Alex Revell chooses Northampton over Blades

[MiserableBlader]

Anyone else think we've had a lucky escape if in deed it's not just the star making crap up on a slow news day.

No interest in a 'centre forward' who doesn't score goals!

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Financial package, location, and likelihood of starting stated this evening as reasons why he didn't join by Wilder. But we're looking at similar types.

 

[yorkshirecoast]

I didn't want Revell but McCabe should hang his head in shame if we can't match financial packages offered by Northampton f'kin Town.

This unwillingness to pay big wages is just another way of saying we lack ambition and want to try to do it on the cheap. Charlton are showing us what you need to pay for quality.

 

[LoughboroBlade]

I didn't want Revell but McCabe should hang his head in shame if we can't match financial packages offered by Northampton f'kin Town.

This unwillingness to pay big wages is just another way of saying we lack ambition and want to try to do it on the cheap. Charlton are showing us what you need to pay for quality.

As Wilder said, it wasn't just about wages.

 

[Woodwardfan]

In the recent thread "Can SUFC Attract Quality Players?" a number of posters expressed dismissive and cynical views and emphatically stated that wages were modern players' only considerations. The O.P. covered the other factors like the appeal of the manager and the location of the club amongst other potential factors.

The point is we are a club entrenched in League 1 and have had loads of bad press in our recent history. We are not the 'go to' club in League 1 anymore if we go knocking and the higher wages we used to pay are not there any moreand that's stated strategy by Wilder and McCabe. Yes, we'll pay more than Northampton even though they are netting a big transfer fee for Holmes, but not enough more for the player to ignore his instincts that Northampton is indeed the safer bet. There is a sense of karma and goodwill associated with a club and we do not have it.

In these circumstances the manager has to sell himself as the man who is determined to change so many things that are wrong with our image recently. Once he gets the ball rolling the problems in the club will be swept away but it's getting that ball moving that is the big challenge. Wilder has to inspire potential recruits and I hope he can.

Have a read of that thread if you have not seen it.

 

[yorkshirecoast]

As Wilder said, it wasn't just about wages.

Yes - but he said the financial package was one reason suggesting they offered higher wages.

Holmes is a more disappointing example of our unwillingness to pay what it takes. We are the biggest club in the division but don't act like it.

 

[Maidenhead]

Yes - but he said the financial package was one reason suggesting they offered higher wages.

Holmes is a more disappointing example of our unwillingness to pay what it takes. We are the biggest club in the division but don't act like it.

Or suggesting that the player wanted bucket loads of extra money to pass up the safe option and take the risk of coming to us

 

[Esablade]

Jeez...in L1, for a lot of players, the money isn't that much compared to upping sticks and moving the family etc...Unless we go back to paying top whack that's the pond we're in...

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Yes - but he said the financial package was one reason suggesting they offered higher wages.

We don't know if they offered higher wages. The point Wilder made was that it was a combination of those three factors that made the deal more attractive to the player. They may well have offered more than we were prepared to, but the way Wilder talked about it made it sound like he wanted to play week in week out, and while we couldn't offer him a deal on that basis Northampton have done. I don't think that's particularly controversial.

 

[Liaminho9]

Lets bear in mind if Northampton are paying higher wages than us, it probably isn't that we can't afford to match it. It's far more likely we've turned round and said we're not paying that because he's not worth the amount.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Yes - but he said the financial package was one reason suggesting they offered higher wages.

Holmes is a more disappointing example of our unwillingness to pay what it takes. We are the biggest club in the division but don't act like it.

Better financial package probably means longer contract and possibly a higher basic wage compared to our offer which may have been more incentive heavy.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

We don't know if they offered higher wages. The point Wilder made was that it was a combination of those three factors that made the deal more attractive to the player. They may well have offered more than we were prepared to, but the way Wilder talked about it made it sound like he wanted to play week in week out, and while we couldn't offer him a deal on that basis Northampton have done. I don't think that's particularly controversial.

We might not be offering him more money as although I’m sure we have more money than Northampton, would we pay more to the bench player he would likely be here compared to what Northampton would pay for a key player that he will be there?

 

[LoughboroBlade]

We might not be offering him more money as although I’m sure we have more money than Northampton, would we pay more to the bench player he would likely be here compared to what Northampton would pay for a key player that he will be there?

Indeed. We'll have offered him a wage reflective of his back-up role, which will likely be different to how Northampton view him and what they are prepared to pay. We could have overpaid for someone not in the first team regularly. That would be a waste, and the sort of deal we're trying to not make any more.

 

[Alfreton14Blade]

Time for the Big John Akinde bandwagon to start rolling again?

 

[BushBlade]

Indeed. We'll have offered him a wage reflective of his back-up role, which will likely be different to how Northampton view him and what they are prepared to pay. We could have overpaid for someone not in the first team regularly. That would be a waste, and the sort of deal we're trying to not make any more.

Why would it be a waste? If he's a player we need, even as a squad player (because it's a squad game now) then we should be prepared to pay the going rate, the market value; what other clubs are prepared to pay, not what we think he should be on. If we now go on to sign an inferior player then that is the bigger waste, even if he's cheaper.

If we continue with this approach, we'll end up with another squad of average L1 players on three year contracts - we'll be back where we were at the start of Clough's reign.

 

[LoughboroBlade]

Why would it be a waste? If he's a player we need, even as a squad player (because it's a squad game now) then we should be prepared to pay the going rate, the market value; what other clubs are prepared to pay, not what we think he should be on. If we now go on to sign an inferior player then that is the bigger waste, even if he's cheaper.

If we continue with this approach, we'll end up with another squad of average L1 players on three year contracts - we'll be back where we were at the start of Clough's reign.

I could be convinced about paying over the odds for a key first team player. I think it's different for a bit-part player. We'll be calculating that there are people of comparable worth out there who might sacrifice what they could earn elsewhere or the likelihood of playing for the sake of playing for a better club. It's early days.

 

[Newbury Blade]

Why would it be a waste? If he's a player we need, even as a squad player (because it's a squad game now) then we should be prepared to pay the going rate, the market value; what other clubs are prepared to pay, not what we think he should be on. If we now go on to sign an inferior player then that is the bigger waste, even if he's cheaper.

If we continue with this approach, we'll end up with another squad of average L1 players on three year contracts - we'll be back where we were at the start of Clough's reign.

Well we've signed two people, neither of whom fit your description of "average L1 players". Most of those who've gone elsewhere (Revell being a good example) are, by contrast, not much more than that.

 

[BushBlade]

I could be convinced about paying over the odds for a key first team player. I think it's different for a bit-part player. We'll be calculating that there are people of comparable worth out there who might sacrifice what they could earn elsewhere or the likelihood of playing for the sake of playing for a better club. It's early days.

Calculating or guessing? That's my concern. If we've got a list of five players of similar ability and attitude and we know we can get at least one of those for a lesser wage, fair enough but get on and sign one.

Even if a target man is just an option for when we need to go from whatever we start with to 442, then the player has to be good enough to make it a viable and worthwhile option. It's no good having a Porter or a Higdon as four out of five times bringing him on won't work.

 

[BushBlade]

Well we've signed two people, neither of whom fit your description of "average L1 players". Most of those who've gone elsewhere (Revell being a good example) are, by contrast, not much more than that.

We have and it was a good start. But we need a lot more and to get the quality we need we will have to spend money. My prediction is that we won't spend enough.
And yes, I'm guessing, based on my perception of how the club operates.

 

[Alfreton14Blade]

Well we've signed two people, neither of whom fit your description of "average L1 players". Most of those who've gone elsewhere (Revell being a good example) are, by contrast, not much more than that.

But if we were in for Revell, as CW admitted we were in his interview yesterday, then presumably he was out-of-the-average enough for the club to want him here?

Worryingly, we're missing out on targets now and they're choosing other clubs over us.

As time goes on, competition's only going to get more intense, with players having greater numbers of options. You're left thinking: Are we able to effectively compete for the more desirable players?

 

[Woodwardfan]

The striking department is not one of our priorities as yet.

There are 3 central defenders to sign and an influential all-purpose midfielder needed before a striker.

Revell and Novak became available this week. If they had become available later in the summer and when we have all the others above in place and particularly if a few on the list had moved out, then perhaps we would have been keener to clinch the deal.

There are undoubtedly more 'fish in the sea' of that type and other opportunities will arise, not least the chance to sign a 'Rashford' type! ( Rashford not Cofie , at Telford last season.)

 

[BushBlade]

The striking department is not one of our priorities as yet.

There are 3 central defenders to sign and an influential all-purpose midfielder needed before a striker.

Revell and Novak became available this week. If they had become available later in the summer and when we have all the others above in place and particularly if a few on the list had moved out, then perhaps we would have been keener to clinch the deal.

There are undoubtedly more 'fish in the sea' of that type and other opportunities will arise, not least the chance to sign a 'Rashford' type! ( Rashford not Cofie , at Telford last season.)

The players we need are the players we need, why does it matter what order we sign them in?

 

[Woodwardfan]

The players we need are the players we need, why does it matter what order we sign them in?

I'll not beat about the bush, I can't explain it any better I'm afraid. You disagree/ don't understand, fair enough.

 

[blades78]

The players we need are the players we need, why does it matter what order we sign them in?

Some are more needed more than others. There is a budget and we don't have any centre backs. I'd rather Wilder sorted this area and bring in a target man later. If he stretches the budget for a 3rd/4th choice striker and misses out on 1st choice centre back, because he's a few quid short, then he's going to right k*ob.
Bit like what Clough and Adkins did with their budget.

 

[Barney]

I'm glad we've missed out as I thought it'd be a poor signing, but Wilder admitted we were in for him, so the fact is we've lost out to Northampton. Marvellous.

 

[Bladesman]

I'm glad we've missed out as I thought it'd be a poor signing, but Wilder admitted we were in for him, so the fact is we've lost out to Northampton. Marvellous.

Well when those big clubs come in for a player then its hard for us to compete.

 

[Barney]

Well when those big clubs come in for a player then its hard for us to compete.

Really does ring alarm bells with regards to money available and/or how we're negotiating/spending.

 

[Sean Thornton]

I didn't want Revell but McCabe should hang his head in shame if we can't match financial packages offered by Northampton f'kin Town.

This unwillingness to pay big wages is just another way of saying we lack ambition and want to try to do it on the cheap. Charlton are showing us what you need to pay for quality.

How do you know we didn't offer him more?

 

[Sean Thornton]

Really does ring alarm bells with regards to money available and/or how we're negotiating/spending.

Do you think we should have offered him at two year contract at his age? Yes or no.

 

[Barney]

Do you think we should have offered him at two year contract at his age? Yes or no.

No because I wouldn't have signed him full stop.

a) - the fact we were in for a player of his quality and
b) - the fact that we couldn't compete with Northampton

Both rightly ring alarm bells.