Player Trading FC United

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

I know we have always been seen to be a selling club but historically that is more from bringing players through the youth set up and selling for big profit, such as Theo, AOC, Shaw, Bale etc. In recent years, certainly since Sports Republic have come in, the focus on our recruitment seems to be solely focussed on buying players to shift on after 1-2 years for a hefty profit, like Lavia and Fernandes.

 

Do we think that this approach is really working as a club overall?

 

The plus side is that it seems to see us top of the league... the net spend league... most years but the club has been in a steady decline since this seems to have been our main transfer business focus and there becomes a point where the team fall so far that the big money sales just won't happen, either because we are so far down (how much lower level Championship teams or dare it go that far, League 1 teams have sold players for £20m +?) or because the players who are any decent just kick up so much of a stink that they force our hand into selling them for a price we would otherwise not be prepared to accept if they down tools and/or refuse to sign extensions? Furthermore, the type of player you will be able to sign will lessen as the club is no longer deemed an attractive proposition as a pathway to playing in the Prem? It's unlikely we will permanently sign a player who wants to play in the Prem in January now given it currently doesn't look likely that we will make it back at this first attempt.

 

I know there would have been a lot of uproar had we signed a Keiffer Moore or a McBurnie type player in the summer but in hindsight, those two players are perhaps what the squad is desperately missing, a focal point up top. A role Stewart had appeared to have got to grasp with before his latest injury leaving us with nobody able to do that job now which Still's system is pretty reliant on. Instead the powers that be tried to play clever bollocks by signing yet another young player with potential who could perhaps perform well for 1-2 seasons and be sold for a huge profit down the line.

 

This player trading system we have with respects to our transfer policy is, what I feel, killing the club. Yes, I know we need to sell players to survive financially but invest more in the youth and bring players through like we used to which we can flog on for profit. However, when it comes to the main squad, invest in what the squad actually needs, regardless of age or ability to make a profit. That's what will drive us up the league and get us into a position where we are deemed more attractive to better players including youth players who we can then poach of other clubs showing them there is a pathway, if they are good enough.

 

There should be a balance between experience and potential yet at the moment we are filling our squad with potential to make millions (when a lot of the time it is not panning out that way) and I suspect, players who are just looking at us in the same way we are looking at them, as a stepping stone. This could be the core reason for our weak mentality as a club. They do not have anyt loyalty to us, they do not care about us as invariably, we do not seem to care much for them as a player but as 'stock' we can turn a profit on.

 

I think this is the main reason for our demise.

[trousers]

2 minutes ago, Crouchie's Lawyer said:

Do we think that this approach is really working as a club overall?

No...

[Matthew Le God]

58 minutes ago, Crouchie's Lawyer said:

I know we have always been seen to be a selling club but historically that is more from bringing players through the youth set up and selling for big profit, such as Theo, AOC, Shaw, Bale etc. In recent years, certainly since Sports Republic have come in, the focus on our recruitment seems to be solely focussed on buying players to shift on after 1-2 years for a hefty profit, like Lavia and Fernandes.

Do we think that this approach is really working as a club overall?

I think this is the main reason for our demise.

Can you suggest a viable alternative strategy?

[bugenhagen]

3 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

Can you suggest a viable alternative strategy?

Focus on building a good team first, and sprinkle said team with talented youngsters who might come good and turn a good profit down the line. 

[Gloucester Saint]

9 minutes ago, bugenhagen said:

Focus on building a good team first, and sprinkle said team with talented youngsters who might come good and turn a good profit down the line. 

Ergo what the club did during the 1960s, 70s, 80s, lost its way in the 90s but did again early-mid 00s until Lowe’s brainfarts. Then again 09-17. 

[Matthew Le God]

49 minutes ago, bugenhagen said:

Focus on building a good team first, and sprinkle said team with talented youngsters who might come good and turn a good profit down the line. 

What makes you think that is the main aim of the club above having a good team? It is more a product of signing good players. Only a handful of clubs in world football are not selling clubs. It is unrealistic to think Saints will ever be one of those clubs.

Edited Monday at 14:39 by Matthew Le God

[johnnyboy]

3 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

What makes you think that is the main aim of the club above having a good team? It is more a product of signing good players. Only a handful of clubs I  worked football are not seeing clubs. It is unrealistic to think Saints will ever be one of those clubs.

Nope not a word of that made sense !! I suggest a quick edit may be necessary 👌

[benjii]

12 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

What makes you think that is the main aim of the club above having a good team? It is more a product of signing good players. Only a handful of clubs I  worked football are not seeing clubs. It is unrealistic to think Saints will ever be one of those clubs.

You what?

[bugenhagen]

16 minutes ago, Matthew Le God said:

What makes you think that is the main aim of the club above having a good team? It is more a product of signing good players. Only a handful of clubs I  worked football are not seeing clubs. It is unrealistic to think Saints will ever be one of those clubs.

Of course we will always be a selling club, along with 99% of all football clubs. I honestly don’t get your point, if there is one. 

[Crouchie's Lawyer]

2 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

What makes you think that is the main aim of the club above having a good team? It is more a product of signing good players. Only a handful of clubs in world football are not selling clubs. It is unrealistic to think Saints will ever be one of those clubs.

Not once have I suggested we will not be a selling club. I get where we are on the food chain of the footballing world.

 

My point is that every signing seems to be a moneyball type signing with the aim of making a profit from that player. At no point are we signing a 30 year old because it doesn't fit with the model of being able to turn a profit on them in 1-3 years time and this is the issue. We could be, and in my opinion, are, turning our back on what the club NEEDS to follow this strategy which is simply not working.

 

You ask what viable alternative we could follow. I think I made it relatively clear in my original post as have a couple of others in the replies, we should be focussing on building a better team without the onus on signing a player purely for profit purposes. This will likely result in the team becoming better and moving up the league, potentially to the point where we become promoted back to the Premier League where our buying power will be stronger and our attractiveness to younger kids joining the academy will grow too thus increasing our chances of unearthing the next talent we can flog for a profit.

 

You'd also argue playing in the first team would mean a lot more to a kid who has come up through the academy than some player signing from abroad who is looking at us as his meal ticket to the hallowed ground of the Premier League. Therefore, that kid coming up through the ranks is likely to care more too.

 

You can still sell players. I'm not ruling out selling players but a shift in focus to sign what the team actually needs rather than what the moneyball men think will turn a profit is the issue here.

 

We'll never know but who did we overlook to bring in as our number 9 this season just because the chances of a resale value on them were slim over taking a punt on Downs? I've already named 2 players who have been performing at this level and who would be an ideal fit for the style Still wants to play. I'm sure when you cast your net further than then Prem and Championship there would have been a fair number of players who would have fit that bill who would have performed far better for the team than Downs has thus far but were ignored as they didn't represent a chance to make a profit.

 

We have Scienza and Jander who even this early on look like they will be cash cows for the club, add to that Charles and likely Robinson. We do not need every player in every position to be someone who the club can turn a profit on. Experienced heads is what the team are lacking at the moment and that's because our strategy is too heavily focussed on profit making.

Edited Monday at 16:32 by Crouchie's Lawyer

[Gloucester Saint]

Honestly, don’t bother @Crouchie's Lawyer, MLG just wants an argument. He knows full well that the club have been selling players for higher fees and re-investing and replacing across different areas of the squad since Martin Chivers in the 1960s.

The times it’s gone wrong is when a player has either been sold/injured/not worked out across the spine of the team. Take centre back. Ken Monkou contract expires, getting on a bit, Dean Richards comes in on a free from Wolves. He excels, sold for £8m, after Paul Williams as a stop gap, Michael Svensson came in from Troyes for £2m. Where it went wrong for Lowe was Killer doing his knee (Fratton of all place in the warm up) and replacing him with Andreas Jakobsson. A slow and reactive ball playing CB with an ageing Claus who was ditto. But cheap fee from Brondby.

Claus needed pairing at that stage with another Killer/Deano who were more inclined to attack the ball and see off danger. 

VVD despite the record fee and Fonte weren’t replaced properly at all by Reed, Jan was meant to be back up at most and Stephens has never been a PL CB because we wouldn’t pay the £25m fee at the time that a ball winning and assertive decent quality international CB cost. Vestergaard, Hoedt, Lyanco - the list of failures goes on and cost far more than a good one would’ve cost who at 23-24 if does well probably sells for £50m and they achieve their aim.

Ings - similar, Semmens and Crocker patted themselves on the back for weeks sickeningly at the £35m fee and then panicked on AA for £15m. 

Keepers - Gunn was never needed, Forster never the same mobility after his major knee injury, AM back up. Just needed a Ramsdale level #1 for £25-30m. Look at how much extra they pissed away instead on wages, fees, contract extensions. Then SR and Rasmus doubled down by spaffing £14m up the wall on a 20 year old lower leagues keeper straight in the deep end who makes Shilts look a giant minus all of the natural goalkeeping ability. 

[sockeye]

We will always be Player Trading FC to some extent, but SR just blindly deploy the strategy in any old place instead of using 2-3 potential signings to bolster a strong base

 

The acquisition of players in positions where you can supplement them with better players is not so much of a problem

Fernandes, Dibling, Lavia (we still needed a more experienced CDM however)

The appointment of players to positions where there can only really be one of them on the pitch and more broadly, spinal positions has lost us countless points. They also always fail

Downs, Bazunu, Mara

 

bare in mind part of the problem is the ridiculous bloat in the team which has been present for years which actually prevents players who could do something from even getting on the pitch and turning selection into a roulette/balancing act

I long for days where we could have a 20-man squad

[Patches O Houlihan]

The problem with only buying <23 potential is that the good ones get sold quickly and the crap ones hang around. 
The only senior ‘leadership’ players are former manager favourites, or journeymen. 
We don’t have a Fonte or Romeu right now. 
 

I’m also wondering if the bid/offer spread is more favourable for lightweight small technical players than for big solid bruisers: Would explain why we have been Son In Law FC for ten years.

[Saint Fan CaM]

Most clubs are selling clubs when the chips are down - only the top 1% may get to escape the system. However, we (SR) have made two fundamental mistakes repeatedly which have caused our decline…

1. Pre SR we nurtured our Academy and promoted the best from there into the 1st team. Theo, Bale, Lallana, JWP etc. The SR approach is to use stats to identify older youngsters and then drop them into the 1st team - Downs for example - to turn a faster profit. It works sometimes - Lavia for example - however it is fraught with risk when you’re relying on the youngster to hit the ground running and integrating seamlessly.

2. Ignoring significant gaps in capability in the squad and not replacing key positions. The most obvious glaring example is a CF striker who knows where the net is. However you could also point to positions where player trading has taken over - I.e. a desire to ‘overstock’ on wing-backs.