How long do we EXPECT our players to stay?

Once again, with Wanyama's imminent departure, questions are being asked as to why can't we keep our top players? This begs the question in the title, how long do we expect them to stay? . Clearly certain players can be very influential to the team and we'd want to keep them forever. Conversely if we started a season without making any changes over the summer we'd be complaining about no ambition / treading water.

As a point of reference the list below are the only players (in order) that have played over 300 times in the PL for just one club. It's a surprisingly short list. Seems nobody stays around anywhere very long.

Ryan Giggs

Jamie Carragher

Steve Gerrard

John Terry

Paul Scholes

GaryNeville

Leon Osman

Jason Dodd

Gary Kelly

Gabriel Agbonlahar

Sammi Hyypia

Dennis Bergkamp

Not really to far beyond there initial contract - we should be offering new players 5 year contracts not the standard 4. That way we at least get them for 4 and a decent fee or 3 and a massive fee.

Not really to far beyond there initial contract - we should be offering new players 5 year contracts not the standard 4. That way we at least get them for 4 and a decent fee or 3 and a massive fee.

That's fine if they are players that people want to stay at the club but it works both ways imagine players like Osvaldo, Gaston or Martina getting 5 year deals...

3 years seems fair to me. Wanyama and Clyne are decent examples of this.

3 years seems fair to me. Wanyama and Clyne are decent examples of this.

but if they had both stayed for two years we might have got an extra £20m in transfer fees, which we could have reinvested. Very tricky balancing act the club has to play. I am not sure they want players getting down to one year left on their deals. Mane's situation will be very interesting. Two years left on his contract feels like we are in the driving seat, but if he doesn't extend this summer will we HAVE to cash in or face losing £10-15m on his value?

I'm afraid that players/agents hold all the aces these days and as soon as someone has a good season then the negotiating position reverts to their advantage !

Teams like Saints in the 2nd level of Premier Leagus clubs (around 6th to 14th) have little option but to cash out at the optimum time or end up with nothing !

It's not Les's fault, nor Ralph, nor Kat, it is just a fact of modern day football life !

Sad but true !

We march on........

Ps. Wurzel, hope all is well in your world ?

but if they had both stayed for two years we might have got an extra £20m in transfer fees, which we could have reinvested. Very tricky balancing act the club has to play. I am not sure they want players getting down to one year left on their deals. Mane's situation will be very interesting. Two years left on his contract feels like we are in the driving seat, but if he doesn't extend this summer will we HAVE to cash in or face losing £10-15m on his value?

Yes, it is a balance. I would personally consider a 5 year contract excessive based on the risk of things not working out but it would play to the strengths you indicate while giving the service we would expect from a signing.

Equally, an ambitious player may feel trapped by the idea of a 5 year term and it may make it less likely for them to sign.

I think we are getting it about right currently.

Equally, an ambitious player may feel trapped by the idea of a 5 year term and it may make it less likely for them to sign.

 

Agreed. I guess that's where the release clauses come in. The Mane contract offer will be a case in point. Add two years to his deal to help protect the asset value, offset of course by a huge wage rise, and then a suitable release clause so he can jump ship if the right offer comes.

Length of contract minus 1 if they are outstanding and/or a mercenary longer if they are only good and/or not a mercenary.

It really is pretty simple in this day and age. The list of players with 300 games consists of 8 players who stayed for most of their careers at a very top club and were outstanding players the others are all in the next tier ie good players who liked the club they played for.

2-3 years, not everyone dreams for a long career at southampton other than you or I.

Shouldn't there be a thought about how long do we need players to stay? Players leave all clubs, only the very biggest keep the majority for a long time so probably needs to be a mix of the time duration players stay with us. For me, we need a core group of 5-7 first team players to play for at least 5 years, one or two who will stay for 10 years or more. The rest needs to be some coming in who improve us and stay for at least 3 years, and then youth coming in to keep things fresh every season. Currently, following Wanyama's departure, we are on track for this being established. The key trying for our ongoing success is that every player who comes here feels they have improved their career. If the academy starts producing the type of players the strategy requires, we won't need to buy as many in but players and their agents will always feel there are opportunities elsewhere. To avoid that, and even then, players still move on, we need to be winning trophies on a regular basis.

Frankly the ons who can pass a ball in the right direction, head, and score the odd goal will be sold as soon as a decent offer comes in. The ones that cant will become legends as they will stay

Frankly the ons who can pass a ball in the right direction, head, and score the odd goal will be sold as soon as a decent offer comes in. The ones that cant will become legends as they will stay

Yeah...Just like MLT

Yeah...Just like MLT

Different era, if MLT played today he would not remain at Saints and anyone who thinks he would is mad, similarly he would be much much fitter and probably an even better player as a result.

Different era, if MLT played today he would not remain at Saints and anyone who thinks he would is mad, similarly he would be much much fitter and probably an even better player as a result.

You have absolutley no idea about that...

You have absolutley no idea about that...

No but it's freeking obvious that in this day and age we would not hold onto one of easily the best players of his generation, the money on offer for a player like that would be mind boggling both for the club and the individual it would be like bale deciding to stay!

No but it's freeking obvious that in this day and age we would not hold onto one of easily the best players of his generation, the money on offer for a player like that would be mind boggling both for the club and the individual it would be like bale deciding to stay!

But, we will never know..

But, we will never know..

you seem to lol. MLT stayed because his wife didnt want to move. My friend was his neighbour BTW

Where does it say i know lol...i said we will never know

I think three years is a perfectly reasonable 'tour of duty' with Saints, so have no issue with Clyne, Big Vic or Morgan. It's the likes of Lovren that disappoint

Different era, if MLT played today he would not remain at Saints and anyone who thinks he would is mad, similarly he would be much much fitter and probably an even better player as a result.

He would certainly be fitter and even better IMO. Think he would be very unlikely to stay in this day and age.

Totally true that it was his wife that decided she didn't want to move to London, if she hadn't Saints history may have been very different!

I think three years is a perfectly reasonable 'tour of duty' with Saints, so have no issue with Clyne, Big Vic or Morgan. It's the likes of Lovren that disappoint

The Toby thing was rubbish.

The Toby thing was rubbish.

I don't have any issue with Toby as he never committed to us since he was on loan

I expect them to stay for their contract (give or take a year).

xxxxxxx

I think there are several possible answers to the OP.

Most of the players in the top half of that list......have been one-club men, and even youth players in those same clubs that have " won things ".(League titles, Cups etc.)

Also those clubs had big incomes that equal big salaries, and so they had little or no desire to move from a club that was successful and paying them well.

With as much as 60% of the Prem. players being non-British, (and of those), the better ones stay longer at successful clubs.

Loyalty, in the old meaning hardly exists now. Careers are short, managers leave /are sacked more often and incoming replacements want to get in their own favourites.

Many foreign imports have already had a career start elsewhere, so don't have the same " ties " to an English club, and if they like the club ....they will stay longer.

NOTED: I saw one glaring omission to your list ...that of Claus Lundekvam who played over 400 games for Saints (almost all in the Prem.) and DAJFU on many occasions.

I don't have any issue with Toby as he never committed to us since he was on loan

It was still a bit rubbish.

I think there are several possible answers to the OP.

 

Most of the players in the top half of that list......have been one-club men, and even youth players in those same clubs that have " won things ".(League titles, Cups etc.)

Also those clubs had big incomes that equal big salaries, and so they had little or no desire to move from a club that was successful and paying them well.

 

With as much as 60% of the Prem. players being non-British, (and of those), the better ones stay longer at successful clubs.

 

Loyalty, in the old meaning hardly exists now. Careers are short, managers leave /are sacked more often and incoming replacements want to get in their own favourites.

Many foreign imports have already had a career start elsewhere, so don't have the same " ties " to an English club, unless they like the club ....they will stay longer.

 

NOTED: I saw one glaring omission to your list ...that of Claus Lundekvam who played over 400 games for Saints (almost all in the Prem.) and DAJFU on many occasions.

xxxxx

NOTED: I saw one glaring omission to your list ...that of Claus Lundekvam who played over 400 games for Saints (almost all in the Prem.) and DAJFU on many occasions.

The list was PL appearances, he only breaks the 300 if you count the 2 seasons in the championship.

Seems general consensus matches my own, 3 years is a decent stint nowadays, anything longer shows good club loyalty (or no-one else wants them lol )

Once again, with Wanyama's imminent departure, questions are being asked as to why can't we keep our top players? This begs the question in the title, how long do we expect them to stay? . Clearly certain players can be very influential to the team and we'd want to keep them forever. Conversely if we started a season without making any changes over the summer we'd be complaining about no ambition / treading water.

 

As a point of reference the list below are the only players (in order) that have played over 300 times in the PL for just one club. It's a surprisingly short list. Seems nobody stays around anywhere very long.

 

Ryan Giggs

Jamie Carragher

Steve Gerrard

John Terry

Paul Scholes

GaryNeville

Leon Osman

Jason Dodd

Gary Kelly

Gabriel Agbonlahar

Sammi Hyypia

Dennis Bergkamp

So 7 out of the 12 are in a "tiny" 25 mile or so radius, must be something in that Northwest water?

We will keep players long enough for some them to attract the attention of teams who pay better wages. We are not in the business of keeping our best players if there are buyers, it's not part of the club strategy.

2 maybe 3 years if you ask me, contracts dont say anything and i dont really care in the first place. Plenty of good players out there, you just cant sell half your team over one summer. And really the more interest there is for the players from bigger clubs the better cause thats means you have good players.

So ill worry when no one wants to buy our players anymore otherwise i dont really care how long players stay, well as long as the club doesnt sell more then 2 key players every summer.