Tomorrow - gutting

[lenners]

As I recall, the offer on the table for Kyle N was £5M from Everton. Let's say we took that and kept Kyle W. We'll never know what could have happened post wembley but OK, you reckon he could have been worth £6M now, let's see what happens in the next 12 months but the fact is, we got, or could get £10M for the pair so some would say we did well getting that kind of money then, particularly as Kyle W had only played a handful of games at Championship level. Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing but I don't think the deal we got makes McCabe (as a businessman) short sighted in any shape or form.

The irony is that McCabe and the board already knew Walker was actually the brighter prospect and yet still took the quick buck.
Very, very poor management and a decision that undermines any claims they make about what their alleged plans are for the future.

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

Ollesendro, I can assure you there's absolutely no wind-up as regards Walker.
It damaged the club and means that even the most 'loyal' on here pretty much sneer at the notion United would really build a team around talented, local youngsters.

Unfortunately len, it's not just us, it's the way of the football world. Most clubs outside the top 4 or 5 in the Prem are simply feeder clubs and can't afford not to cash in when they start offering silly money for unproven young kids. The two Kyles won't be the last, we just have to hope that we can somehow claw our way up at a time when we have them in the side, would both have left if we'd beaten Burnley ?

 

[themaninblack]

I believe that, for better or worse, the supporters represent the soul of a club. Footballers are here today and gone tomorrow.

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

I believe that, for better or worse, the supporters represent the soul of a club. Footballers are here today and gone tomorrow.

True, but part of the problem is that it's difficult for fans to associate themselves with players who are 'earning' close to £1M a month for playing football and who you know will be gone as soon as they get a better offer. The Kyle sales probably hit harder for us fans as they were local lads who you felt were part of SUFC but at the end of the day, they're no different to anyone else when it comes to chasing the buck. They were by no means totally innocent parties and I didn't buy the 'they didn't want to go' stories.

The fans will always be there but sometimes I think clubs rely on loyalty too much.

 

[Ollessendro]

As I recall, the offer on the table for Kyle N was £5M from Everton. Let's say we took that and kept Kyle W. We'll never know what could have happened post wembley but OK, you reckon he could have been worth £6M now, let's see what happens in the next 12 months but the fact is, we got, or could get £10M for the pair so some would say we did well getting that kind of money then, particularly as Kyle W had only played a handful of games at Championship level. Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing but I don't think the deal we got makes McCabe (as a businessman) short sighted in any shape or form.

It was incredibly short sighted. Selling one talented youngster was bad enough, but the second was ludicrous. I actually think that £6m (rising to £8m) was too good to turn down for Naughton. But the £2 or £3 million offered for Walker should have been turned down.

Firstly, it wasn't hindsight. Many people disliked this deal at the time if reactions on this and other boards was anything to go by. Indeed, one thing almost universally disliked was the sale of two players not one.

Dismantling the best defence this club has had in over 40 years, the defence which was the main factor in our play off run, was extremely short sighted. If management really did seriously want promotion, selling our two best young players, at a time when our left back was out for months and out keeper suspended for many months, was more than short sighted. It was wilfully stupid.

Spot on Fiery. It was not hinsight. There was absolute uproar at the time. Hindsight has only confirmed what we already know, that Walker is a very promising young star.

The irony is that McCabe and the board already knew Walker was actually the brighter prospect and yet still took the quick buck.
Very, very poor management and a decision that undermines any claims they make about what their alleged plans are for the future.

Lenners is spot on. Why couldn't McCabe have waited? We could have sold Naughton for £5 or £6m and kept Walker. His value would have rocketed after a while and we would have kept one of the best young right backs in England. He is a Blade, Sheffielder and would have been happy to stay. But McCabe had the pound signs in his eyes and couldn't resist the offer. How anyone can say that it was no short sighted is beyond me.

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

It was incredibly short sighted. Selling one talented youngster was bad enough, but the second was ludicrous. I actually think that £6m (rising to £8m) was too good to turn down for Naughton. But the £2 or £3 million offered for Walker should have been turned down.



Spot on Fiery. It was not hinsight. There was absolute uproar at the time. Hindsight has only confirmed what we already know, that Walker is a very promising young star.



Lenners is spot on. Why couldn't McCabe have waited? We could have sold Naughton for £5 or £6m and kept Walker. His value would have rocketed after a while and we would have kept one of the best young right backs in England. He is a Blade, Sheffielder and would have been happy to stay. But McCabe had the pound signs in his eyes and couldn't resist the offer. How anyone can say that it was no short sighted is beyond me.

I seem to remember it was £5M rising to £6M for KN and £3M rising to £4M for KW. It was inevitable that KN was going to go and in an ideal world he would have gone to Everton (which I believe was his preferred choice) and KW would have stayed but as I say, potentially £10M for the two, who had played less than 40 games at this level between them was decent business. It's easy to say KW's value would have rocketed but who's to say he wouldn't have suffered under Blackwell ? KN has hardly gone from strength to strength has he ? It will certainly be interesting to see how KW does for half a season in the Prem.

 

[JJ Sefton]

Our soul isn't in unpleasant, self-seeking, it's the ref's fault numpties.
It's in the players.

No it isnt.

 

[Bath Blade]

We could have sold Naughton for £5 or £6m and kept Walker. His value would have rocketed after a while and we would have kept one of the best young right backs in England.

Like Michael Tonge's value was going to soar after we didn't take the opportunity to cash in back in 2003.

 

[super_pig]

yeah but tongey was crap

 

[Ollessendro]

Like Michael Tonge's value was going to soar after we didn't take the opportunity to cash in back in 2003.

there was no opportunity to cash in on Tongue. Despite intense speculation no bids were tabled. Funnily enough, we held onto him, got the best out of him (02/03 and he was instrumental in promotion and decent in the Prem) and flogged him for £2m. Pick a better example if you are going to try and critique please.

I seem to remember it was £5M rising to £6M for KN and £3M rising to £4M for KW. It was inevitable that KN was going to go and in an ideal world he would have gone to Everton (which I believe was his preferred choice) and KW would have stayed but as I say, potentially £10M for the two, who had played less than 40 games at this level between them was decent business. It's easy to say KW's value would have rocketed but who's to say he wouldn't have suffered under Blackwell ? KN has hardly gone from strength to strength has he ? It will certainly be interesting to see how KW does for half a season in the Prem.

I agree that we we're probably right to cash in on Naughton. But selling Walker as well was a bad move. You can dress it up how you want, 'he only had 5 games experience and we got 3 million'. Do you think the Rossineri would have been happy if they'd sold an 17 year old Paulo Maldini after 5 games for a similar relative value (say 500k) back in 1985? The argument doesn't hold water.

 

[SteelCity Blade]

I agree that we we're probably right to cash in on Naughton. But selling Walker as well was a bad move. You can dress it up how you want, 'he only had 5 games experience and we got 3 million'. Do you think the Rossineri would have been happy if they'd sold an 17 year old Paulo Maldini after 5 games for a similar relative value (say 500k) back in 1985? The argument doesn't hold water.

I completely agree with Olle here. It seemed logical to only sell one of them IMO, they are both full backs (right sided) and we were already receiving a handsome sum for Kyle Naughton. Why the need to snatch at the first offer for his younger (and IMO better) alternative? Everyone could see Kyle Walker had massive potential when he first broke through.....he's a beast, with fantastic ability at his feet and electric pace. He's an England full back in the making!

If we had held onto Kyle Walker for even a season longer (maybe 2), clubs would have been queuing up with silly money for him. The only reason they arent now is because he is at a bigger club and his exposure to first team football has been staggered until recently.

It was typical United I'm afraid, sell the family silver for the first bid. I remember saying at the time it was daft to sell both. Spurs may have wanted the pair but I remember Everton made an offer for Kyle Naughton on his own.

 

[broomhillblade]

True, but part of the problem is that it's difficult for fans to associate themselves with players who are 'earning' close to £1M a month for playing football and who you know will be gone as soon as they get a better offer. The Kyle sales probably hit harder for us fans as they were local lads who you felt were part of SUFC but at the end of the day, they're no different to anyone else when it comes to chasing the buck. They were by no means totally innocent parties and I didn't buy the 'they didn't want to go' stories.

The fans will always be there but sometimes I think clubs rely on loyalty too much.

I read yesterday that the average wage in the premiership is over £33,000 a week. Obviously unproven young players won't get that amount straight away, but one can understand the temptation for them to join a top-level club.

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

I agree that we we're probably right to cash in on Naughton. But selling Walker as well was a bad move. You can dress it up how you want, 'he only had 5 games experience and we got 3 million'. Do you think the Rossineri would have been happy if they'd sold an 17 year old Paulo Maldini after 5 games for a similar relative value (say 500k) back in 1985? The argument doesn't hold water.

I bow to your greater knowledge of Italian football Olle but I bet for every Maldini, there's a similar player who went for a decent fee and turned out to be pants.

£3/4M may turn out to be a snip, all I'm saying is that the deal for the two was understandable in business terms but it was exactly that, a business decision, I doubt that McCabe stopped and thought about the players/team. I think McCabe saw it pretty much as a straight replacement for the parachute payment and that was that, unfortunately from the fans/teams point of view, the deal for the two was better financially.

It may come across that I agree with the deals, I didn't then and I don't know, all I'm saying is that it was an understandable gamble from McCabe's point of view at a time, let's not forget, when the financial market was in free-fall.

 

[alcoblade]

We sold them because we were skint. It's surely that simple? We'd have loved to have kept them but we needed the money. Even after we've pocketed the cash, we're left making do with Andy Taylor and Rob Kozluk. The money has gone on failed Chinese ventures and sky high contracts for incredibly average players like Gary Naysmith. For me, if we want to dwell on mistakes, it's these we should discuss.

UTB

 

[lenners]

We sold them because we were skint. It's surely that simple? We'd have loved to have kept them but we needed the money. Even after we've pocketed the cash, we're left making do with Andy Taylor and Rob Kozluk. The money has gone on failed Chinese ventures and sky high contracts for incredibly average players like Gary Naysmith. For me, if we want to dwell on mistakes, it's these we should discuss.

UTB

It might be interesting to do a roll call of the number of players who've played full back since the two Kyles left or even since Walker played his last game.
I'd imagine it's a pretty substantial number with plenty going on wages in loanings for starters, in place of the £3m brought in.
That's before you consider the damage it's done longer term to crowds, team performance (both hitting income) and future credibility of the board.

 

[alcoblade]

It might be interesting to do a roll call of the number of players who've played full back since the two Kyles left or even since Walker played his last game.
I'd imagine it's a pretty substantial number with plenty going on wages in loanings for starters, in place of the £3m brought in.
That's before you consider the damage it's done longer term to crowds, team performance (both hitting income) and future credibility of the board.

But there is no way that filling the fullback position have cost us anywhere near the £10M we've had for them. And if we hadn't had that money, what else would we have sold to make up the short fall and what other damage might there have been? None of this can be answered, there's a counter for both sides. But for me the root cause remains the same - we overspent in the wrong areas, making player sales an inevitability.

UTB

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

But there is no way that filling the fullback position have cost us anywhere near the £10M we've had for them. And if we hadn't had that money, what else would we have sold to make up the short fall and what other damage might there have been? None of this can be answered, there's a counter for both sides. But for me the root cause remains the same - we overspent in the wrong areas, making player sales an inevitability.

Spot on, once the Wembley final was lost, there was a deficit that needed making up somehow and that was the easiest way of doing it. It all goes back to the Robson era and Tevezgate before that, 12 months where major events went against us and the wrong decisions made to put them right. We almost got away with it had we beaten Burnley but from that point on it's been damage limitation and rake back as much money as we can.

Are we rock bottom yet, probably not in terms of cuts but we need to get there before we can start picking up again. Linking up with other current threads, what the club needs to do is keep the fans reasonably happy and ensure enough people buy into what they're doing via Season Tickets.

 

[Bath Blade]

there was no opportunity to cash in on Tongue. Despite intense speculation no bids were tabled. Funnily enough, we held onto him, got the best out of him (02/03 and he was instrumental in promotion and decent in the Prem) and flogged him for £2m. Pick a better example if you are going to try and critique please.

I don't know whether there was actually ever a bid on the table but you surely can't argue that he didn't ever live up to the potential that he showed in 2002/03, and therefore his value then would have been the highest it ever was.

If you want another example, how about cashing in on Lee Morris after only a few games. He must be worth a fortune now.

 

[Revolution]

Spot on, once the Wembley final was lost, there was a deficit that needed making up somehow and that was the easiest way of doing it.

This is a mischaracterisation. There was no third party debt that needed addressing - heaven knows, the usual suspects went on and on about the hotel debt being risk free in that regard. McCabe wanted his money back. He wouldn't fund any more. We did not sell because we had to. We sold because McCabe wanted us to. That was his right, but that was not the only choice he had.

If you want another example, how about cashing in on Lee Morris after only a few games. He must be worth a fortune now.

A great deal, admittedly - but then again, Lee Morris was already a crock. United sold him after he's played 15 minutes of football in 3 months and had come nowhere near to proving his fitness.

And again, Lee Morris is only one player, not two.

 

[alcoblade]

Spot on, once the Wembley final was lost, there was a deficit that needed making up somehow and that was the easiest way of doing it.

This is a mischaracterisation. There was no third party debt that needed addressing

There was shit loads of debt, it just wasn't out in the open yet. £20M wagebills and the residual contracts were only leading one way. And the hotel, as with Chengdu and the rest of the property, was bought with money we didn't have. Even after that, we were pepared to find another £40M to redevelop the ground so we that could attract 3 games of the likes of Mexico V Slovenia, and pocket a full 20% of the receipts.

We'd definitley lost the plot, but the sale of the 2 Kyles was symptom and not cause.

UTB

 

[lenners]

But there is no way that filling the fullback position have cost us anywhere near the £10M we've had for them. And if we hadn't had that money, what else would we have sold to make up the short fall and what other damage might there have been? None of this can be answered, there's a counter for both sides. But for me the root cause remains the same - we overspent in the wrong areas, making player sales an inevitability.

UTB

No, I've always accepted the sale of Naughton and the total so far is £8m.
It's the sale of Walker that grates and the associated costs make the £3m a very short-sighted decision.
When you're down-sizing, the aim ought to include recognising how you're going to develop income and protect incoming revenue in the future - not just take any quick buck at that moment in time.

 

[Highbury_Blade]

No, I've always accepted the sale of Naughton and the total so ar is £8m.
It's the sale of Walker that grates and the associated costs make the £3m a very short-sighted decision.
When you're down-sizing, the aim ought to include recognising how you're going to develop income and protect incoming revenue in the future - not just take any quick buck at that moment in time.

Interesting that you always quote ched as having cost us a fee of £3m whilst not quoting the top end figure for walker & Naughton

 

[Ollessendro]

We sold them because we were skint. It's surely that simple? We'd have loved to have kept them but we needed the money. Even after we've pocketed the cash, we're left making do with Andy Taylor and Rob Kozluk. The money has gone on failed Chinese ventures and sky high contracts for incredibly average players like Gary Naysmith. For me, if we want to dwell on mistakes, it's these we should discuss.

UTB

Yep, have to say alco has hit the nail on the head. In the annual accounts we made a profit that year purely because of the deal.

I don't know whether there was actually ever a bid on the table but you surely can't argue that he didn't ever live up to the potential that he showed in 2002/03, and therefore his value then would have been the highest it ever was.

If you want another example, how about cashing in on Lee Morris after only a few games. He must be worth a fortune now.

Morris is a alightly better example. He was one player, who was overrated (imo - and many others) compared to two. This is not to mention Morris injury concern.

I accept the line of argument that you and Jim are taking, i.e. not every players that has potential will turn out to be good. There are plenty of examples opf players bursting on the scene and being rubbish over the years. The Blades have a decent record of cashin in on these, with the likes of Woodhouse, Wayne Quinna and Morris. However it is not an excuse to sell every young player that looks good in a Red and White shirt. Where will it leave us if every academy youngster who breaks through has an awesome few games (half a season or whatever) is sold for 1/2/3 mill on the premise he might get injured or lose form?

My original point was that it was short sighted to sell both. The Naughton offer was too good to turn down, but the Walker deal was a mistake.

 

[lenners]

Interesting that you always quote ched as having cost us a fee of £3m whilst not quoting the top end figure for walker & Naughton

Because McCabe and the accounts said £3m and the accounts, if I remember correctly, said £8m for the Kyles.

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

My original point was that it was short sighted to sell both. The Naughton offer was too good to turn down, but the Walker deal was a mistake.

Can't argue with that but the Spurs offer was more money for KN, a decent fee for KW based on what he'd actually achieved and, of course, we got him back for the season (cough). Could be wrong but I don't think the original intention was to sell both and it was only when Spurs came up with the package that McCabe saw the 'value' in it.

 

[Ollessendro]

Can't argue with that but the Spurs offer was more money for KN, a decent fee for KW based on what he'd actually achieved and, of course, we got him back for the season (cough). Could be wrong but I don't think the original intention was to sell both and it was only when Spurs came up with the package that McCabe saw the 'value' in it.

In danger of going round in circles I think we should leave it at that. I think more could ahve been done. For examplke we could ahve gone back to Everton and asked them to match Spurs offer or we could have taken the £6m for Naughton and refused to sell Walker. Both scenarios were perfeclty feasible, would have resulted in alarge cash influx (plugging the accounts) and meant we kept one very talented young player.

 

[lenners]

£3m out on Ched, plus £1.5m to £2m on wages, still rising.
£3m in for Walker, who was on rather less.
Well run club.

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

£3m out on Ched, plus £1.5m to £2m on wages, still rising.
£3m in for Walker, who was on rather less.
Well run club.

One was a full International with Premiership experience, the other had had half a season on loan at Northampton and 5 games at Chumpionship level.

 

[lenners]

One was a full International with Premiership experience, the other had had half a season on loan at Northampton and 5 games at Chumpionship level.

One was already a much better player than the other.
Sadly.

 

[Jim Chimmerney]

One was already a much better player than the other.
Sadly.

This is based on seeing Kyle, what, 5 times and Ched, what, never ?