Jacob Mellis

[lenners]

ROFL - "harmonious" - aye, players are never greedy. He loved us sooooo much!

He signed a new contract with the £4M get out clause that he insisted on. He didn't have to sign one and if he didn't he would have walked for free at the end of his previous, shorter contract. He knew very well that any increase on the £4M was a decrease in his salary at the new club. You know this but choose to ignore it. So let's not let the facts get in the way of an opportunity to bash the club, eh Len?

They've given you loads of ammo to use. I don't share your need to dream new stuff up.

UTB

Nope, he signed a new contract when we had got to the Prem, no need for a clause at all.
We could have easily agreed he could go if we went down, no need for £4m - clubs had already bid that, so why would the amount go down?
The bit about his salary going down makes no sense.

 

[alcoblade]

Which bit of "he insisted on it" don't you get?

The buying club agrees to a package. If they pay us £10M rather than £4M, there's far less in the pot for players wages. All players / agents are acutely aware of this

Jeez, it's not rocket science.

UTB

 

[Balham]

Not wishing to be pedantic but that Walker Stadium nightmare was brought to you by a Jagielka/Bromby combo, more than ably assisted by Alan Wright being overwhelmed in the air by someone 3 foot taller than him out wide.

It's not pedantry at all. I'd almost blocked that defensive nightmare out of my mind and mistook lightweight Leigh Bromby for Kilgallon. Anyone and Bromby... there was a centre half pairing to be feared.

 

[Bladesway]

If both of Mellis' legs fell off tomorrow I would laugh like buggery. He is a shit of the highest order.

 

[lenners]

Which bit of "he insisted on it" don't you get?

The buying club agrees to a package. If they pay us £10M rather than £4M, there's far less in the pot for players wages. All players / agents are acutely aware of this

Jeez, it's not rocket science.

UTB

Eh? Valuable players worth big transfer fees get paid less because their fee is bigger?
Interesting logic of the kind which has so far not applied to English football but it's worth a try, especially if we ever pay a fee for a player again.

 

[alcoblade]

Eh? Valuable players worth big transfer fees get paid less because their fee is bigger?
Interesting logic of the kind which has so far not applied to English football but it's worth a try, especially if we ever pay a fee for a player again.

Let's get this straight. You really can't comprehend that if a club picks up a player for free then they will be prepared to pay more in wages than if they'd had to break the bank to get him? It's part of what Bosman was all about.

You're either thick (doubtful, but you're acting it here), or just avoiding being cornered in your usual way.

So let's have it your way. Do you think it was as simple as forgetting to add a 1 in front of the 4? You're really suggesting we were that incompetent?

UTB

 

[sitwell]

If both of Mellis' legs fell off tomorrow I would laugh like buggery. He is a shit of the highest order.

He would still be taller than Alan wright.

 

[Stafford Blade]

He would still be taller than Alan wright.

plus he'd still be a better player than nosworthy

 

[lenners]

Let's get this straight. You really can't comprehend that if a club picks up a player for free then they will be prepared to pay more in wages than if they'd had to break the bank to get him? It's part of what Bosman was all about.

You're either thick (doubtful, but you're acting it here), or just avoiding being cornered in your usual way.

So let's have it your way. Do you think it was as simple as forgetting to add a 1 in front of the 4? You're really suggesting we were that incompetent?

UTB

You really think quality players who attract substantial fees have their pay restricted because of the fee paid?
Aye, that Ronaldo's apparently paying Real Madrid to play for 'em because he cost so much.
Tha's bonkers son.
And that's before you begin to consider that those players will also pick up a proportion of the fee in signing-on fees etc.

 

[alcoblade]

You really think quality players who attract substantial fees have their pay restricted because of the fee paid?
Aye, that Ronaldo's apparently paying Real Madrid to play for 'em because he cost so much.
Tha's bonkers son.
And that's before you begin to consider that those players will also pick up a proportion of the fee in signing-on fees etc.

I don't know how better to spell out such a commn sense point, but then again, why bother(?). If you can't (or wont) see that clubs have a finite pot of money and money paid into one pot will have to come from another then any form of sensible debate is clearly pointless. So what's new there then....

After a brief wrestle with your concience, you've reverted to type - that is, talking down your club and each and every opportunity.

Obviously, you couldn't answer my question. I presume in Len's world, it 's completely realistic to think that we just plucked £4M out of the air when we could have just as easily inserted £10M.

As I said, pointless.

UTB

 

[sheffielder]

Yep, thick

 

[lenners]

I don't know how better to spell out such a commn sense point, but then again, why bother(?). If you can't (or wont) see that clubs have a finite pot of money and money paid into one pot will have to come from another then any form of sensible debate is clearly pointless. So what's new there then....

After a brief wrestle with your concience, you've reverted to type - that is, talking down your club and each and every opportunity.

Obviously, you couldn't answer my question. I presume in Len's world, it 's completely realistic to think that we just plucked £4M out of the air when we could have just as easily inserted £10M.

As I said, pointless.

UTB

Unfortunately, I did answer your question and as I expected you would be unable to deal with the response.
Clubs in the Prem are rich, they can pay big money for transfers and big wages. I would have thought you might have noticed this over the last 15 years but if you missed it all just do a quick bit of research on the internet.
As for Jags, no figure had to be plucked out of any air, just an agreement he could go. Competition for his signature had already been signalled - getting good money for him was never a problem.
And my friend, it isn't me who talks down the club, it's the negative fans who accept any old crap because they think we're no better.
They're so inured to the shit management, they come to accept it, embrace it, find excuses for it.
And that's one of the reasons why we are unable to cope with the footballing giants of Stoke, Bolton, Wigan, Middlesbrough, Burnley, Norwich, West Brom and countless others.

 

[Pittsburg Blade]

I'm with you on this one Lenners. We were all fed a good line about McCabe running a well-managed club but it is plain to see now he was with a host of other "property magnates" riding a buoyant market with real short term planning. He employed a bunch of duffers that sold short in the beginning, and then found themselves having to sell the crown jewels to keep from a complete cash flow collapse. Good luck Micky. Let's hope you can make a silk purse out of a sows ear, cos' with Chesterfield and Rotherham on the upsurge I can see us being bottom of the sh*tpile this time next year.

 

[alcoblade]

Unfortunately, I did answer your question and as I expected you would be unable to deal with the response.
Clubs in the Prem are rich, they can pay big money for transfers and big wages. I would have thought you might have noticed this over the last 15 years but if you missed it all just do a quick bit of research on the internet.
As for Jags, no figure had to be plucked out of any air, just an agreement he could go. Competition for his signature had already been signalled - getting good money for him was never a problem.
And my friend, it isn't me who talks down the club, it's the negative fans who accept any old crap because they think we're no better.
They're so inured to the shit management, they come to accept it, embrace it, find excuses for it.
And that's one of the reasons why we are unable to cope with the footballing giants of Stoke, Bolton, Wigan, Middlesbrough, Burnley, Norwich, West Brom and countless others.

I'm no clapper, as you're well aware. Unlike you, I can use some objectivity.

If Jags was so highly sought after, where were the queue of clubs to force the price up? And however you'd like to ignore it, it's the most obvious point that there is that the lower the transfer fee, the more money that is left in the pot for wages, hence the drive for lower fees by players /agents (or the alternative theory that we forgot t ask for more). No club's have bottomless pits of cash. That you can't grasp it speaks volumes.

Anyway, we digress. Stick your fingers in your ears in your usual way, but Jagielka insisted on the £4M get out clause. It's that simple and renders another of your silly attempts to undermine the club, just plain silly.

Your usual inability to recognise even the most obvious of points if it doesn't help you renders this another pointless one. The floors all yours.

UTB

---------- Post added at 08:45 PM ---------- Previous post was at 08:43 PM ----------

I'm with you on this one Lenners. We were all fed a good line about McCabe running a well-managed club but it is plain to see now he was with a host of other "property magnates" riding a buoyant market with real short term planning. He employed a bunch of duffers that sold short in the beginning, and then found themselves having to sell the crown jewels to keep from a complete cash flow collapse. Good luck Micky. Let's hope you can make a silk purse out of a sows ear, cos' with Chesterfield and Rotherham on the upsurge I can see us being bottom of the sh*tpile this time next year.

Erm, I'm with him on that too. None of which alters the point that Jagielka and his agent insisted on a £4M get out clause.

UTB

 

[lenners]

Sorry Alco, but I think you know you cannot stand up your argument that rich Premiership clubs were desperate to drive down fees to keep wages down - the evidence shows, very clearly, they could and have afforded both.
And I'm sure Jags would have objected to no clause in his contract, just an agreement he could go, or at worst a clause which just said he could go. He would have insisted on the £4m because he felt so protective towards the club.
If you believe only Everton were interested in him, knock yourself out.
We've made bigger mistakes but it was another example of the failings endemic at board level.
Still think the pie man would have been here today though if only he'd sorted out the world hunger problem mind, such was his genius as a negotiator of deals and contracts.

 

[alcoblade]

Last try.....

Jags: "I'll sign a contract but I'd like a get out clause"
Club: No problem, if someone comes in with a realistic offer, we'd let you speak
Jags: Ok, but what's realistic?
Club: We don't need to be specific, Len said so. Our relationship is harmonious, afterall.
Jags: Like fuck........


UTB

 

[Deleted member 2102]

You really think quality players who attract substantial fees have their pay restricted because of the fee paid?
Aye, that Ronaldo's apparently paying Real Madrid to play for 'em because he cost so much.
Tha's bonkers son.
And that's before you begin to consider that those players will also pick up a proportion of the fee in signing-on fees etc.

Len, do you think that there maybe a bifurcated market for football players. Ronaldo was at the time either the highest or second highest rated player in World Football. He was moving between the richest and most powerful two football clubs in World Football. Jags was a midfielder/defender for a relegated premier league team transfering to a mid table premier league team. Everton would have a budget for such a signing that would include fees and wages etc. Less spent on the fee would mean more money for wages. Real Madrid have no such budget concerns as they effectively backed by the Spanish state. United speculated with Jag's contract knowing that if we were relegated we would receive less than market value for the player.

 

[lenners]

Last try.....

Jags: "I'll sign a contract but I'd like a get out clause"
Club: No problem, if someone comes in with a realistic offer, we'd let you speak
Jags: Ok, but what's realistic?
Club: We don't need to be specific, Len said so. Our relationship is harmonious, afterall.
Jags: Like fuck........


UTB

Nope, more like Jags saying he'd want to go if we went down, us saying ok, if that wasn't enough he could then say he wants a clause in his contract, we say ok then.
If you go down, you can then negotiate the sale without having hamstrung yersens with a £4m clause that other clubs know about and will automatically settle on.
I'll take it you've now grasped your argument about fees and wages doesn't stand up with rich clubs, like those in the Prem.
I accept it would be much more likely to with clubs like ourselves who have no money.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Nope, more like Jags saying he'd want to go if we went down, us saying ok, if that wasn't enough he could then say he wants a clause in his contract, we say ok then.
If you go down, you can then negotiate the sale without having hamstrung yersens with a £4m clause that other clubs know about and will automatically settle on.
Not rocket science.

In that scenario where is the protection for the club, should there be no bidding war?

 

[lenners]

Len, do you think that there maybe a bifurcated market for football players. Ronaldo was at the time either the highest or second highest rated player in World Football. He was moving between the richest and most powerful two football clubs in World Football. Jags was a midfielder/defender for a relegated premier league team transfering to a mid table premier league team. Everton would have a budget for such a signing that would include fees and wages etc. Less spent on the fee would mean more money for wages. Real Madrid have no such budget concerns as they effectively backed by the Spanish state. United speculated with Jag's contract knowing that if we were relegated we would receive less than market value for the player.

Why would we receive less than market value if we went down?
And much as it would be awfully thoughtful for us to organise our sales around Everton's budget, that would seem an odd way to go.
Can't remember the exact details but I think West Brom got around £10m for Curtis Davies after being relegated.
I wonder which of the two players any Prem team would have now.

---------- Post added at 03:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:51 PM ----------

In that scenario where is the protection for the club, should there be no bidding war?

Why would no-one want one of the best young defenders around - a player already subject to bids from Prem clubs before we got promotion?

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Why would we receive less than market value if we went down?
And much as it would be awfully thoughtful for us to organise our sales around Everton's budget, that would seem an odd way to go.
Can't remember the exact details but I think West Brom got around £10m for Curtis Davies after being relegated.
I wonder which of the two players any Prem team would have now.

You keep bringing this Curtis Davies deal in as some sort of comparison, but clearly you've forgotten that before Villa signed him, they had had him on a season long loan. By that point he'd spent three years in the premiership, most of that in the first team at West Brom or villa. Somewhat different to the Jagielka situation.

 

[Deleted member 2102]

Why would we receive less than market value if we went down?
And much as it would be awfully thoughtful for us to organise our sales around Everton's budget, that would seem an odd way to go.
Can't remember the exact details but I think West Brom got around £10m for Curtis Davies after being relegated.
I wonder which of the two players any Prem team would have now.

We wouldnt have received owt for Jags as he wouldnt have signed a new contract. To entice him to sign United inluded the 4 million quid sell on clause. If we had not done so then presumably Jags would have done one or stayeda round until his contract expired and left for nothing. As I said United speculated that the potential reward from including the sell on clause (staying up) was greater than the risk of him leaving for less than his true market value. Unfortunately Jags gave handled the ball and we went down.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

Why would no-one want one of the best young defenders around - a player already subject to bids from Prem clubs before we got promotion?

What other clubs had put in bids when Everton signed him?

 

[alcoblade]

I'll take it you've now grasped your argument about fees and wages doesn't stand up with rich clubs, like those in the Prem.
.

No, I just think you're coming across as unbelievably thick to not see this. So much so that I've stopped trying, that's all.

Others can see this common sense point, but you're happy to be the lemon once again. That's fine.

UTB

---------- Post added at 06:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:45 PM ----------

We wouldnt have received owt for Jags as he wouldnt have signed a new contract. To entice him to sign United inluded the 4 million quid sell on clause. If we had not done so then presumably Jags would have done one or stayeda round until his contract expired and left for nothing. As I said United speculated that the potential reward from including the sell on clause (staying up) was greater than the risk of him leaving for less than his true market value. Unfortunately Jags gave handled the ball and we went down.

Exactly. Unless you're Len, it's as far from Rocket science as it could get.

UTB

 

[lenners]

No, I just think you're coming across as unbelievably thick to not see this. So much so that I've stopped trying, that's all.

Others can see this common sense point, but you're happy to be the lemon once again. That's fine.

UTB

Hmm, the aggression usually comes before the acceptance.
Unless you is thinking the players being bought and sold for £20m, £30m, £40m today and recently are not being paid £100,000 a week plus...
As I said, it makes a difference for clubs like us but makes very, very little for clubs rolling in Premiership lolly.

---------- Post added at 06:05 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:03 PM ----------

We wouldnt have received owt for Jags as he wouldnt have signed a new contract. To entice him to sign United inluded the 4 million quid sell on clause. If we had not done so then presumably Jags would have done one or stayeda round until his contract expired and left for nothing. As I said United speculated that the potential reward from including the sell on clause (staying up) was greater than the risk of him leaving for less than his true market value. Unfortunately Jags gave handled the ball and we went down.

Jags wouldn't have signed a new contract unless we had a clause saying we had a £4m release in it?
If you say so.

---------- Post added at 06:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:05 PM ----------

You keep bringing this Curtis Davies deal in as some sort of comparison, but clearly you've forgotten that before Villa signed him, they had had him on a season long loan. By that point he'd spent three years in the premiership, most of that in the first team at West Brom or villa. Somewhat different to the Jagielka situation.

Pretty sure he'd played about one year in the top flight when he went to Villa with a view to a permanent transfer.
Not sure what West Brom were thinking though. Not only did their board not solve world hunger but they also failed to put a £4m clause in his contract.
Silly billies.

 

[alcoblade]

Len, he was never going for £20m upwards. We weren't talking about the Real Madrid's of the world.

It was the Evertons, Wigans and Boro's that were after him. It's just good old fashioned common sense that the less they have to pay, the more the agent would use this to screw a better deal for the player. It's so obvious as to be incredible that I'm having to spell it out for you.

UTB

 

[lenners]

Len, he was never going for £20m upwards. We weren't talking about the Real Madrid's of the world.

It was the Evertons, Wigans and Boro's that were after him. It's just good old fashioned common sense that the less they have to pay, the more the agent would use this to screw a better deal for the player. It's so obvious as to be incredible that I'm having to spell it out for you.

UTB

Don't worry, I'll not go through a list of players that have cost more than £4m that signed for the teams mentioned.
Not that the notion of 'those' kind of clubs really exists anymore given the amount of money in the Prem.

 

[alcoblade]

Don't worry, I'll not go through a list of players that have cost more than £4m that signed for the teams mentioned.
Not that the notion of 'those' kind of clubs really exists anymore given the amount of money in the Prem.

You wont, because you wont have any information about what fees of wages were paid. There'll be filed in the drawer marked "Len's common sense".

UTB

 

[1973Blade]

Very sad how things have turned out.

Former Sheffield United wonderkid Jacob Mellis now homeless after remarkable spiral

Former Blades wonderkid opens up on drink issue after being left homeless after post-Chelsea spiral

www.thestar.co.uk

 

[Guesty]

Ah, Lenners.