Player Power: Maguire v Stones

[Flatulent_Bob]

But Harry's didn't benefit us.
Does anyone really think he was worth the 2m we got?

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

He was worth more than 2m if we'd gone up with him in the side.

Selling Beattie got us 2.5m. Promotion was worth 20 times that...

Exactly, different deals. Clough got he 2m and he should have gotten us up. HM wasn't worth the money hull paid.

 

[sheffielder]

But Harry's didn't benefit us.
Does anyone really think he was worth the 2m we got?

Do you think the 2m we got for him was worth what happened last season? If you do, then well umm

 

[sheffielder]

People have to stop thinking about the money we get for players and think of the value that player had to our team. Was getting 2m worth the money it cost not to get promoted.

Fast forward a season... let's hope that not replacing Murphy with a quality midfielder and CB won't cost us this time.

It's the Bladey blade shit way, or however it goes.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Do you think the 2m we got for him was worth what happened last season? If you do, then well umm

You dont get hindsight to help you make the decision.

You have 2m (I was actually told by someone close to the first team at Hull it was more if you include add ons) on the table for an asset worth no more than £1million, who'll be worth nothing in the summer.
You'be got a solid replacement in place in Butler and the money to spend strengthening elsewhere.
It's a relatively simple decision.
The fact that Butler wasn't used is an entirely different dicussion, he should have been a more than adequate replacement.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

People have to stop thinking about the money we get for players and think of the value that player had to our team. Was getting 2m worth the money it cost not to get promoted.

Fast forward a season... let's hope that not replacing Murphy with a quality midfielder and CB won't cost us this time.

It's the Bladey blade shit way, or however it goes.

Isn't that the skill of good effective management? To sell players for more than their worth and replace them with better for the money progressing the team?

To go back to Stones, Everton do not need the money to improve the squad. Especially when the likes of Stones and Barkley will be worth 10-20% more next summer and Everton will get a nice chuck of the TV deal. Harry was going to be worth hardly anything.
Rather ironically the new deal is going to change the landscape for the clubs not at the top selling their talent to the big boys.
They can't be bullied into selling their talent on the cheep. Not quite so good for Chanpionship and lower teams but they'll need to spend the money better, and it will be more profitable to develop young English talent lower down the leagues.

 

[alcoblade]

People have to stop thinking about the money we get for players and think of the value that player had to our team. Was getting 2m worth the money it cost not to get promoted.

Fast forward a season... let's hope that not replacing Murphy with a quality midfielder and CB won't cost us this time.

It's the Bladey blade shit way, or however it goes.

You can never stop thinking about the money. Promise of where we might be does not pay for the current running of a team.

Of course, there's always speculating to accumulate. Easily demanded in the shoutbox , often by those who put fuck all into the club (you know who you are), from someone else's wallet.

UTB

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Yes, if the money is too good to turn down, or the player is more trouble than he is worth, or there's a great replacement waiting in the wings.

None of this reasoning applies to the Maguire or Murphy sales IMHO.

Butler was waiting in the wings for Harry as was Adams, and or Done for Murphy.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

People have to stop thinking about the money we get for players and think of the value that player had to our team. Was getting 2m worth the money it cost not to get promoted.

Fast forward a season... let's hope that not replacing Murphy with a quality midfielder and CB won't cost us this time.

It's the Bladey blade shit way, or however it goes.

Yet to see anything tangible that would suggest we'd definitely have been promoted with Harry in the team. Likewise we had Murphy last year and didn't go up, we had him against Gillingham and got stuffed. Such assumption are nonsense and based on nothing but wishful thinking.

 

[sheffielder]

Yet to see anything tangible that would suggest we'd definitely have been promoted with Harry in the team. Likewise we had Murphy last year and didn't go up, we had him against Gillingham and got stuffed. Such assumption are nonsense and based on nothing but wishful thinking.

You dont get hindsight to help you make the decision.

You have 2m (I was actually told by someone close to the first team at Hull it was more if you include add ons) on the table for an asset worth no more than £1million, who'll be worth nothing in the summer.
You'be got a solid replacement in place in Butler and the money to spend strengthening elsewhere.
It's a relatively simple decision.
The fact that Butler wasn't used is an entirely different dicussion, he should have been a more than adequate replacement.

No it's not. These relatively simple decisions have cost us plenty over the years. You don't need hindsight to see that selling your best players doesn't lead to success.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

No it's not. These relatively simple decisions have cost us plenty over the years. You don't need hindsight to see that selling your best players doesn't lead to success.

So you're saying Harry's sale led to us not being promoted, and following that forward, Murphys will mean the same this season?
I think it's a lot more complicated than that, but there's no way HM leaving should have stopped us going up.
When you are offered over their true worth, which we were for Harry and Murphy, it's about replacing them and making us a stronger side. Both Brighton and Hull paid extra for the youth element, and we didnt reinvest it properly or effectively with Harry. Time will tell with Murphy but we look better than when he was here so far, but it's early days.

 

[JohnDenver]

So you're saying Harry's sale led to us not being promoted, and following that forward, Murphys will mean the same this season?
I think it's a lot more complicated than that, but there's no way HM leaving should have stopped us going up.

Harry's sale left us incredibly vulnerable at the back. Murphy's sale doesn't leave us as badly wounded up front.

But I accept the point we should have coped with Harry's sale and challenged far better than we did. As for now, I remain concerned that losing Edgar would leave us very weak once more.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Harry's sale left us incredibly vulnerable at the back. Murphy's sale doesn't leave us as badly wounded up front.

But I accept the point we should have coped with Harry's sale and challenged far better than we did. As for now, I remain concerned that losing Edgar would leave us very weak once more.

Agree on Edgar, but didn't we get Butler in and he performed solidly at our level both previously to playing for us and since.
The problem with selling Harry was that we spent the money on a right back but also moved on the centre half replacement without having any other options. That's separate to wether HM should have been sold, personally I think it's clear he should have been, others disagree.

 

[JohnDenver]

Agree on Edgar, but didn't we get Butler in and he performed solidly at our level both previously to playing for us and since.
The problem with selling Harry was that we spent the money on a right back but also moved on the centre half replacement without having any other options. That's separate to wether HM should have been sold, personally I think it's clear he should have been, others disagree.

I wouldn't put Butler anywhere near Maguire's class - we needed a more comparable replacement. And in Clough's defence, I think no-one expected McCarthy to disappoint in that role quite so badly. He was a huge let down.

As for whether Maguire should have been sold - I wouldn't have taken the money unless it was clear the player would be embittered by having the move refused. All I have to go on in that regard is hearsay.

 

[sheffielder]

I wouldn't put Butler anywhere near Maguire's class - we needed a more comparable replacement. And in Clough's defence, I think no-one expected McCarthy to disappoint in that role quite so badly. He was a huge let down.

As for whether Maguire should have been sold - I wouldn't have taken the money unless it was clear the player would be embittered by having the move refused. All I have to go on in that regard is hearsay.

I imagine Bruce wish he had gone for Butler as a slightly cheaper option than Maguire, as they were obviously of similar standard. I wish people would stop underestimating this division and what is needed to get out of it. (not you)

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

I imagine Bruce wish he had gone for Butler as a slightly cheaper option than Maguire, as they were obviously of similar standard. I wish people would stop underestimating this division and what is needed to get out of it. (not you)

Don't play the fool. Harry's youth while performing at that level and his potential to improve was what Bruce was buying. You don't pay 2M for an decent league one centre half. But then you already knew that.
No one is under estimating what it takes to get out of this league, and I notice you've ducked the question about our promotion chances this year already being damaged by selling Murphy. Following your logic should already mean we can't be promoted this season because Murphy's been sold, yet performances have improved without him. How's that level with your view on selling Harry automatically cost us promotion last season?

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

I wouldn't put Butler anywhere near Maguire's class - we needed a more comparable replacement. And in Clough's defence, I think no-one expected McCarthy to disappoint in that role quite so badly. He was a huge let down.

I'm not attacking Clough at all, just saying it's his job to identify and obtain good enough replacements and make the team stronger with the money.

As for whether Maguire should have been sold - I wouldn't have taken the money unless it was clear the player would be embittered by having the move refused. All I have to go on in that regard is hearsay.

Didn't he refuse to play, or report as injured when he wasn't?
Eitherway he'd already rocked the boat when we'd rejected the first few offers and then we had to go back to Hull to resurrect the deal once he'd made it clear that he wasn't going to play nicely. Remember we'd already said he wasn't going, it was Harry who forced the issue. Hardly the behaviour of a guy who'd be an positive asset going forward.

 

[sheffielder]

Don't play the fool, Harry's youth while performing at that level and his potential to improve was what Bruce was buying. But then you already knew that.
No one is under estimating what it takes, and I notice you've ducked the question about our promotion chances this year already being damaged by selling Murphy. Following your logic should already mean we can't be promoted this season because Murphy's been sold, yet performances have improved without him. How's that level with your view on selling Harry automatically cost us promotion last season?

I have already commented that unless we replace Murphy with quality in midfield and CB then it will damage our chances of getting promoted. Butler was and never will be in anyone's mind an adequate replacement for Maguire and not having anyone at CB all season cost us promotion, sadly you don't agree.

I am not even going to get started on the team's results have improved since Murphy left. Selling our best players and not using the money to improve the team has cost us for a few years now. McDonald, Blackman, Maguire and now Murphy. With the first 3, not one time has our team/squad improved with the money we have received and you can't argue with that, well...

 

[sheffielder]

Eitherway he'd already rocked the boat when we'd rejected the first few offers and then we had to go back to Hull to resurrect the deal once he'd made it clear that he wasn't going to play nicely. Remember we'd already said he wasn't going, it was Harry who forced the issue. Hardly the behaviour of a guy who'd be an positive asset going forward.

How do you know that version of the story is true?

 

[alcoblade]

Harry's sale left us incredibly vulnerable at the back. Murphy's sale doesn't leave us as badly wounded up front.

But I accept the point we should have coped with Harry's sale and challenged far better than we did. As for now, I remain concerned that losing Edgar would leave us very weak once more.

As i think you've accepted, it was about adequate replacement. We got very good money. In fact I think we did ok with the replacement, but in this case a problem with the manager spoiled it,

Similar with Murphy, though I think we are well covered in his position. For me, 2 good recruits with this money will make promotion much more likely that it was with Murphy. Of course, only time will tell if we make them.

UTB

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

I have already commented that unless we replace Murphy with quality in midfield and CB then it will damage our chances of getting promoted. Butler was and never will be in anyone's mind an adequate replacement for Maguire and not having anyone at CB all season cost us promotion, sadly you don't agree.

OK so selling Murphy doesn't automatically mean we won't be promoted, it's about quality replacement. Don't look now but that exactly what I've been saying all along. No need for the silly straw man stuff at the end of that paragraph it completely removes your credibility to discuss this without being daft. I've obviously said no such thing at any point.

I am not even going to get started on the team's results have improved since Murphy left. Selling our best players and not using the money to improve the team has cost us for a few years now. McDonald, Blackman, Maguire and now Murphy. With the first 3, not one time has our team/squad improved with the money we have received and you can't argue with that, well...

That's the manager fault isn't it, if they're given the funds which Clough was? With Murphy result have definitely improved from last season and the start of this, and we didn't get near promotion with him in the team last year. It's early days, far too early to judge but so far it doesn't look like selling a player, perceived by some to be our best, is the sole reason we don't get promoted. Another example would be keeping Scoogs last season didn't get us up either. It's clearly a more complicated matter than what you are trying to make it to be, and not a case of selling player=no promotion.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

How do you know that version of the story is true?

Which bit, only the first part contained conjecture? He did claim to be injured and missed a game when the manager said he wasn't if I recall. If that isn't true then I did cover that in the next sentence.
The rest about us turning down the offers was stated by the club, manager and Hull.
Same for us reopening talks afterwards due to the players influence.

 

[gavtheblade]

I used to like a pint of stones.

 

[davidpinder]

I am a believer in keeping players that want to be there, this isn't really relevant to us as we are a selling club and need to sell players to keep going.

 

[alcoblade]

I am a believer in keeping players that want to be there, this isn't really relevant to us as we are a selling club and need to sell players to keep going.

I'm a big believer that very, very few players want to play for anyone. They want to play for the most money.

UTB

 

[JohnDenver]

I'm a big believer that very, very few players want to play for anyone. They want to play for the most money.

UTB

True. Which makes Brayford's wish to play somewhere that makes him happy rather than somewhere that makes him richer a refreshing thing to see. Not that we're impoverishing the bloke, but still....

As a fan I don't begrudge Maguire or Murphy taking the chance to earn life changing sums of money by rising up the leagues. I take greater offence at Rooney rinsing his club and by extension its fans, or Robbie Keane working endless sideways moves to cream off the signing-on fees, or Ashley Cole taking umbrage at £60k a week. (etc etc)

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

I used to like a pint of stones.

Then you have no taste. I'd drink Stones when I was 15 and it was all I could get out the one offie who would serve me.

 

[Flatulent_Bob]

Interesting side note;
Just watched Swansea and Southampton. Sides improving year on year as clubs by selling their best players for over the odds prices and bringing in better alternatives.

 

[FatLadFromSheffield]

Stones is no where near worth £30+ million. Everton should snatch their hands off, get 2/3 decent players and still have money to spare.

 

[Revolution]

Interesting side note;
Just watched Swansea and Southampton. Sides improving year on year as clubs by selling their best players for over the odds prices and bringing in better alternatives.

After not selling their free scoring centre forwards until they got out of league one.