Kevin McCabe on David Brooks

[Bert]

Tony Agana

Bomb Scare to Celtic

 

[Maidenhead]

It's a column piece, not a story. And it was part of a conversation with McCabe about Brooks' progress over the summer.

Looks like two conversations conveniently tagged together from where I'm sitting.

 

[Bert]

“In many ways [promotion has eased pressure of selling youngsters]. But the truth is until you are back in the Premier League, if a Premier League club comes along and wants one of your players... if someone can give me the answer of how you keep them. I think most supporters realise that our desire is not to sell a David Brooks - obviously a youngster with immense talent - or a Dominic Calvert-Lewin. But when the big dog comes knocking...”

www.thestar.co.uk/sport/football/sheffield-united/danny-hall-sheffield-united-s-david-brooks-is-a-young-man-of-few-words-but-immense-potential-1-8658586

What a disgrace. McCabe needs to come out and make a statement about this controversy.

 

[stringer]

Looks like two conversations conveniently tagged together from where I'm sitting.

Fair enough. I thought a direct quote from the chairman about a young player's future, in an article about the young player and his future, would be relevant. You disagree, that's life

 

[Maidenhead]

Fair enough. I thought a direct quote from the chairman about a young player's future, in an article about the young player and his future, would be relevant. You disagree, that's life

And finally the truth emerges

 

[steve26272]

I do find this all a bit odd. To my understanding, the process is:-

1. Club A has player who is under contract to them
2. If Club B wish to sign said player, they have to agree a fee with Club A BEFORE they can talk to that player - failure to do this is against all rules

That means that regardless of how much Club B wants to pay Brooks in wages WE are in control of the situation. We either say Not For Sale or we decide on a valuation.

ahhhh, in fluffy cloud land yes.
in the real world....
an agent acting on behalf of club B approaches agent of the player to tell him club B want him, and will quadruple whatever club A offer. Also he will be playing with super stars like X Y and Z. he will get an apartment paid for in the city, and point to Kyle Walker as an example of how moving to a bigger club "could" turn you into the most expensive defender in the world (don't mention Slew)
players agent says"now son, you may have to agitate the situation, tell club A you want to leave etc, but in 6 months when your bank balance hits a million I'm sure it'll be a memory".
this shit happens, we do it to clubs below us, Everton do it to us, man utd do it to Everton (rooney) real Madrid do it to man U (Ronaldo) - gerrorit.

 

[stringer]

And finally the truth emerges

What truth?

 

[Tyler Durden]

What truth?

Probably the truth about your journalistic integrity, or lack thereof.

 

[stringer]

It probably wasn't until you dodged a simple question twice. Poor form given the already piss-poor esteem your publication is held in.

Sure, Matthew. Send me your bank account details by PM please, it's a simple question and you have no right to ask why I want to know

 

[BushBlade]

Lookman went for £7.5 million RISING to £11 million over 4.5 years. He had 45+ league appearances and around 20 England appearances. A fair bit more than Brooksy. Like many others I saw his potential as soon as I saw him a couple of years ago now and would love to see a midfield based on Whiteman/Reed/Brooks.
I feel everyone's pain over Brooksbut the club cannot stick a £30 million price tag on him as some are suggesting. They would have to pay commensurate wages. That's what Bosman was about.

I am not sure about a release clause. PSG has offered to buy out the release clause of Neymar at Barcelona at around €200 million so clearly that might not be an obstruction.

It's not just league appearances though, it's championship appearances. It makes a big difference; it's less of a step up to the PL so less of a gamble. Comparing DCL with Lookman is like comparing Arnautovic with Zlatan because they've got the same haircut.

 

[stringer]

Probably the truth about your journalistic integrity, or lack thereof.

You know as much about journalistic integrity as I know about the NHS. Which is why I don't interfere in your work. What's the issue, exactly with integrity?

 

[Maidenhead]

What truth?

For God's sake are you thick or just stupid.

The quote about difficulty in keeping young players was made in a completely different context, and a completely separate conversation to that about the rapid development of Brooks and has been added to the article purely to "stir shit" or "add reader interest"

Same difference, you choose, but I were Kevin McCabe you would never get the chance to quote me out of context again, in fact you never get to quote me again at all.

 

[Patrick Suffaux]

I do grow weary of Kevin's submissive attitude towards Premier League clubs. I'm as much of a realist as anyone when it comes to being able to keep good players. It's inevitable that if they do well enough, they will move on but I can't abide this "how can we stop them" bollocks.

If they're under contract we can do as we wish. No one should stop a player from moving on to bigger things provided the club gets the going rate for him. Our willingness to take the first offer at £1m or above just invites PL clubs to come and take them easily.

Here's a tip for your colleagues Kevin.....if a club wants our best players (young or otherwise) then make them pay the market rate. The fees we got for Ramsdale, Calvert-Lewin and Adams were a joke.

Brooks will leave, no doubt but he's an asset to the football club. Given his reputation and undoubted potential, he's worth minimum £8m in the current market. If Everton want him, tell them that's the price!

 

[stringer]

For God's sake are you thick or just stupid.

What's the difference? I'm fascinated how you also seem to know more about the context of a conversation than the people involved in it

 

[BushBlade]

We need to stop quoting the Southampton model, especially the Walcott myth, when it comes to transfer dealings. He went for an initial fee of £5m plus add-ons. A couple of years later Arsenal then offered to convert the add-ons into a lump sum and Southampton accepted, meaning they got around £8m in total. About the same as we will get for Walker when the dust has settled.

OK, this is not to excuse United or McCabe, but lets deal with facts not myths.

And Bale. Spurs did the same. Neither of those players went for the quoted fees. It's bullshit. And Spurs had to fight Man U for Bale (although a left back at the time, Fergie had spotted his attacking talent and wanted him as the eventual replacement for Giggs. Spurs got him by promising him immediate first team football.)

 

[Pierre's PC]

Well the OP got what he wanted from the initial post. Exposure and a mini-shitstorm with what amounts to nothing of value

 

[stringer]

Well the OP got what he wanted from the initial post. Exposure and a mini-shitstorm with what amounts to nothing of value

Seven pages of worthwhile debate and two or so of nonsense. I'll let you decide whether I wanted to spark up conversation or let anonymous people slag me off

 

[Tyler Durden]

You know as much about journalistic integrity as I know about the NHS. Which is why I don't interfere in your work. What's the issue, exactly with integrity?

See, the thing about your line of work Daniel is that it is meant to be open to public scrutiny (or "interfered" with as you strangely put it) or else it isn't journalism at all.
You've emphatically fallen at that particular hurdle.

 

[sheffielder]

 

[Maidenhead]

What's the difference? I'm fascinated how you also seem to know more about the context of a conversation than the people involved in it

Two conversations please, I though we'd already established that.

How many questions did you ask about the specific possibility of selling David Brooks in conversation one?

 

[stringer]

Two conversations please, I though we'd already established that.

How many questions did you ask about the specific possibility of selling David Brooks in conversation one?

There was one conversation with Kevin McCabe. Two questions about David Brooks. The result is in the OP.

 

[BushBlade]

Do people really think KM doesn't consult Wilder on transfer fees? Or that Wilder's a bit dim and he doesn't know as much about fees as we do? Or that we really accept the first offer? A bloke who effectively negotiates for a living, a trained quantity surveyor, will just take the first fucking offer?

 

[snootyfenooty]

And Bale. Spurs did the same. Neither of those players went for the quoted fees. It's bullshit. And Spurs had to fight Man U for Bale (although a left back at the time, Fergie had spotted his attacking talent and wanted him as the eventual replacement for Giggs. Spurs got him by promising him immediate first team football.)

Exactly. Southampton got around £8m in total for Bale. If McCabe had been party to that the lynch mobs would have been out.

 

[stringer]

See, the thing about your line of work Daniel is that it is meant to be open to public scrutiny (or "interfered" with as you strangely put it) or else it isn't journalism at all.
You've emphatically fallen at that particular hurdle.

Which hurdle?

 

[alcoblade]

I think it's fair to say that every Utd gan knows the financial facts of life in football and most accept the realities of it all.

I won't have any issue with the Board at tbe Lane if an offer ca me in for any of our players and it was just too.good to turn down. It happens.

What does get my goat a bit is when we have the owner telling us all about the financial facts of football life and that if a big dog comes calling we will can't keep our most promising youngsters. It's not any potential future sale...it's the fact that McCabe has to speak about it in the first place. Yes...we know he will go if he's a real player...bit can our owners not publically admit this in the media. Talk about advertising the lad is potentially for sale. He shouldn't even be entertaining such talk and just batting it away with a 'there no bid in so nothing to talk about' comment.

Yep, he should pipe down with his explanation for selling players. There's plenty of truth in what he says, but at a time when we're struggling to prize a wantaway player from Southend, the opposite side of the coin is being exposed.

 

[blade too long]

mccabes being honest , its not in his ability to match prem wages where we are

no matter what we think of mccabes view it doesnt alter the fact we pay him 3 grand a week now to keep him , maybe up to 5 or 8k in a push to keep him but then a prem club offers 20k as starters its hard to hang on to them

Hopefully he will realise its better for him to stay and play and become a big fish in a small pond as opposed to becoming a tiddler in an ocean of talent

 

[Tyler Durden]

Which hurdle?

Well by the looks of it, being able to read posts written in plain English for a start.

 

[stringer]

Well by the looks of it, being able to read posts written in plain English for a start.

I've not got a bad record if they actually make coherent sense

 

[WalkelyFan]

So how much you regkon Charlton were paying Lookman in getting a deal rising to £11m. Buttons I suspect.

I have no idea how much they were paying him and neither have you! They took the money they were offered. A bit like we did with the two Kyles.

 

[BushBlade]

I've not got a bad record if they actually make coherent sense

Coherent sense? Is there another kind?