Just think...

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

Sufc true to their word as far as I'm concerned, game changing they said and game changing we've got, For the worse.
 



...and our response to getting hammered by the mighty Gillingham is, prior to the next game, selling our best player.

He certainly looked far from our best player during said hammering.
 
Your spot on, a player doesn't sign a new contract then want to leave 6 months later. We had interest in Murphy last January but he still signed, it wasn't as though we were guaranteed promotion back in February so what's changed? Why not request a transfer in May when we knew which division we'd be playing in.
Maybe he did. This Brighton rumour has being going around for quite a while now. It's not come out of the blue.
 
Its whoever has the money to pay what SUFC want for the players going rate .In this case its brighton .

Also it depends how much they are paying cash up front . If SUFC have been astute for once , it could be the majority of the transfer fee , and only a small amount on a agreed repayment period. Having cash in hand gives you more pulling power , when trying to sign players.

Short term may be not good , but long term it will pay dividends . Adkins remit now is to build a squad to gain promotion. We have to go with his judgement , whoever he sells ( if it is him selling and not the board ) .

It just opens up more cash for good recrutment , for areas most in need . At least he had the sense to buy before we sold ( aquisition of Billy )

UTB

Great, lets sell all our players and be super awesome!
 
Great, lets sell all our players and be super awesome!

If only we could be so efficient at selling ineffective assets like Collins, McEvely, Baxter, Scougal, Alcock, McFadzean and Higdon then maybe we might just be able to build a team which can compete effectively in this agricultural league ! :rolleyes:

UtB & FTP
 
And it also sends a message to young players considering joining us. That we'll hold back their careers.
Players rarely submit requests in the modern game, they just agitate for a move because if they submit a written request they lose out on part of their signing on fee (which is usually paid in installments over the term of the contract).
If he's done that then he's serious and asking him to play nicely probably won't work.
Jim has made it clear in his statement that they tried hard to keep him.

I think the opposite, by signing a player we're saying we think you're good enough, therefore fortunate to be considered worthy by SUFC. As for the contractual nuts and bolts, most young footballers just want to be signed to a club. Until they're 18 they will be guided by both their parents and/or an agent. If a club has a reputation for treating it's employees fairly that will work in the club's favour, added to one isolated incident of a player thinking he can leave an agreement prematurely, one that he entered into freely, may be sufficient to send out long-term ripples that instil a set of behaviour patterns that benefits both parties.

Otherwise, well it leaves clubs in the position of having an agreement that, in this context, has little or no clout. In my view the club has displayed a lack of nous regarding its position and what it should have held out for.
 
Just think
A goal shy team has just lost its main supplier of chances.

There are no goals left in the players that remain (and are fit) and there are leaks all over the place.

Sounds like a great place to be, eh?

To be fair Murph did not have the balls to run us to a promotion but I have zero confidence that any fee will be invested in strengthening this turgid and lacklustre team to a level required to make any kind of realistic challenge.
 

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