Listing the transfer Targets

[Hove Ranger]

I understand that most clubs don't let their good players' contracts run out, or even run down to one year remaining. They offer their good players a new contract before that happens and if the player doesn't sign then the club transfers the player, thereby getting full market value. If you want good players you will have slim pickings if you restrict yourself to players whose clubs have allowed their contracts to run out!

I would disagree. Predominantly in the top leagues you are right but in the lower leagues teams have to work to strict budgets and are sometimes unable to offer significant pay rises to players with more than a year left. There is so much risk involved with the uncertainty of relegation and FFP and generally a lot of them dont have much money. Plus with the rise of player power in modern football some teams struggle to be able to meet the demands of their improving players

[nasser95]

I understand that most clubs don't let their good players' contracts run out, or even run down to one year remaining. They offer their good players a new contract before that happens and if the player doesn't sign then the club transfers the player, thereby getting full market value. If you want good players you will have slim pickings if you restrict yourself to players whose clubs have allowed their contracts to run out!

Again, lets go back and take a look, Lewandowski, Danny Ings, Pirlo, Cambiasso and many more have left clubs (or will leave) on bosmans and have only gotten better since

[Hove Ranger]

The main point of the younger transfer policy is to allow the club to be run with some sort of financial restrain. Buying older players is seen as dead money in the fact that their value naturally decreases as they get older meaning that money spent will never be recouped. Signing younger players at favourable fees for whatever reason (contractual, personal, geographical etc) allows the club to generally recoup at least what it spends as the player will not decrease in value much more than what they paid, meaning the money invested is constantly being reinvested allowing the club to run with some sort of diligence. The key is obviously identifying the right players, ones with potential that can be developed. Also there is no problem with signing older players on free transfers as that just affects wage budgets. This idea is fairly common among a lot of clubs nowadays, only spending proper fees on players under a certain age as they see it as good investments.

[dsqpr]

Again, lets go back and take a look, Lewandowski, Danny Ings, Pirlo, Cambiasso and many more have left clubs (or will leave) on bosmans and have only gotten better since

Citing a few examples of good players whose contracts ran out does not disprove my point! To disprove my point, you will have to show that there are no players with two years or more on their contracts who would have been good signings! The policy stated higher up is too restrictive.

Also, I'm not sure that even the players you have mentioned above would be suitable for us. Likely all either high earners or would not be motivated to play for us (having played for bigger clubs).

[dsqpr]

The main point of the younger transfer policy is to allow the club to be run with some sort of financial restrain. Buying older players is seen as dead money in the fact that their value naturally decreases as they get older meaning that money spent will never be recouped. Signing younger players at favourable fees for whatever reason (contractual, personal, geographical etc) allows the club to generally recoup at least what it spends as the player will not decrease in value much more than what they paid, meaning the money invested is constantly being reinvested allowing the club to run with some sort of diligence. The key is obviously identifying the right players, ones with potential that can be developed. Also there is no problem with signing older players on free transfers as that just affects wage budgets. This idea is fairly common among a lot of clubs nowadays, only spending proper fees on players under a certain age as they see it as good investments.

Yes, I see your point, and I agree that there is probably more opportunity in the lower leagues but for players who are unproven at a higher level. That does make some sense but would be hit and miss I think (although I suppose that could be said of any transfer). And if we get an opportunity to sign the right player who is looking for a move but still has more than a year left on his contract, it would be a shame to miss out. IMHO we should be keeping our eyes open for those players too.

I'll leave it at that. You have made good points. We probably need to agree to disagree.

[Hove Ranger]

Yes, I see your point, and I agree that there is probably more opportunity in the lower leagues but for players who are unproven at a higher level. That does make some sense but would be hit and miss I think (although I suppose that could be said of any transfer). And if we get an opportunity to sign the right player who is looking for a move but still has more than a year left on his contract, it would be a shame to miss out. IMHO we should be keeping our eyes open for those players too.

I'll leave it at that. You have made good points. We probably need to agree to disagree.

[nasser95]

Citing a few examples of good players whose contracts ran out does not disprove my point! To disprove my point, you will have to show that there are no players with two years or more on their contracts who would have been good signings! The policy stated higher up is too restrictive.

Also, I'm not sure that even the players you have mentioned above would be suitable for us. Likely all either high earners or would not be motivated to play for us (having played for bigger clubs).

You think i was mentioning them for us? C'mon mate haha.

I'm saying that players who are being targeted are those on shorter length contract because they tend to be cheaper. If the manager then came in with another suggestion who isn't in the category, I'm sure Les will do his research and make a decision from that.

[Shania]

Stay on topic,please.

[nasser95]

Stay on topic,please.

lol wut, I'd say this couldn't be more on topic Shania.

[Shania]

lol wut, I'd say this couldn't be more on topic Shania.

I want names!! Thatīs the entertainment.


Ps. Itīs your thread, though.

[nasser95]

I want names!! Thatīs the entertainment.


Ps. Itīs your thread, though.

Haha, I have offered a list of names initially, been bogged down with exam prep but will get back to finding players in all leagues haha.

[Shania]

Thanks, nasser95.

[nasser95]

I did list sammy ameobi already for the prem teams and I'm hard at work on the remaining lists down to league 1, but watching him in those 20 minutes he was on the pitch, I don't know why we don't go for him instead of Sako?

[geejaybee]

LF has apparently watched Lorient winger Jordan Ayew a couple of times recently as a possible replacement for Matty Phillips.

[RoryTheRanger]

Again, lets go back and take a look, Lewandowski, Danny Ings, Pirlo, Cambiasso and many more have left clubs (or will leave) on bosmans and have only gotten better since

Most of the players you just named there have not been better since leaving on a bosman. Lewandowski was far better at Dortmund, scored more goals and got more assists. Pirlo's prime was back in 2006 when he won the World Cup, still amazing after he left Milan for Juve but still not as good as he used to be and Cambiasso has certainly not got better at Leicester compared to how he was at Inter Milan