Brooks...

[Houso]

That's wrong though isn't it. We don't have anyone like Brooks now, we have Coutts who's like Norwood.

But it's already been evident in just 2 games, that Norwood will contribute more (IMO) to United winning games than Brooks.

And we have two players available who inhabit Brooks position; Woodburn and Duffy.

 

[grafikhaus]

Regarding this reinvestment, I should say that I'm sure it's not all down to the owners and Wilder could've spent considerably more if he chose to. But nevertheless, we haven't reinvested. As has always been the case at this club.

It's allowed us to re-shape the team. Even loan players like Henderson, Bryan and Woodburn won't be on peanuts. Egan and Norwood (around £4m for both) look excellent acquisitions plus McGoldrick and we haven't finished yet. Also we'll need funds for the JTW if we're struggling.

 

[Houston_Blade]

Just because nobody offered more than £12m doesn’t mean we had accept it, it’s a poor argument to put forward. Villa were in financial dire straits this summer but still repelled Tottenham’s offer for Grealish as it didn’t meet their valuation. It pretty clear that Bournemouth have got a very good deal, We don’t seem to learn from our past mistakes. For the life of me I cannot see why we let him go for £12m shortly after Norwich received more than double that for Maddison. Fair enough he’s played a few more games but it doesn’t warrant such a difference. I fear we are going to regret this deal and look very foolish in a few years time.

So as the owner of the Blades you’d have turned down £12m for a player with a handful of appearances, even if it meant that the £12m would have to come out of your pocket to cover the losses?

 

[Ricky]

But it's already been evident in just 2 games, that Norwood will contribute more (IMO) to United winning games than Brooks.

And we have two players available who inhabit Brooks position; Woodburn and Duffy.

It could boil down to Coutts and Brooks or Coutts and Norwood.

In which case, Coutts and Brooks for me.

Coutts and Norwood are similar and although they could contribute to us controlling games more, we'd have to change the formation/setup to accommodate both and we'll still be lacking that spark in the final third.... unless Woodburn improves 1000%.

 

[I should coco]

even if it meant that the £12m would have to come out of your pocket to cover the losses?

But losses only come about because of the wages we pay and it is already an 'established' fact that these are covered by the money tree.

Plenty are convinced that the £12m went straight in KM's back pocket and will be spent on loose women and speedboats.......probably...

 

[Ricky]

It's allowed us to re-shape the team. Even loan players like Henderson, Bryan and Woodburn won't be on peanuts. Egan and Norwood (around £4m for both) look excellent acquisitions plus McGoldrick and we haven't finished yet. Also we'll need funds for the JTW if we're struggling.

Didn't we have any budget in the first place then? Didn't we make room on the wage bill with other departures? And our aspirations should be beyond simply not struggling.

 

[Fanny magnet]

Regarding this reinvestment, I should say that I'm sure it's not all down to the owners and Wilder could've spent considerably more if he chose to. But nevertheless, we haven't reinvested. As has always been the case at this club.




That's wrong though isn't it. We don't have anyone like Brooks now, we have Coutts who's like Norwood.




Again, how? Part of your argument seems to be that you can't keep a player who wants to leave. That's wrong. For other clubs, anyway.

I didnt say you cant keep him but it's a fact of life that if we want to progress from.being a league one club to a play off chalenger we have to be stronger in all areas of the pitch and we don't have the money to do that
So we are a selling club if this upsets you it's because you've been burying your head in the sand

 

[Withington Blade]

So as the owner of the Blades you’d have turned down £12m for a player with a handful of appearances, even if it meant that the £12m would have to come out of your pocket to cover the losses?

10 years ago £12m might have been a good fee but I’m afraid it isn’t today, it’s peanuts, so yes I would have rejected the offer and told them to come back with something better or go elsewhere, as Villa evidently did with Tottenham despite being in breach of FFP regulations. Christ sake look around some of the transfers this summer and tell me that is a good deal? A journeyman striker like Waghorn has just been sold for upwards of £8m with limited capacity to improve or little or no resale value.

 

[Ricky]

I didnt say you cant keep him but it's a fact of life that if we want to progress from.being a league one club to a play off chalenger we have to be stronger in all areas of the pitch and we don't have the money to do that
So we are a selling club if this upsets you it's because you've been burying your head in the sand

Again, didn't we have a budget we could have used to strengthen in other areas? The talk was that we had a decent amount to spend.

Keep Brooks, couple of loans, couple of frees, couple for around £2-3m.... we could have been very strong. Would that have been beyond us?

 

[Sheffsteel]

Just because nobody offered more than £12m doesn’t mean we had accept it, it’s a poor argument to put forward. Villa were in financial dire straits this summer but still repelled Tottenham’s offer for Grealish as it didn’t meet their valuation. It pretty clear that Bournemouth have got a very good deal, We don’t seem to learn from our past mistakes. For the life of me I cannot see why we let him go for £12m shortly after Norwich received more than double that for Maddison. Fair enough he’s played a few more games but it doesn’t warrant such a difference. I fear we are going to regret this deal and look very foolish in a few years time.

Some inaccuracies there.

Grealish was known to be Villas best player, Brooks couldn’t even get in our first team.
Villa were in financial straits, Steve Bruce was interviewed this week and said a few weeks ago they had no choice but to sell Grealish, think they had cash flow issues but now they received the Chinese investment they no longer need to sell.
How is it clear Bournemouth have a good deal. Are you saying all the other PL clubs are stupid for not making higher bids.
Brooks is still a big risk but PL can afford to make risky transfers.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing but imagine this scenario.

If Brooks had stayed there a good chance we’d now be struggling near the bottom.
There would be unrest amongst our fan base, Brooks attitide, confidence and form would have dropped.
Our fans would be slagging off Brooks for being a show pony with no end product.
Our fans would be slagging off the board for not learning and accepting a 12 million bid for a squad player.
We’d then be forced to sell Brooks in the JTW and be forced to accept 5 million whilst the squad is weaker than ever.
Relegation back to league 1 looks a real possibility.

 

[Topplayersleave]

Regarding this reinvestment, I should say that I'm sure it's not all down to the owners and Wilder could've spent considerably more if he chose to. But nevertheless, we haven't reinvested. As has always been the case at this club.




That's wrong though isn't it. We don't have anyone like Brooks now, we have Coutts who's like Norwood.




Again, how? Part of your argument seems to be that you can't keep a player who wants to leave. That's wrong. For other clubs, anyway.

Give it up Ricky
Everybody knows that by not selling a player who wants to go you create a monster who will deliberately fuck his entire career up as well as his whole life and create such disharmony that he ends up being worthless.

Everybody knows this because Sheffield United boardrooms over the last million years have told us

 

[SteveBlade]

Brooks was brilliant about a quarter of the time, at most. He was in and out of the team, and we didn't really have a position for him.

I think it's highly unlikely that he'd have defined our season one way or the other.

 

[Fanny magnet]

Again, didn't we have a budget we could have used to strengthen in other areas? The talk was that we had a decent amount to spend.

Keep Brooks, couple of loans, couple of frees, couple for around £2-3m.... we could have been very strong. Would that have been beyond us?

Brooks wanted to go ,so your entire strategy for the season ahead is dependant on a kid who has not yet made it into the first team as a starter to just magmanimously accept losing out on a dream move he might never get again Getting his nut down alongside a few cheapo signings and hoping for the best

But what if he didn't?
What if he did what 90 % of players do in these circumstances and throw his toys out the pram ?
Would these lower league players on low wages be inspired that if they play well enough they might get forced to stay here and have no chance of bettering themselves ?

Sound's like you'd be out of a job by the autumn

 

[Sheffsteel]

10 years ago £12m might have been a good fee but I’m afraid it isn’t today, it’s peanuts, so yes I would have rejected the offer and told them to come back with something better or go elsewhere, as Villa evidently did with Tottenham despite being in breach of FFP regulations. Christ sake look around some of the transfers this summer and tell me that is a good deal? A journeyman striker like Waghorn has just been sold for upwards of £8m with limited capacity to improve or little or no resale value.

Don’t think Villa were ever in breach of FFP, my understanding was cash flow and they were in danger of going into admin.
Now they have the new Chinese investors they now have plenty of money but FFP still applies.

Waghorn is expensive because he’s achieved, so there is some kind of guarantee that he’ll perform.
Brooks has done very little in his career to date.
When buying potential it’s always a risk, so the price is naturally cheaper then someone tried and tested.

Think that because Kyle Walker and Maguire have gone on to be top internationals
Then the logic is Brooks will be a top international too, if only it was so simple.
It explains why no other PL club (scouts who will have seen every match Brooks played) were willing to take a risk.

Don’t get me wrong I think Brooks will be a regular PL player (it’s rare to see someone who can produce moments of skill) but being serious I wouldn’t gamble my mortgage on it.

 

[GrayBlade]

While I’m as peed off as anybody with the sale of Brooks, I don’t think we’ve seen anywhere near enough of Woodburn or that he’s had anywhere near enough time to settle in at the club to start making negative comparisons. It’s his first ever loan away and he’s not been with us 3 weeks yet.

He’s rated by many in the game as being one of the hottest prospects in the country and the Liverpool fan’s seem to love the kid. More importantly for this season at least he’s our player and Brooks isn’t.

 

[Fanny magnet]

Give it up Ricky
Everybody knows that by not selling a player who wants to go you create a monster who will deliberately fuck his entire career up as well as his whole life and create such disharmony that he ends up being worthless.

Everybody knows this because Sheffield United boardrooms over the last million years have told us

Ricky when the resident porkker is backing you up you know you're in trouble

 

[ShockingBadBuy]

Feels like Woolford for Murphy. Is it Woolford for Murphy? Might be Woolford for Murphy.

No! The correct answer is Murphy for Desso!

 

[Ricky]

Brooks wanted to go ,so your entire strategy for the season ahead is dependant on a kid who has not yet made it into the first team as a starter to just magmanimously accept losing out on a dream move he might never get again Getting his nut down alongside a few cheapo signings and hoping for the best

But what if he didn't?
What if he did what 90 % of players do in these circumstances and throw his toys out the pram ?
Would these lower league players on low wages be inspired that if they play well enough they might get forced to stay here and have no chance of bettering themselves ?

Sound's like you'd be out of a job by the autumn

90%!!! I'd ask you to get anywhere near backing that up but it would be pointless.

It is in NOBODY'S best interests for a player to start playing badly. More than anything, they'd be fucking themselves over.

Don't know where you got 'entire strategy' from because that wouldn't have been the case, but it does sound more dramatic I suppose.

I agree that I'd be out of a job by the autumn though, because I'm not a football manager.

And I'm very sorry but Topplayersleave is 100% a Blade.

 

[Nicolaus_Copernicus]

It's a heady mixture of the wisdom of hindsight and ignoring the harsh realities of modern football, and we are in danger of projecting things onto the situation in retrospect.

James Maddison at 21 yrs of age, has 105 games under his belt, roughly split 50:50 between the Championship & L1. He's scored 25 goals, the majority of those in the Championship last season. You could say that he is established. David Brooks at 21 yrs of age, has played 1146 minutes of Championship football (12 3/4 games), mainly as a sub, scoring 3 goals. You could say that he isn't established. He had the build of a 15 yr old, was coming back from GF and unless he was doing things that were so fucking subtle & special that i couldn't comprehend them, when all things are considered £12m was a fair price for him. If we have a meaty sell on clause, even more so. I find it odd that blades can say with such certainty 'I knew he was special & we've undersold him'. Scout for the club, because you've got a rare talent. If you can easily spot a £20m+ talent after only 1146 minutes, then you should be identifying players for united to buy from the lower leagues.

As soon as he started turning out for the England u20's, Wales u21's and full side, and we didn't go up last year, his days were numbered with us. That's the reality of football. You can mention Grealish, but that's a different kettle of fish. Grealish is a Villa supporter, he's played premiership level football already, he's at Villa who have a good chance of promotion, Villa are a bigger club than us, and I suspect that he is on circa £20k a week as it is. When Brooks changed his Agent, his intention was clear, he wanted to leave. The players that DB were mixing with, probably had watches that cost more than what DB was earning in 6 months. Your head gets turned. The same that has/is/will occur at United. We pay £x a week, another club lets it be known that they'll pay 4 x £x a week. And what you get then is a player whose head isn't right.

Further add into the mix that we lose £5m a season purely by existing and the fact that our two owners are at logger heads, then someone offers us what seems to be a fair sum, then we'll accept it.

 

[Bladesince59]

We've punched below our weight for the past 60 years to my personal knowledge.

 

[vorpal blade]

exactly and Southampton have thrived and are in the top tier of English football again. We aren't.

that is how their policy of nurturing talent and then selling it differs from ours.

in short, they are a successful club - we are not.

 

[bromtom]

Does the potentially long term fatigue inducing glandular fever not come in to it?

Let's be truthful, he was about half as effective when he came back from it than he was before he got it. So there was an element of risk for a buyer, although I was bitterly disappointed when he went obviously.

Personally I'm more angry at him and his agent than anything. I don't think £12m is far off, £15m would have been nice but he wasn't worth 20 based on his performances for us and it's hard to put a number on potential. He wasn't as finished an article as Maddison who is scoring goals and made Man U look a bit ropey so I have no real issue with the fee.

I see a lot of people beating the club with the sarcastic "he wanted to leave so we couldn't keep him" line but really he can fuck off, not the club. You don't want players having a paddy and being a negative influence in the dressing room, "Bournemouth offered me £65000 a week JOC" "Really, I must call my agent young David" etc..

Him and his agent got a whiff off cash and went Billy Big Bollocks. He betrayed us, no loyalty whatsoever, which is probably a stupid thing to seek in today's day and age but the way Brooks was discarded by Man City and loved by us lot I thought we'd get a bit, not one club man loyalty but would it have damaged his career to play up to the JTW or next summer window? Arguably probably would have given him a better platform to seek a move further up the PL like Maddison, or he might even have gone up with us.

When I see him it's different to Maguire and Walker I feel proud when I see them, Walker had talent for us but I can see that the player he is now is as much if not more so down to leaving as it is from being here, Maguire actually played for us, he put his stint in and deserved a move to improve his career.

When I see Brooks, unfortunately I just think "what a so-and-so" and other less family friendly ways of thinking that.

Obviously a massive talent but for me all he is now is a walking sell on. In 2 years we might get a £10m payday.

 

[vorpal blade]

Having had it, I think the long term fatigue inducing effects of glandular fever are over emphasised. I suspect he had better after care and physio than I had. Mine amounted to wait till you can breath properly and you feel less febrile and get back to college .... and I don't think I had any fatigue after it...,.

 

[Nick Jansky]

Having had it, I think the long term fatigue inducing effects of glandular fever are over emphasised. I suspect he had better after care and physio than I had. Mine amounted to wait till you can breath properly and you feel less febrile and get back to college .... and I don't think I had any fatigue after it...,.

You got off lightly then. I was seriously fatigued for over 6 months.

 

[vorpal blade]

aye - but when I had it, I don't think there was ever any mention of it draining your energy long-term, it just wasn't "a thing" so you got on with it. I think there is some power of suggestion and a very fit well looked after young lad is just the type to shrug it off.

friends of mine regarded the aftermath of Brooks's glandular fever as an excuse to not play him in case he got injured and couldn't be sold on quickly. It's not my opinion, but I'm not going to say they were wrong ..... after all, it panned out the way they predicted it would.

 

[Kozzy_is_my_Dad]

No! The correct answer is Murphy for Desso!

 

[Houston_Blade]

10 years ago £12m might have been a good fee but I’m afraid it isn’t today, it’s peanuts, so yes I would have rejected the offer and told them to come back with something better or go elsewhere, as Villa evidently did with Tottenham despite being in breach of FFP regulations. Christ sake look around some of the transfers this summer and tell me that is a good deal? A journeyman striker like Waghorn has just been sold for upwards of £8m with limited capacity to improve or little or no resale value.

I’m not interested in the crazy fees paid for other players, the question was, if it was you being asked to cover the £12m yourself or to use the Brooks fee to stem losses what would you do? I don’t blame our owners for cashing in. £12m was on the table so the higher fee quoted on here is a moot point.

 

[Houston_Blade]

Didn't we have any budget in the first place then? Didn't we make room on the wage bill with other departures? And our aspirations should be beyond simply not struggling.

Did you read the court documents saying that our budget was £2m? We’ve now spent much more so the fee has been partially utilised to fund transfers.

 

[Dnblade]

Really enjoyed watching Brooks,and just watching a few brief highlights for Bournemouth reminded me of what we're missing at times..just drifts past players..the one where he gets the ball in the box,back to goal and shoots on the turn...I don't think we could have kept him once the offer came...Probably been let go by City taught him loyalty in football is few and far between,so when a Prem team came in he had no problem leaving the club that did give him a chance..GLTTL.

 

[HolmesfieldBlade]

Probably 10% of any profit they make. £30m would gain us a hefty £1.8m...

Maths isn’t your best skill is it?

Wilder said we had a good sell on clause. When the time comes we should see some good profit.