New Contract For Wanyama?

Isn't that what we should be hearing and wanting as we dont want to go down the same road with wanyama like clyne.

Chances are he wouldn't sign it.

Doubt the delay would be our end.

No chance.

Can we add a "?" to the thread title please?

Massive shame but it's going to be another Clyne situation, can only see us getting around £15m for him.

Massive shame but it's going to be another Clyne situation, can only see us getting around £15m for him.

So a 3 mill profit? Doubt the club would accept that.

So a 3 mill profit? Doubt the club would accept that.

We won't have a choice @ the end of this season - We will be in the "Clyne" situation again.

Isn't that what we should be hearing and wanting as we dont want to go down the same road with wanyama like clyne.

He has already made it clear that he thinks he is destined for Arsenal he won't sign a new contract. Playing hardball with Morgan last year, while the right thing to do, sent a message to players not to tie themselves to new contracts if they want to move.

Can we add a "?" to the thread title please?

Seconded. Bumpity-bump.

The club have shown great progress and are the model for most English football clubs. With that in mind I no longer have any doubts that all contract and transfer situations are in hand.... so not to worry. Thread can be closed.

Mane and Wanyama are next Summer's Clyne and Schnierderlin.

Ideally yes.

Reality - he won't sign one and will move at the end of this season after 3 good years. As he will only have a year left we will get less than he is worth, as with Clyne.

Anything the club can do: bar trying to get players like VW and Mane to sign new deals after 1 year, not really.

I think we should go all out to get him to sign a new one and if that means offering him BIG wages then so be it. We can finance that easily by adding a few more Category A matches next season. Can't see anyone grumbling about that.

I think we should go all out to get him to sign a new one and if that means offering him BIG wages then so be it. We can finance that easily by adding a few more Category A matches next season. Can't see anyone grumbling about that.

What I expect...

I expect we will offer him a new contract

I expect it will be for favourable wages without breaking our current pay structure (i.e. could make him our highest paid player but nothing ridiculous)

I expect he will prefer to wait and see what his options are

I expect a top 4/6 team will come in with an offer for a high amount and much higher wages than we can afford

I expect he will leave

This will be the pattern for any of our players that are in demand and wanted by the teams above us. We just don't have the financial power to compete with those above us (at least as long as the Liebherrs want us to be self sustainable). I'd say the only way we could get a player to stay is if they really do love the club and have a connection to it. Think that's what annoyed people so much about the Lallana transfer - if anyone was gonna stay you thought it would be him but even he jumped at the first chance of money and glory.

Sorry i cant edit but................. ?

Since there is very little loyalty towards the supporters or indeed the shirt any more it would be nice for players to respect the business side of things and help a club that has furthered their careers maximise their transfer fee by signing improved terms.

Or does running down your contract actually make the player money? Do they maximise their signing on fee or something? I suppose it makes them more attractive if the fee is going to be much smaller.

Didn't Walcott and Chamberlain sign improved deals to effectively get Saints a bigger transfer fee??? I may of made that up but something in back of my mind says to me that it happened.

Yup, he'll be gone next summer unfortunately.

Since there is very little loyalty towards the supporters or indeed the shirt any more it would be nice for players to respect the business side of things and help a club that has furthered their careers maximise their transfer fee by signing improved terms.

 

Or does running down your contract actually make the player money? Do they maximise their signing on fee or something? I suppose it makes them more attractive if the fee is going to be much smaller.

 

Didn't Walcott and Chamberlain sign improved deals to effectively get Saints a bigger transfer fee??? I may of made that up but something in back of my mind says to me that it happened.

I think Walcott just said to Arsenal "pay Southampton a decent fee or I'm not signing for you".

Ah you bugger, I thought he'd signed when I saw this thread!

Ah you bugger, I thought he'd signed when I saw this thread!

Yep, its quite misleading. But then I saw it was created by pluto.

I wonder what our approach is towards building in buy out clauses into player contracts? It's a risk to the player to sign up again if a move to a bigger club is on the horizon but surely there is an option for an interim "win-win" solution which would be a player getting better terms, with Saints able to recover the right fee through the buy out clause which if done right, won't make the player unattainable for bigger sides.

Agree with others that Wanyama will be next years Clyne. Mane will be next years Wanyama.

I think we should go all out to get him to sign a new one and if that means offering him BIG wages then so be it. We can finance that easily by adding a few more Category A matches next season. Can't see anyone grumbling about that.

I wonder what our approach is towards building in buy out clauses into player contracts? It's a risk to the player to sign up again if a move to a bigger club is on the horizon but surely there is an option for an interim "win-win" solution which would be a player getting better terms, with Saints able to recover the right fee through the buy out clause which if done right, won't make the player unattainable for bigger sides.

 

Agree with others that Wanyama will be next years Clyne. Mane will be next years Wanyama.

This. We know our place in the food chain. Add a clause that says they can leave if a CL clubs makes an offer we accept.

What I expect...

 

I expect we will offer him a new contract

I expect it will be for favourable wages without breaking our current pay structure (i.e. could make him our highest paid player but nothing ridiculous)

I expect he will prefer to wait and see what his options are

I expect a top 4/6 team will come in with an offer for a high amount and much higher wages than we can afford

I expect he will leave

 

This will be the pattern for any of our players that are in demand and wanted by the teams above us. We just don't have the financial power to compete with those above us (at least as long as the Liebherrs want us to be self sustainable). I'd say the only way we could get a player to stay is if they really do love the club and have a connection to it. Think that's what annoyed people so much about the Lallana transfer - if anyone was gonna stay you thought it would be him but even he jumped at the first chance of money and glory.

This is an excellent summary.

Isn't that what we should be hearing and wanting as we dont want to go down the same road with wanyama like clyne.

This why we should ve have signed him on a five year contract and not a four year one like we seem to do.

Had he signed a five year one he would have 2 years remaining on his next summer, giving us much more flexibility to negociate his transfee fee if he doesn t want to stay.

Reed has made clear several times we are a shop window club. Great players from minor leagues / up and coming players / players with a problem looking to breakout come to Saints and get experience and exposure of playing in the PL. When they are good enough for top 4 they move on and we pocket the increase in value and use it to fund the next signing. That our business model, its the only way we will be able to compete near the top. Id much rather see mostly young players on the way up than older stars on the way down.

Reed has made clear several times we are a shop window club. Great players from other leagues comes / up and coming players / second chance players with a problem somewhere else come to Saints and get experience and exposure of playing in the PL. When they are good enough for top 4 they move on and we pocket the increase in value and use it to fund the next signing. That our business model, its the only way we will be able to compete near the top. Id much rather have mostly young players on the way up than older established stars on the way down.

Except we won't get the increased value if players enter the final year of their contracts. If we offer a 4 year deal and the player does well in year 1, the optimum time to sell is realistically in year 2.

This why we should ve have signed him on a five year contract and not a four year one like we seem to do.

Had he signed a five year one he would have 2 years remaining on his next summer, giving us much more flexibility to negociate his transfee fee if he doesn t want to stay.

Just like Tommy Forecast.

Except we won't get the increased value if players enter the final year of their contracts. If we offer a 4 year deal and the player does well in year 1, the optimum time to sell is realistically in year 2.

But then you'd have the team in a constant state of flux. Its a trade off between making the money back and team performance

But then you'd have the team in a constant state of flux. Its a trade off between making the money back and team performance

Yep, that's the argument really. If we position ourselves as a "show-case" club, the implication is high player turn-over with 1-2 season max from the ones which do really well for us. If this is really our model, allowing players to enter the final year of their contract is counter to that even if we do get more stability and team performance that way. There is an interesting trade off somewhere down the line.

Arsenal next summer for £12m imo.

This why we should ve have signed him on a five year contract and not a four year one like we seem to do.

Had he signed a five year one he would have 2 years remaining on his next summer, giving us much more flexibility to negociate his transfee fee if he doesn t want to stay.

What if he turned out to be crap? People would be complaining that we'd given such a crap player such a long contract.

Yep, its quite misleading. But then I saw it was created by pluto.

He's got a decent number of bites though, so mission accomplished.

Yep, its quite misleading. But then I saw it was created by pluto.

Yes, misleading and annoying.

Except we won't get the increased value if players enter the final year of their contracts. If we offer a 4 year deal and the player does well in year 1, the optimum time to sell is realistically in year 2.

Except the club have never said anything about selling at an "optimum" time, or achieving an "optimal" fee.

We will get three seasons out of Victor. I doubt he will sign an extension and if Arsenal/Liverpool etc want him next season they'll get him for £14m or another acceptable fee. Not the optimum fee we could ever get - but a fee we will accept.

I don't quite understand the bed wetting about how that theoretical fee compares to what we paid Celtic for him, or some perceived sense of losing out because if he had a five year contract we could charge £35m for him or whatever.

Who gives a fu cking monkeys - it isn't really our money, and it makes no difference to our ability to recruit the next one anyway. He has a year left, he won't renew, some Champions League-ish club want him, £14m or so, lovely, sold, done. Good luck and thanks Victor.

Just remember we won't get ripped off, and guess what, we had a player called Victor Wanyama playing for us and his performances took us to top half finishes and European football. Three years of it. Brilliant.

Now, I am thoroughly enjoying the fact that the 2016 meltdown has already started. Bring it on, you soppy old sods.

Get Champions League and there's a hope...

Get Champions League and there's a hope...

......or not.

I think we would have to be regular Champions league and trophy winners for several seasons and be one of the highest wage payers around before that hope ever came home to rest.

Except the club have never said anything about selling at an "optimum" time, or achieving an "optimal" fee.

 

We will get three seasons out of Victor. I doubt he will sign an extension and if Arsenal/Liverpool etc want him next season they'll get him for £14m or another acceptable fee. Not the optimum fee we could ever get - but a fee we will accept.

 

I don't quite understand the bed wetting about how that theoretical fee compares to what we paid Celtic for him, or some perceived sense of losing out because if he had a five year contract we could charge £35m for him or whatever.

 

Who gives a fu cking monkeys - it isn't really our money, and it makes no difference to our ability to recruit the next one anyway. He has a year left, he won't renew, some Champions League-ish club want him, £14m or so, lovely, sold, done. Good luck and thanks Victor.

 

Just remember we won't get ripped off, and guess what, we had a player called Victor Wanyama playing for us and his performances took us to top half finishes and European football. Three years of it. Brilliant.

 

Now, I am thoroughly enjoying the fact that the 2016 meltdown has already started. Bring it on, you soppy old sods.

Discussing our approach to transfers is hardly indicitive of a pre 2016 meltdown although we all know you're like a dog on heat looking to sniff anything out which even looks like a criticism of uncle Les and co to get your teeth into. It really isn't though, so try not to get too worked up and all frothy at the mouth too soon. Plenty on here talk about sustainability being based on getting players in at good fees and selling them on for a big. Just stating the fact thatit doesn't really work if contracts run to the final year. The flip side is high player turnover each year. Not a criticism or a claim to any of the money involved, just a couple of posts on a forum.

Who gives a fu cking monkeys - it isn't really our money, and it makes no difference to our ability to recruit the next one anyway. He has a year left, he won't renew, some Champions League-ish club want him, £14m or so, lovely, sold, done. Good luck and thanks Victor.

I agree with most of what you said but I disagree with this. The whole 'it's not your money' argument doesn't mean anything because it's like because you personally don't spend it on a player you can't judge a player against the fee paid for him. In which case we can't say Osvaldo was a waste of money, and we can't say Fonte was amazing value - except they were.

And getting a bigger fee for Wanyama does help in replacing him, as we have more money, which gives you more ability in the market. That a players contract duration impacts their fee so much is annoying, but that is life. It's just worth remembering we also benefit from it as much as we are victims of it!

Discussing our approach to transfers is hardly indicitive of a pre 2016 meltdown although we all know you're like a dog on heat looking to sniff anything out which even looks like a criticism of uncle Les and co to get your teeth into. It really isn't though, so try not to get too worked up and all frothy at the mouth too soon. Plenty on here talk about sustainability being based on getting players in at good fees and selling them on for a big. Just stating the fact thatit doesn't really work if contracts run to the final year. The flip side is high player turnover each year. Not a criticism or a claim to any of the money involved, just a couple of posts on a forum.

Interesting you interpret a post where I discuss how relaxed I am about Victor Wanyama leaving us next season as "frothy at the mouth".

Funny, your sneering reference to "Uncle Les and co" seems far more frustrated/angry than anything I've said.

Enjoy the season. We are in great hands, aren't we?

Interesting you interpret a post where I discuss how relaxed I am about Victor Wanyama leaving us next season as "frothy at the mouth".

 

Funny, your sneering reference to "Uncle Les and co" seems far more frustrated/angry than anything I've said.

 

Enjoy the season. We are in great hands, aren't we?

I don't know about you, but I'm dreading pre-season 18/19.

Interesting you interpret a post where I discuss how relaxed I am about Victor Wanyama leaving us next season as "frothy at the mouth".

 

Funny, your sneering reference to "Uncle Les and co" seems far more frustrated/angry than anything I've said.

 

Enjoy the season. We are in great hands, aren't we?

Yea we are. We also agree that we won't always be getting huge fees for players if we want a good few seasons out of the best ones. kindered bed wetting soppy sod spirits that we are.

I agree with most of what you said but I disagree with this. The whole 'it's not your money' argument doesn't mean anything because it's like because you personally don't spend it on a player you can't judge a player against the fee paid for him. In which case we can't say Osvaldo was a waste of money, and we can't say Fonte was amazing value - except they were.

 

And getting a bigger fee for Wanyama does help in replacing him, as we have more money, which gives you more ability in the market. That a players contract duration impacts their fee so much is annoying, but that is life. It's just worth remembering we also benefit from it as much as we are victims of it!

Maybe. In retrospect you can describe players as bargains or wastes of money, sure.

In Victor's case, our choice is to flog now for, say, £20m, doing us out of a season of Victor Wanyama, or sell next season for £14m.

My point about how the fee doesn't really matter is for our Wanyama replacement we will spend between £8-12m on come what may.

It's highly unlikely we would spend, say £5m more on a replacement in 2015 rather than 2016. And in the meantime we've had that extra year of Victor in the team than selling him at the "optimal" time.

The Toby affair and other transfers have created a mini forum hysteria that "if only we did xx" we could somehow chain players up in everlasting contracts and they'd never leave.

Victor would be mad to sign an extension now if he has agent intelligence telling him he could be at Arsenal in a year. He probably had an eye on that way back when he signed for us in 2013.

The fact that we are a stepping stone to greater things is a selling point for this club. I've no doubt Victor, Mane, Clasie, Cedric have signed for that reason among others. Good.

Two years for Mane banging them gives us either a gigantic fee at the start of Y3 or another year banging them in for us and a lower fee, but still a fee at start of Y4.

Happy days.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3185354/Southampton-open-contract-talks-Victor-Wanyama-bid-midfielder.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

#PleaseSign

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-3185354/Southampton-open-contract-talks-Victor-Wanyama-bid-midfielder.html?ITO=1490&ns_mchannel=rss&ns_campaign=1490

 

#PleaseSign

That Journo probably reads Saints Web.

Mostly writes a load of crap if you look at his history, mostly taken from other sources.

But hopefully its true.

That Journo probably reads Saints Web.

 

Mostly writes a load of crap if you look at his history, mostly taken from other sources.

 

But hopefully its true.

The fact he has mis-spelled Kenya is not a good start.

BBC Gossip page for Wed suggests we are readying to offer a contract now despite Vic having two years left!

Wow, I've only got 3 months left on my contract at work and my employer hasn't opened negotiations yet. Maybe I should be worried.

Offer him all the spaghetti he wants. Apparently he likes it.