldn’t have been greedy and asked for a fee. We could have freed up his wage (and should have off loaded a few others) to fund other players coming in. 
 

No one won in this scenario

[Miffed]

8 minutes ago, darra said:

And you know that statement is 100% true and if so what's your source? You're probably right about Röhl so maybe 50% true.

Or could it be that Gregory thought it might be nice to get paid a ton of money to spend Saturdays with the family? 

Who knows he might be planning on retiring at the end of the season? 

Like you I'm guessing.

I thought it was reported that the player and Wednesday had agreed for him to go out on loan only for chansiri to ask for a loan fee at the 11th hour 

[S72 Owl]

9 hours ago, Mr Meadows said:

As a late sub would certainly have him over smith, cleverer, with a  better touch and more likely to score (unless it’s from the spot)

This, last 10 minutes needing a goal, I’d love to see Gregory come on. 
 

Cadametri was doing really well until his injury, looks a bit short on confidence at the moment too. 

[TrickyTrev]

19 minutes ago, darra said:

And you know that statement is 100% true and if so what's your source? You're probably right about Röhl so maybe 50% true.

Or could it be that Gregory thought it might be nice to get paid a ton of money to spend Saturdays with the family? 

Who knows he might be planning on retiring at the end of the season? 

Like you I'm guessing.

It was reported in the local media so unlike you I’m not guessing.

[Howards back]

He should have been allowed to go to derby but again the idiot sticks his nose in and we are paying a player to sit on his arse. 

[POWP]

1 hour ago, Jwowl said:

Well he doesn’t have to, he can stay and A) try and get back into the team or

B) end his career not playing much 

 

My point is if he was desperate to play and for the the move to happen he could have taken a pay cut for the move, like normal life - if you aren’t happy in your job and your current employer doesn’t think much of you, if you get a job offer elsewhere on less money your current employer doesn’t pay a contribution? I mean, they could pay you off but it isn’t the norm. 

 

It’s not the same as loaning a lad out for a percentage of his wage where he’s gaining experience / transfer value so you’re getting sone for’ of return on your investment.

 

I have no idea what the offer was, maybe it was a considerable amount of his wages and definitely worth consideration, maybe it was a tiny fraction - if it’s a tiny fraction then it’s probably worth him staying in case we have a couple of injuries up top?

 

like always in these scenarios, very few people know the details

 

 

If someone isn't performing as required at work in the real world, but they aren't in a durable position, they could be offered a severance package to leave.

 

Look up how companies like netflix have done this when they realise it's not really going to work out.

 

6 months pay up front to leave is not unheard of in some industries and roles. And this isn't role redundancy just when people don't fit anymore.

 

To me, subsidising a player's wage whilst out on loan is similar to this real world scenario.

[darra]

21 minutes ago, Miffed said:

I thought it was reported that the player and Wednesday had agreed for him to go out on loan only for chansiri to ask for a loan fee at the 11th hour 

Could be right suppose we'll never the full story

[Jwowl]

5 minutes ago, POWP said:

 

 

If someone isn't performing as required at work in the real world, but they aren't in a durable position, they could be offered a severance package to leave.

 

Look up how companies like netflix have done this when they realise it's not really going to work out.

 

6 months pay up front to leave is not unheard of in some industries and roles. And this isn't role redundancy just when people don't fit anymore.

 

To me, subsidising a player's wage whilst out on loan is similar to this real world scenario.

Well there’s typically no contract end date in that situation so the company could be paying this disengaged, underperforming person for years and years - so 6 months is a small amount if it gets them off the payroll for years to come.

 

we don’t know the numbers involved in January but there’s 6 months left on his contract so there’s a known cost to him remaining at the club - (its not someone coasting for the next 15 years, using sick leave, receiving pension contributions etc etc)

 

for whatever reason they decided the offer wasn’t worth it - like I’ve said, it’s hard to know whether it was the right decision without knowing the finances but of course it’s not a good situation for anyone involved 

[POWP]

just feels odd, and yea, I get it, we don’t have the information - hopefully journo’s will prod more in the future or someone will expose it all.

 

but honestly, if he stays and doesn’t play, and it comes out that there was no intention of him ever playing… it just feels like it’s a terrible decision.

 

even now, if we know he’s never going to play, they could loan him out to a non league club or maybe some other country outside of the transfer window we use… and let him just play football - assuming that’s what he wants

[Owlabroad2001]

11 hours ago, Mr Meadows said:

As a late sub would certainly have him over smith, cleverer, with a  better touch and more likely to score (unless it’s from the spot)

How is he more likely to score? Smith has out scored him easily THREE seasons in a row and also has more goals from less starts this season.

[TomtheOwl95]

43 minutes ago, POWP said:

even now, if we know he’s never going to play, they could loan him out to a non league club or maybe some other country outside of the transfer window we use… and let him just play football - assuming that’s what he wants

If Derby couldn't put up the money we (Chansiri) would want then I can't see a non-league club being able to do so.

[SouthRustyOwl]

I suspect people are basing this on Gregory's ability with us in League 1.  He has never, ever been even close to prolific in the Championship, he has scored 40 goals in 195 Championship games, so little more than 1 in 5.  In league 1 he has scored 61 in 152 games, a goal every 2.5 games.

 

He just hasn't ever cut the mustard at this level, and at 35 years old he isn't going to start now.  He should never have been given a new contract at the end of last season, that was probably due to the managerial situation.  Ideally he would have left in the January transfer window, but we really don't know whether that is due to no one wanting him, him wanting too much money, or us not willing to let him go.  I find the latter very hard to believe given we haven't even put him in the squad.