Jump to content

Why don't we sign players on longer contracts?


stevy777_x
 Share

Recommended Posts

Just seen what we will receive for Clyne deal up front which is in large part because he was entering the last year of his contract.

We seem to have signed all of our recent players on 4 year deals (clyne, wanyama, rodriguez, morgan, cedric, Juanmi) which tends to put pressure on us pretty rapidly.

 

Wanyama who has been at the club 2 years now will have one year left on his deal next summer and i can already foresee selling him at a lower price if he doesn t sign a new contract.

 

Other teams don t seem to have this issue as they tend to sign players on 5-6 years contracts (most recently Nexcastle and West Ham).

 

Should we not be doing the same?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just seen what we will receive for Clyne deal up front which is in large part because he was entering the last year of his contract.

We seem to have signed all of our recent players on 4 year deals (clyne, wanyama, rodriguez, morgan, cedric, Juanmi) which tends to put pressure on us pretty rapidly.

 

Wanyama who has been at the club 2 years now will have one year left on his deal next summer and i can already foresee selling him at a lower price if he doesn t sign a new contract.

 

Other teams don t seem to have this issue as they tend to sign players on 5-6 years contracts (most recently Nexcastle and West Ham).

 

Should we not be doing the same?

 

I thought 5 years was the maximum length for a "CDD" for footballers in the UK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For every good player signed on a four year deal, there is an Osvaldo. A four year deal is in effect a two year deal, as a club should be reopening contract negotiations with a player as they enter the last 24 months of their deal.

 

Five years feels like a good max to offer a young player we already know, with four years offered to new signings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just seen what we will receive for Clyne deal up front which is in large part because he was entering the last year of his contract.

We seem to have signed all of our recent players on 4 year deals (clyne, wanyama, rodriguez, morgan, cedric, Juanmi) which tends to put pressure on us pretty rapidly.

 

Wanyama who has been at the club 2 years now will have one year left on his deal next summer and i can already foresee selling him at a lower price if he doesn t sign a new contract.

 

Other teams don t seem to have this issue as they tend to sign players on 5-6 years contracts (most recently Nexcastle and West Ham).

 

Should we not be doing the same?

3- 4 years seems typical for most deals at most clubs. Saints don't want to be tied to a player on high wages that has failed and often players don't want to be tied to a club for too long. 3 to 4 years is a good chunk of a player's career and a reasonable compromise.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just seen what we will receive for Clyne deal up front which is in large part because he was entering the last year of his contract.

We seem to have signed all of our recent players on 4 year deals (clyne, wanyama, rodriguez, morgan, cedric, Juanmi) which tends to put pressure on us pretty rapidly.

 

Wanyama who has been at the club 2 years now will have one year left on his deal next summer and i can already foresee selling him at a lower price if he doesn t sign a new contract.

 

Other teams don t seem to have this issue as they tend to sign players on 5-6 years contracts (most recently Nexcastle and West Ham).

 

Should we not be doing the same?

 

5 and especially 6 year contracts are pretty rare. They also require a player agreeing to it and if they think they are capable of getting a big transfer in the future they may not want to potentially restrict themselves 2 or 3 years later. Also from Saints point of view, if a signing doesn't work out and he is on a 6 year contract thats a huge financial commitment and may make him hard to shift out of the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clyne was unproven at PL level. 4 years was probably excessive. I've always been a fan of 3 years with the club having the right to extend that to 5 at anytime with the first 2 seasons. Would help a lot, especially with some of the aforementioned names

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our main issue is that either we are slow off the mark in looking to extend the contracts, or, more likely, the players move to us with the thought of playing a couple of years every week in a decent PL side knowing they will get offers if they play well.

 

If we asked them to sign 5 year deals at the start some might refuse as it gives them far less control of their situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SFC started talking to Clyne's agent (before he was banned) around October of last year. Even going back say to 2013 he clearly would have stuck to type and turned down any contract offer. Its in his interests financially to do that a bit like Cork.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

his renewed contract was for (wait for it )....8 years, and I think he left after 3.

 

Yeah and had they held on to him that long they'd have been a stable Prem club for a long time. The fact that they stayed up by the width of the skidmark in their knickers was testament to how good a job he was doing there before being hounded out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 years is pretty standard, usually they come with clauses that if you reach a certain amount of games there's an optional extension to sign etc (I think Jay triggered that a season or so ago, and then got injured).

 

I think 5/6 year contracts are pretty rare, the financial outlay is huge for a club like ourselves. A massive gamble really.

 

And people saying we leave it too late, how do you know what goes on behind the scenes? I'm pretty sure we'd have been on top of Clyne's/Morgan's contracts a while back, probably coinciding with all the crappy instability of last pre-season which didn't help. But it's pure folly to think the club just left it to the last minute to negotiate a deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that we should just write in to a players contract that the contract end is "whenever you retire, or when you die; whichever comes first"

 

We'd have no problem with squad depth then.

 

At least we would find out which players were dying to get out of Southampton.

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...