Lessons from History

[Bladesway]

depends oin what fee it generates , if a puny club like rotherham want to risk 3 million say on murphy , its a calculated gamble, we would accept it as getting 3m for him is commercial sense
although we get bigger gates they are generating more tv money and could stretch to one gamble
but as we found out with brayford 1.5 million does,nt stop injuries taking players out, just like when we bought Ebrell all those years ago
you need the luck of not losing your prize assetts, once again we are cursed with losing key players at vital moments we were 1-0 up and they didnt look like scoring till he went off , thats a defender

Of course and you can be unlucky once, maybe twice but the amount of crap thrown our way the past nine years suggests way more than just being unlucky.

 

[blade too long]

Of course and you can be unlucky once, maybe twice but the amount of crap thrown our way the past nine years suggests way more than just being unlucky.

would Preston have gone up if Beckford had torn his ligament in first game v chesterfield ,,,, doubt it

it took them 10 goes 9 before they suffered our luck this time the players all stayed fit

 

[Woodwardfan]

"Lessons from History" or "Facts of Life".

The Facts of Life are not as simple as the OP would suggest. Let's state one obvious fact - No Board will sell their best players unless there is good reason. The Board know the dynamics of the finances of the club and they know the dynamics of player and agent forces. Circumstances can demand a player exit even if the Board do not welcome it.

In my time we have had Boards which I would not trust and we have had naive and parochial Boards who were naive and "amateurish". The new Board do not appear naive or "amateurish" to me.

The new owner put some £12m in last year and has no doubt promised more to attract and secure the services of our new manager. If we sell Murphy in amongst the change then so be it. Thing is the new manager has a lot to do in his first few weeks and the Murphy situation appears to be an early decision. Sometimes through force of circumstances a new manager will have to take a punt at a situation because he has no time to judge it properly.

The new manager will have a budget by now. He urgently wants to assess his squad. If he chooses to take the money for Murphy, why do fans presume it's a Board decision. I'd be amazed if it was.

If the Board does sell Murphy above the new manager's head where would that leave him and us.

Nor do I think the various managers over the years were totally divorced from some of the decisions.

But, like someone in effect says above, this is football for all but a few clubs these days. For example, Liverpool do not want to sell Sterling for many reasons but....Facts of Life.

Good OP that encourages debate and perhaps achieves understanding.

 

[Pollingtonblade]

It just goes to show.

 

[blade too long]

what better reason is there than making a profit , sufc is a business if we could get 3 m for Murphuy we would be absolutely stupid not to accept it

at this stage of proceedings who knows if Murphy will figure in Adkins plans

this lets get the complaints in now attitude is wholly negative and unnecessary

every player we have has a price , , if its exceeded wildly we take the money and get someone else
not one player in our current squad we can argue is utterly irreplaceable

we cant have people slagging players off as not good enough in May and then say its an affront to sell them in July

 

[itsinyerblood]

On stage at the 125 bash, Alan Woodward said to the board, "Stop selling your best players!"

In a nutshell BOSS, Woodward had it. It's not rocket science, lies aren't necessary, we're now lead to believe that we have resources that will enable us to reject other clubs plundering our best players. The exceptions are if a player wants to leave, or we receive an offer that means losing a player can be softened by the fact that we'll have the funds to buy someone as good as the player we sell. Those exceptions apart we surely need to strengthen the squad, so I expect Adkins will need to devote himself to the job of evaluating who's worth keeping and who deserves to be sold. Once NA has done that the business of strengthening the squad begins. I say begins, I imagine that NA and his staff will have already got stuck into this most vital aspect of the season ahead.

Those who are calling for news of signings need to be patient. Adkins won't need telling what he needs to do, and he'll know time is ticking so I guess he'll be putting the hours in to make sure that whatever decisions are arrived at are the right ones for the season ahead.

 

[bladesmanluke]

what better reason is there than making a profit , sufc is a business if we could get 3 m for Murphuy we would be absolutely stupid not to accept it

at this stage of proceedings who knows if Murphy will figure in Adkins plans

this lets get the complaints in now attitude is wholly negative and unnecessary

every player we have has a price , , if its exceeded wildly we take the money and get someone else
not one player in our current squad we can argue is utterly irreplaceable

we cant have people slagging players off as not good enough in May and then say its an affront to sell them in July

Right so selling our best player for £3m is more profitable than promotion to the championship and hopefully, eventually the premier league. Gotcha

Don't give me we can replace them, because we simply can not and will not replace them with a player as good

 

[Lord Bos of Eckington.]

In a nutshell BOSS, Woodward had it. It's not rocket science, lies aren't necessary, we're now lead to believe that we have resources that will enable us to reject other clubs plundering our best players. The exceptions are if a player wants to leave, or we receive an offer that means losing a player can be softened by the fact that we'll have the funds to buy someone as good as the player we sell. Those exceptions apart we surely need to strengthen the squad, so I expect Adkins will need to devote himself to the job of evaluating who's worth keeping and who deserves to be sold. Once NA has done that the business of strengthening the squad begins. I say begins, I imagine that NA and his staff will have already got stuck into this most vital aspect of the season ahead.

Those who are calling for news of signings need to be patient. Adkins won't need telling what he needs to do, and he'll know time is ticking so I guess he'll be putting the hours in to make sure that whatever decisions are arrived at are the right ones for the season ahead.

Its not just selling players which is the issue . There is a right time , and a wrong time , to sell , even going beyond the Birchenall and Jones sale . ( SUFC even tried to off load Hagan ) . We have always sold at the wrong time , and replaced with sub standard or nothing at all . This has been the story of all chairman , and has caused doubt , uncertainty and no stability whatsoever,

The old chestnut is that certain players had to be sold to pay wages , banks , loans etc , and McCabe has been , as bad as all other chairman , for a short term fixes and poor management decisions.

You reap what you sow , thats why we are in ( and still in ) league 1.

This is why decisions on players like Murphy and Done , have to be thought through carefully , as we all know the consequences of getting it wrong .

Adkins would not have come to BDTBL without assurances , we were not going to have a fire sale , to balance the books or finance new players. Players who are just squad players will be moved on , but we have to add quality to the quality we have already.


UTB

 

[itsinyerblood]

Its not just selling players which is the issue . There is a right time , and a wrong time , to sell , even going beyond the Birchenall and Jones sale . ( SUFC even tried to off load Hagan ) . We have always sold at the wrong time , and replaced with sub standard or nothing at all . This has been the story of all chairman , and has caused doubt , uncertainty and no stability whatsoever,

The old chestnut is that certain players had to be sold to pay wages , banks , loans etc , and McCabe has been , as bad as all other chairman , for a short term fixes and poor management decisions.

You reap what you sow , thats why we are in ( and still in ) league 1.

This is why decisions on players like Murphy and Done , have to be thought through carefully , as we all know the consequences of getting it wrong .

Adkins would not have come to BDTBL without assurances , we were not going to have a fire sale , to balance the books or finance new players. Players who are just squad players will be moved on , but we have to add quality to the quality we have already.


UTB

All good and considered point Bos, can't argue with any of those. As you say, it's the reasons and circumstance that supports a potential sale that either makes that sale tolerable or it rubs people the wrong way. I fully support your view that what we must do is add to our existing quality. It actually wouldn't mean a huge influx of new players to make us a force to be reckoned with, say 5/6 players max - 2-3 defenders, a couple of seasoned midfielders, and a forward to complement Matt Done, at least that's my take on our current needs.

 

[Woodwardfan]

We shouldn't lose sight of the fact that two of the three "indispensible" players have only been with us for 4 months of last season ( and cost an absolute fortune for this league) and Murphy somewhat longer. With all three on our books we bombed.

So we can lose with them and seemingly we would lose without them. At the end of the day it's a squad game and the manager will balance his squad hopefully. That's something we haven't done for years.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

Apart from Real Madrid and maybe Barcelona aren't all teams selling teams? And almost by definition it's your best players who will be targetted. And there's not a lot a club can do if a player wants to leave.

 

[Silent Blade]

Its not just selling players which is the issue . There is a right time , and a wrong time , to sell , even going beyond the Birchenall and Jones sale . ( SUFC even tried to off load Hagan ) . We have always sold at the wrong time , and replaced with sub standard or nothing at all . This has been the story of all chairman , and has caused doubt , uncertainty and no stability whatsoever,

My dad was gutted when we sold Mick Jones but he thought we got good business when we got £100K for Birchenall

 

[Lord Bos of Eckington.]

We shouldn't lose sight of the fact that two of the three "indispensible" players have only been with us for 4 months of last season ( and cost an absolute fortune for this league) and Murphy somewhat longer. With all three on our books we bombed.

So we can lose with them and seemingly we would lose without them. At the end of the day it's a squad game and the manager will balance his squad hopefully. That's something we haven't done for years.

Woody . It is a squad game these days , but nothing has changed for decades . You have to know your best first 11 and stick with it . Less players you use at this level IMO the more successful you become . Another area of the stability thing .

UTB

 

[Lord Bos of Eckington.]

My dad was gutted when we sold Mick Jones but he thought we got good business when we got £100K for Birchenall

Birchenall was a Sherman Tank when moving forward . Trouble is he liked too many sherbets for Mr Harris liking.

UTB

 

[Bladesway]

We shouldn't lose sight of the fact that two of the three "indispensible" players have only been with us for 4 months of last season ( and cost an absolute fortune for this league) and Murphy somewhat longer. With all three on our books we bombed.

So we can lose with them and seemingly we would lose without them. At the end of the day it's a squad game and the manager will balance his squad hopefully. That's something we haven't done for years.

We need to keep those players and add to them exactly so we don't lose many games in the future. Three good players is eight short of where we need to be which is the crux of my point. Forget selling the good ones and buy a couple more. There will be a couple of players at least who will thrive under Adkins and from there you are well on your way to a division winning team. Sell them for whatever reason and we go backwards.

 

[Woodwardfan]

We need to keep those players and add to them exactly so we don't lose many games in the future. Three good players is eight short of where we need to be which is the crux of my point. Forget selling the good ones and buy a couple more. There will be a couple of players at least who will thrive under Adkins and from there you are well on your way to a division winning team. Sell them for whatever reason and we go backwards.

But the Board nor the manager get what they wish for all the time. Learn all the lessons you like but real life does not always pan out as you would intend. Ask Brendan Rodgers, ask Koemann and ask Dyche, and that's just this week. I'm sure Scunthorpe didn't like losing Turnbull either.

It really is fanciful to expect any club, even Man Utd with their keeper ,to hang on to every player. If certain clubs come knocking the player goes, simple.

As someone says above, it's how you react to that circumstance that matters.

However if the manager creates such an atmosphere that players do not want to leave, despite greater riches elsewhere, then that is progress and gives us a chance.

 

[Patrick Suffaux]

It's a very different situation at the moment. We are in the third tier, hence our team is relatively average and it's debatable whether we have any players at all that are irreplaceable. Depends how highly you rate our better players.

 

[Bladesway]

But the Board nor the manager get what they wish for all the time. Learn all the lessons you like but real life does not always pan out as you would intend. Ask Brendan Rodgers, ask Koemann and ask Dyche, and that's just this week. I'm sure Scunthorpe didn't like losing Turnbull either.

It really is fanciful to expect any club, even Man Utd with their keeper ,to hang on to every player. If certain clubs come knocking the player goes, simple.

As someone says above, it's how you react to that circumstance that matters.

However if the manager creates such an atmosphere that players do not want to leave, despite greater riches elsewhere, then that is progress and gives us a chance.

Of course you don't get what you want all the time. That is a given but if you set your bar high and realise it isn't teams like Arsenal and Chelsea we are keeping from the door then you start by giving yourself a chance. That's all any of us can ask in our position. What gets me is when we talk about getting value for players when what we have in fact done is taken the footballing equivalent of a wonga loan. The club buying pay on the never never and we never replace with anything approaching the quality of the player that left. This cost Clough his job in my opinion because not replacing Harry (his fault, no one else) put a hole in the side we couldn't patch up.

I think we are finally in different times but forgive me if my first instinct when one of our players is mentioned is "well that's him away then".

 

[Woodwardfan]

Lessons we can learn from history are: 1. getting long term contracts signed 2. insisting that sell-on clauses are included.

Maguire was only on contract for another year to mid-2015 and as soon as Premiership interest was expressed he knew he was in a "different league". I recall he was on £4k a week with us and went onto £14k p.w. at Hull. With the best will in the world nobody can expect the lad not to insist on going or the club to insist on him staying when the £2.5m fee would have been zero by the end of the season. If indeed his absence was the reason we didn't get promoted then that is false economy, but seriously, we should have replaced him and the fact we didn't remains Clough's biggest failing and so unnecessary, negligent in fact.

Murphy committed to a new contract until 2017 only last January. whoever was responsible, be it Clough and/or Brannagan, or Phipps or McCabe, then it was a masterstroke. It changes the bargaining power we have. The player can still agitate to move away and that happens the player usually gets his way but the fee is better value. As you say Leeds are not Arsenal and maybe Murphy will hope for a much better club, though I sense Leeds have big cash now. As for the Sharp factor, I believe we can get him without any barter if we bide our time. Personally I'm not sure Murphy is big on personal confidence. He struggled with us for long enough and might gain comfort from being at a club where the fans appreciate him at last. I think he probably values his deal at Bramall Lane and also values all his Scottish mates here.

 

[georgebernardshaw]

There has long been a saying in the British Army that the most dangerous thing is an officer with a map - this flies in the face of another well-known business saying about companies without a long-term plan, "those that fail to plan, plan to fail".

In all the years that I have supported United, I have never had the slightest hint that they have ever had a plan.

 

[Barney]

This is a post in response to others about selling of players and values. This is just the last 20 years and off the top of my head.

Sold Brian Deane, relegated
Sold Deane, Fjortoft and a host of good players, promotion missed
Hulse breaks leg, relegated
Sell BT and other best players, promotion missed
Kyles sold, club slides further down the toilet towards League One
Ched sent down, promotion missed
Quinn & Blackman sold (latter when top of table), promotion missed
McGuire sold, promotion missed and huge hole in central defence never patched up

I haven't included the net effect of selling Edwards to Leeds and Cockerill to Southampton at the time but we didn't improve in fact if memory serves me we replaced them with a dads army of old men and ended up going backwards.

Whatever the value of the above (combined or individual) the overall effect has probably cost this club hundreds of millions of pounds in lost revenue. We can argue over blame, we can argue over the actual effect of selling/losing our best players in certain cases, but what we cannot argue over is that every time we lose these players and replace them we become weaker (anyone remember Jostein Flo as the replacement for Brian Deane!?!)

So before people go down the road of speculating on £2m or £5m for Jamie Murphy, what is the actual cost of losing that player? I would say in the case of Murphy, Done and Brayford they are irreplacable in the short term. Players who can change a game. Players who can win you a game from nothing. 3 points rather than none. In this league as much as any other this is going to be key to promotion.

When we start talking about part deals for our own players like Murphy just to get Billy Sharp (no E at the end) to come back in an act of sad bladey, bladeness you are taking out someone who is a surefire matchwinner on occasion and replacing with someone who has never quite done it for us (for whatever reason).

I am genuinely shocked some people think this is a solution of any sort. My solution is we either get our hands in our pockets and enhance the squad, adding to the good players we have, casting those who aren't so good out elsewhere, selling/loaning whatever and treating those match winners we have like gold.

May I say (if I was one you were referring to in the first line) all I said with regards to selling players was two things:

(1) I'd sell Murphy for £5m
(2) I'd sell Done for £2.5m

That is all I said. Can't see much harm in that.

I'd add that you can't just base your decisions for the future solely on the happenings of the past otherwise a thing called improvement wouldn't exist. At some point you have to re-trace your beginnings but do them correctly the second time round otherwise you will not learn from your mistakes, you will simply avoid them and by doing that your not getting anywhere, achieving anything or improving in the slightest.

 

[SouthEssexBlade]

Selling players isn't the issue with us. All clubs sell, nearly all clubs sell when they don't want to. Our issue has always been getting value in the transfer deal and recruiting wisely to replace with equal or better. Now, buying after selling is down to the manager, so we blame the 20-odd managers I've seen since the days of John Harris. Not as simple as that as the board sanction any transfer spending and salary agreement. We have, for the vast majority of my time had boards with the philosophy of sell quick, buy cheap. And look where that has got us...

Fans see the selling of our best players as the reason we have declined. Actually, selling and the replacing with inferior quality is the reason. An obsession with getting value for money (always having an eye to a future sell-on when signing, thus a propensity to constantly try and unearth the diamond-in-the-rough). Case in point was when we needed a forward to replace the ageing but top quality Bill Dearden. Harris wanted Francis Lee as part of a new two-prong attack, fee agreed and terms agreed. Then the board baulked at paying that money for a player who was 'not the youngest', which really meant, we wont get our money back on any future transfer for this player (ignoring the proven quality and International experience they were getting), so spent the same money on a big young forward who'd bagged a few for Southend. And we know how Chris Guthrie turned out. This little episode sums up the clubs attitude to transfer dealings. Sign young and promising (and cheap) hope they are a success so we can get a bit of dosh for them.

Apart from a few signings in the Kendall era or thereabouts I struggle to remember when we signed a player superior to the one he was replacing at the time. Hopefully there are signs we are moving back towards this. Fingers crossed!

 

[blade too long]

Right so selling our best player for £3m is more profitable than promotion to the championship and hopefully, eventually the premier league. Gotcha

Don't give me we can replace them, because we simply can not and will not replace them with a player as good

why does it stop us getting promotion before weve kicked a ball I said not one of our current squad is irreplaceable , my argument is Murphys valuye is at best 1.5 miññion if someones daft enough to pay 3 we take it and get a better player for the going rate , say billy sharp for 1. 2 m but you go down your route of being totally uinprofessional

 

[Barney]

why does it stop us getting promotion before weve kicked a ball I said not one of our current squad is irreplaceable , my argument is Murphys valuye is at best 1.5 miññion if someones daft enough to pay 3 we take it and get a better player for the going rate , say billy sharp for 1. 2 m but you go down your route of being totally uinprofessional

That's the point i've been trying to get across to this fella for days. (him or metalblade, can't remember) If somebody offers obscenely more than his value, e.g £3-5m, then you take it because there is then obviously the potential to buy in a player that is better hence worth more. Whether the management and scouting team are talented enough to find those replacements is another matter but one in which we should definitely have trust in especially now we have actually got a decent manager and scout in place for once.

 

[Revolution]

Selling players isn't the issue with us. All clubs sell, nearly all clubs sell when they don't want to. Our issue has always been getting value in the transfer deal and recruiting wisely to replace with equal or better. Now, buying after selling is down to the manager, so we blame the 20-odd managers I've seen since the days of John Harris. Not as simple as that as the board sanction any transfer spending and salary agreement. We have, for the vast majority of my time had boards with the philosophy of sell quick, buy cheap. And look where that has got us...

Fans see the selling of our best players as the reason we have declined. Actually, selling and the replacing with inferior quality is the reason. An obsession with getting value for money (always having an eye to a future sell-on when signing, thus a propensity to constantly try and unearth the diamond-in-the-rough). Case in point was when we needed a forward to replace the ageing but top quality Bill Dearden. Harris wanted Francis Lee as part of a new two-prong attack, fee agreed and terms agreed. Then the board baulked at paying that money for a player who was 'not the youngest', which really meant, we wont get our money back on any future transfer for this player (ignoring the proven quality and International experience they were getting), so spent the same money on a big young forward who'd bagged a few for Southend. And we know how Chris Guthrie turned out. This little episode sums up the clubs attitude to transfer dealings. Sign young and promising (and cheap) hope they are a success so we can get a bit of dosh for them.

Apart from a few signings in the Kendall era or thereabouts I struggle to remember when we signed a player superior to the one he was replacing at the time. Hopefully there are signs we are moving back towards this. Fingers crossed!

I think that selling per se is more of an issue than you make it, but this is certainly a big part of the problem.

Another issue that causes us major problems is doing deals without looking at the impact on the squad as a whole: from just the post PL years you have the wilful dismantling of half the defence in 2009-10 when Naysmith and Kenny were out all season, Blackwell, Weir and Clough all obsessed with collecting midfielders who are either puny and/or can't score or assist to save their lives, and Clough discarding all of his centre half options without coming up with an alternative. Someone needs to step back and take a view of the whole picture for once. Hopefully Adkins will do that.

 

[Woodwardfan]

At least Adkins has been there and done it. He's experienced multiple promotions, he knows what it looks like and what it feels like. He's developed proper footballers, he knows how they look at various ages and periods of development.

When you've been there and done it you know how it is.

 

[blade too long]

I think that selling per se is more of an issue than you make it, but this is certainly a big part of the problem.

Another issue that causes us major problems is doing deals without looking at the impact on the squad as a whole: from just the post PL years you have the wilful dismantling of half the defence in 2009-10 when Naysmith and Kenny were out all season, Blackwell, Weir and Clough all obsessed with collecting midfielders who are either puny and/or can't score or assist to save their lives, and Clough discarding all of his centre half options without coming up with an alternative. Someone needs to step back and take a view of the whole picture for once. Hopefully Adkins will do that.

the reason we got relegated was losing several key players to long term injury and having to use 44 players , even the loan players we had to get replacements for as they got injured
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010–11_Sheffield_United_F.C._season
the number of key defenders , collins doyle morgan all played less than 16 games

 

[BushBlade]

the reason we got relegated was losing several key players to long term injury and having to use 44 players , even the loan players we had to get replacements for as they got injured
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010–11_Sheffield_United_F.C._season
the number of key defenders , collins doyle morgan all played less than 16 games

And Blackwell's pre season recruitment was as bad as I've seen, including Clough last time around. And then he gets sacked anyway. We'd have had a better chance of survival if we'd either sacked KB at the end of the previous season and let GS spend the money, or kept KB.

 

[Revolution]

the reason we got relegated was losing several key players to long term injury and having to use 44 players , even the loan players we had to get replacements for as they got injured
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010–11_Sheffield_United_F.C._season
the number of key defenders , collins doyle morgan all played less than 16 games

Morgan's injury was a factor.

Collins and Doyle hardly missed a game. Adams signed them both in January. Neither were good enough for that division.

We were relegated because years of selling our best players and replacing them with crap came home to roost.

 

[blade too long]

Morgan's injury was a factor.

as were 6 others with ligament injuries

take 7/8 players out of any team , change managers every 8 weeks and you only go one way

still think we sacked Blackwell at the wrong time , the draw at cardiff showed he had a plan
to sack someone on 1 defeat , to a team who eventually went up was crazy