Dominic Calvert Lewin

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

I agree only time will tell, i have watched dom and Jordan from a young age, dom has bags of talent plus a brilliant attitude, this is where a lot of young players fall down, think they've made it as soon as they break into the first team or get a decent move to a bigger club.. Good luck to him I say, he is a blade
 



It was a good deal at the time for everyone concerned. Did it reflect his future value? No, but we weren't in a position to really dictate that

Wilder felt it was right and most importantly he is getting the best out of the League 1 players that we have and NEED.

Did we need a player of DCL's future potential or did we need players for League 1 right now?

Exactly Swiss. I wonder what people would say if we signed a 19 year old who had scored 5 goals in 20 appearances in the 4th division?

Oh.......and paid over £1Million for him?:rolleyes:
 
Exactly Swiss. I wonder what people would say if we signed a 19 year old who had scored 5 goals in 20 appearances in the 4th division?

Oh.......and paid over £1Million for him?:rolleyes:

I suppose its like us buying a player from Ilkeston...
 
I agree only time will tell, i have watched dom and Jordan from a young age, dom has bags of talent plus a brilliant attitude, this is where a lot of young players fall down, think they've made it as soon as they break into the first team or get a decent move to a bigger club.. Good luck to him I say, he is a blade

Agree about the attitude Heaton but I haven't seen the talent in DCL myself. Purely a personal opinion based on his limited appearances for United. I do wish the lad luck though and I would be delighted if he were to line up for Everton against United in a league game in a couple of years time. :eek:

And have a stinker!;)
 
It was a good deal at the time for everyone concerned. Did it reflect his future value? No, but we weren't in a position to really dictate that

Wilder felt it was right and most importantly he is getting the best out of the League 1 players that we have and NEED.

Did we need a player of DCL's future potential or did we need players for League 1 right now?

I totally agree with what you're saying it's just a shame that we are a selling club, football is a business at the end of the day and I will stand by what I originally said in believing we got peanuts.. He was bought for 1m to play for Everton u23 by David unsworth,if he goes as a 1st teamer the money is redeculous! hes now in the first team set up... simple
 
I suppose its like us buying a player from Ilkeston...
I totally agree with what you're saying it's just a shame that we are a selling club, football is a business at the end of the day and I will stand by what I originally said in believing we got peanuts.. He was bought for 1m to play for Everton u23 by David unsworth,if he goes as a 1st teamer the money is redeculous! hes now in the first team set up... simple

In reality Heaton, most clubs are selling clubs and trade players based on the clubs position. United were offered over £1M for an unproven 19 year old who was unlikely to play much this season. That money more than covered the fees for Fleck and Duffy, and probably a fair chunk of their wages too. In our position, I would suggest we got the better deal, effectively Fleck and Duffy for DCL. That's a no brainer for me.
 
I suppose its like us buying a player from Ilkeston...
P
In reality Heaton, most clubs are selling clubs and trade players based on the clubs position. United were offered over £1M for an unproven 19 year old who was unlikely to play much this season. That money more than covered the fees for Fleck and Duffy, and probably a fair chunk of their wages too. In our position, I would suggest we got the better deal, effectively Fleck and Duffy for DCL. That's a no brainer for me.

Hmm then rebuild again next season if we reach the championship, with what? That 400k we're getting for DCL..
 
In reality Heaton, most clubs are selling clubs and trade players based on the clubs position. United were offered over £1M for an unproven 19 year old who was unlikely to play much this season. That money more than covered the fees for Fleck and Duffy, and probably a fair chunk of their wages too. In our position, I would suggest we got the better deal, effectively Fleck and Duffy for DCL. That's a no brainer for me.

This is a fair point: sometimes sales are defensible because of what you use the money for. We have not done this well in recent years.

For example, contrast this deal with selling Jamie Murphy and spending the money on wages for Woolford, Sammon and Hammond...
 
P


Hmm then rebuild again next season if we reach the championship, with what? That 400k we're getting for DCL..

Yes we will need to rebuild next season if we go up, everyone knows that. I'm not sure what you're suggesting though. Are you saying we should have kept DCL and relinquished some of the players brought in? If so, who?
 
I can't believe some people are upset at the DCL deal.

We're in the 3rd tier of English football, and as long as that is the case we will be a selling club. As is every club in this league, and below. The only question then is can you get decent money for the player. Now while we'd all love for United to play hard ball and demand over the top fee's, it just isn't practical.

Look at the Dele Alli sale to Tottenham, £5 million at the time was a great bit of business for franchise FC. A player they were never going to be able to hold onto long term, that they got great money for. But because he's now performing in the premier league his value is now what? £30 - £40 million probably. Does this suddenly make it bad business by MK, of course not.

As for DCL, £1.4 million for a player that was going to be our 4th choice striker going into the season. We'd have been mad to turn that down.
 
Adams and DCL were sold to fund CW being in a position to get us out of L1. Both players were not going to play much this season where as the players brought in have played every game.
I think the fees paid for both were realistic with what they had shown over the previous 12 months.

I really can not see what issue anyone has about this. As for the prediction that DCL is another Slew, that really is stupid talk.

Being a L1 club unfortunately means you are a selling club, the further up the pyramid you go the less of a selling club you become and your players naturally command a higher transfer value.

I honestly don't understand why some people can't crasp that...
 
all prem clubs can take punts on promising but unproven young players. i saw him only a few times and dont have any idea if or how he'd have helped us with the immediate objective of battling out of this league.

I don't blame United for selling and if his fees cover the fees of players making an immediate impact (even if of lesser natural ability and of far lesser potential) i'll not rest uneasy and certainly not lay blame.

i do question how likely it would be to impose a far higher bonus fee clause though - ie 5m based on a specific number of first team appearances. 6m for a regular prem player is still peanuts for the buyer but big beans for United. If he turns out to not make the grade then 1m wasted is still acceptable to a prem balance sheet.
 
P


Hmm then rebuild again next season if we reach the championship, with what? That 400k we're getting for DCL..

Its not as straight forward as that, but like it or not, the Academy, whilst we're in 3rd tier is there to a) supply the first team b) generate revenue. Even if we were in the Championship you can expect us to sell young players.

With DCL (and Adams), i don't see it as selling the family silver. It was sensible business. Two young players on the fringes, DCL perhaps less likely to fit Wilders mould for this division and at the right age to get a decent deal.

In perhaps 1-3 years, in the championship he could perhaps be worth 5 Million, but how does that benefit the team today
 
The reason we sold him was to provide funds we needed to rebuild. Those funds could have been injected by the owners, on top of what they're already putting in to cover our substantial losses.
It's understandable why they weren't prepared to do so, given how much they've lost over the past few seasons.

If DCL had stayed, over time he may have become a really good player, at which point we'll sell him anyway. For a much bigger fee.
So the owners will ultimately pay for letting him go now.
Or he doesn't become a good player and we end up getting very little for him. That's the gamble.

The team will lose little right now because he's not the finished article and our priority is to get promoted, not develop young players to sell for big fees.
 



Just had a horrible thought. Did old Mr Hammond play enough games to get a medal from Leicester last season?

Dunno, but I find it strange that, for a bloke who obviously couldn't last 90 minutes - and was therefore an ideal sub/impact player* to bring on in the second half (* don't laugh - you didn't see the work he did...) he started 30 games. Exactly 30 games. Re-arrange the following words - paper, envelopes, brown.
 
Good luck to the lad but he has fucked off from us now, made us a bit of money in footballing terms and is now no longer part of our club, roll on Thursday.
 
DCL was a weird one because while I only saw brief appearances from him, I personally saw nothing in him. Obviously I was missing something, but holding onto him would've been as big a gamble as selling him. How quickly people forget the likes of Slew, youth players built up, guaranteed to be the next big thing, and then they amount to absolutely nothing. Prem teams can afford to gamble the £1.4m on a DCL, and his wages, and have the player worth nothing later on. Is it a sensible risk for a League One team to turn that down?

I get that it's not what fans want to see. None of us like that the game is so heavily influenced by money. As long as it is though, decisions like this will keep being made.
 
Such an odd thing – were he still with us he might not even be on the bench. I don't think anyone on here would have thought he'd be sent on as a genuine attacking move in the last ten minutes at home to Arsenal as a last roll of the dice to help get a win.

So then:
– is he overrated and appearing too early, or
– have we collectively underrated his talents?
I reckon Everton have seen potential in the lad and they believe they can bring him on. He's probably been watched from a young age and people from the England set-up will have had a say in the move.
 
He's come on again. In the derby!
 
Know what you mean but it's been frantic and Everton haven't been in it this half so I don't think anyone could judge him at all.
Klippetty Klopp.

I can't believe Everton don't have better quality options. Especially to go and play wide right.
 



So he's even coming on against Liverpool in the Merseyside derby now?

Ohhhh my word what a mistake we've made.... £1.4m... from a PL club!
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom