[UPDATED] Fulham bid for Slew is rejected

[Beighton_Blade]

Apologies Foxy et al if this is in the wrong thread (its not a rumour as its been confirmed Fulham ARE now in talks with us re. Slew)...

Anyway, as the title says, what do you think will happen?

Realistically, he was always going to be subject to interest after all the media attention following him breaking into (and scoring for) the 1st team, and even more so since his impressive performances in the FAYC.

I know in an ideal world we'd prefer not to sell, but given that McCabe has already said we are not able to stop any youngsters being sold (i'll talk about that later), what would you i) expect/hope we would get for Slew and ii) what do you think we will actually get should he go?

I'd say i'd expect atleast an upfront payment of £3m and it must include performance related clauses (taking any fee up to a potential £5-6m) such as for appearances/goals scored for Fulham as well as a sell-on clause and an international appearance clause. Oh, and while we're at it, a season-long loan agreement which actually means that we get him back for an ENTIRE season...

What i think we'll actually end up with is him being sold for £1m at best and little or no further clauses, and probably no loan back option, which makes no financial as well as business/footballing sense at all.

Given that McCabe has stated we are reliant on youth and must make use of it, to then consider selling Slew now would be hugely hypocritical and almost suicidal from a financial point of view.

Ok yes, we gain about £1m+ in cashflow immediately, but what exactly is Slew costing us at present? Probably around £1,000 a week max. Given that, and the consideration of how much it would cost us to find a replacement with any sort of potential or ability to Slew it just doesn't make sense for us to accept anything less than about £3m.

For example, if we were to try and sign someone like ALF or Craig Davies, what would that cost us? Atleast £1.5m i'd assume and they are not even proven in league one never mind the championship where Slew has (thus far) shown an ability to score at that level. Plus their wages would no doubt dwarf Slew's, so McCabe i ask - what would be the financial sense?

The biggest (and more important) task we face/should be focusing on, is getting rid of the other (overpaid and underperforming) players like Ched, Hendo, Cresswell, Simmo et al.

Sell/dispose of these, and keep hold of the youngsters who are comparably on peanuts to these, and you immediately and in the long-term, benefit both financially as well as a football team.

It makes no sense then, to sell our few glimmers of hope whilst they are costing us next to nothing, and keep average to poor players on high wages.

I fear though this will all be in vein, as there's no doubt we'll sell as soon as McCabe feels we've got a good deal, unfortunately though i don't think McCabe any longer appreciates the long term financial effect his actions (which ironically he thinks is out of concern over our financial situation) has on deals like this, is actually contradictory to the reason he makes them (cost-cutting).

In the long run, selling low paid players for substantial (but not massive) fees and keeping high paid players until the end of their contracts thus losing them for nothing as they have underperformed, will always have the opposite effect - short term gain but long term pain.

Instead we should take a short term hit - by turning down anything less than £3-4m for Slew and getting rid of the high paid players for anything we can get (or on free's if neccessary) - which will ultimately prove more financially viable as we are then left with a lower wage bill which saves us money not just this season but in the next two or three, which in turn will save us more than any fee for Slew is likely to be...

Will McCabe do this though?? What do you think???

UTB!!

 

[sheffielder]

There is no way Fulham have that type of budget to blow on a player and then loan him back.

If I was McCabe I would wait till Slew's stock rose some more
If I was Slew there is no chance I would join Fulham.

When SLew starts banging them away for fun then you hold the keys, now we just hold the brochure

 

[Wards]

We should go tell Fulham where to stick it unless they're offering silly money! We can't hope to build a squad around the youngsters if all were going to do is sell them at the first chance.

I actually think there's only potentially 5 or 6 able to step up from the youth team, Slew being one of these. We HAVE to try keep hold of the best ones for as long as we can.

 

[norfolkblade]

Sold - and it won't be £3m either, bloody well should be though, I really have lost all faith now.

 

[JohnDenver]

I can't imagine Fulham are willing to pay much. Slew is promising he's no more than that.

So all this will do is unsettle our player if we refuse any bid. Because McCabe is right about one thing, if a Prem team offers life-changing money, we have to expect the player to want it, and we certainly cannot match it.

But as we saw with Kyle Walker, if we can just hold on until these lads have had a year in the first team, their value could rocket. Question is, how do we do that? Even if we did up the lad's money, just doing that could ruin his progression.

Money is truly spoiling football.

 

[Beighton_Blade]

But surely by the reports suggesting that Fulham are in DISCUSSIONS with us - this implies we are infact open to their offers, so in other words, if we get an offer which McCabe et al feels is good (which is where I worry) then he's gone!!??

I'm not naive enough to think we are going to keep him or that we aren't in a vulnerable position, i just fear that what McCabe and the board will think is a good deal, will prove not to be the case i.e. Kyle Walker's transfer.

Yes a million or two is a lot of money when your in our position, but i don't think they appreciate the opportunity cost of keeping Slew and instead losing money on Ched et al is less than it will cost us in the long term should we sell Slew and be left with the high paid dross. Its this lack of understanding i fear most, which has already been proven by the Kyle's transfer, which short-term looked like a good deal £3m for Walker, but what would he cost now? And what has it cost us not having a player of his quality for the past year?

UTB!!

 

[Webding]

I actually think there's only potentially 5 or 6 able to step up from the youth team, Slew being one of these. We HAVE to try keep hold of the best ones for as long as we can.

Only? That's more than optimistic. I agree there's 5-6 with more than enough potential to step up, but of those, how many will actually do so long term? Anything between none and six I'd say, it's early days yet.

I can't see us not selling Slew. Actually, scrub that. I can't see us not making the wrong decision. Not selling can sometimes prove to be a mistake with hindsight- remember Woodhouse?

 

[Beighton_Blade]

I can't imagine Fulham are willing to pay much. Slew is promising he's no more than that.

So all this will do is unsettle our player if we refuse any bid. Because McCabe is right about one thing, if a Prem team offers life-changing money, we have to expect the player to want it, and we certainly cannot match it.

But as we saw with Kyle Walker, if we can just hold on until these lads have had a year in the first team, their value could rocket. Question is, how do we do that? Even if we did up the lad's money, just doing that could ruin his progression.

Money is truly spoiling football.

True JD, i think what we must do though, is say to Slew "keep with us for one year, grow your stock further, get us back to the Championship and we'll then grant you a transfer to any Prem side that comes calling with an agreed fee". At the same time, reject any unsatisfactory offers, as £1-2m is no good to us right now it needs silly money like £4-5m (like Southampton always seem to get and look set to get for their next star that Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain (sp!?) kid...

In the long run he'll get his move if he proves his potential, even if it does mean staying with us in L1 for a year, and if he's scored even more goals it can only help him get a better deal and (no disrespect to Fulham) maybe with a better club...

But it'll not happen... :-(

UTB!!!

 

[Wards]

Exactly, the key work being 'potentially' in my first post

We've got to try and put up some sort of fight for these lads. Surely?!

 

[Webding]

History says no. And I read your post as the number of kids being the potential part, not the ability to step up, sorry.

 

[mekkyblade]

We should go tell Fulham where to stick it unless they're offering silly money! We can't hope to build a squad around the youngsters if all were going to do is sell them at the first chance.

I actually think there's only potentially 5 or 6 able to step up from the youth team, Slew being one of these. We HAVE to try keep hold of the best ones for as long as we can.

What he said!!!!

 

[Kenilworth]

What's up BB a sensible and well though out post?
Agree with you - sopt on.

If past policy is repeated Slew will be sold at the first opportunity but I cannot see how that fits in with McC stated intention of using the youth set up or his comment about releasing kids too early but seeing them go on to make good careers elsewhere when they could have done so with us. I guess the only rationale would be to sell the really good ones as soon as there is Prem interest but keep the others for ourselves. Doesn't make economic sense to me either but there is at least some wierd logic behind it.

Good examples of not offloading too soon are Ipswich with Connor Wickham and as you say Southampton - Walcott & Oxlade-Chamberlain.

The following image sums up our transfer policy to a tee.

 

[Wards]

It's a different BB Kenilworth. This one can formulate full sentences!

The really good ones, as you state, are probably the only ones who'll be able to cut it at any level to be honest. Some of them, just by law of averages won't make it pro. We've got to keep hold of the good ones.

 

[Ballinpigpubs13]

What will happen?
He'll be gone for about 750k quicker than a ferret down a rabbithole.

 

[cooperblade]

Let's not get too carried away here. Are we sure this isn't just SSN reading bladesmad and taking it as gospel? The most credible sounding post on there is the lad who's got his mate at Fradi to ask Slew and been told nothing's happening.

 

[gavtheblade]

if slew is sold-mccabe should hang

 

[sheffielder]

Let's not get too carried away here. Are we sure this isn't just SSN reading bladesmad and taking it as gospel? The most credible sounding post on there is the lad who's got his mate at Fradi to ask Slew and been told nothing's happening.

Yeh I have just seen that. I think there is a chance Slew could be sold if we can't get rid of 2 out of cresswell, boggy, henderson and evans. I don't see fulham having the money for a project.

 

[Trigger Blade]

It's a different BB Kenilworth. This one can formulate full sentences!

It had me going for a minute before I spotted the crucial underscore ;-)

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

I can't imagine Fulham are willing to pay much. Slew is promising he's no more than that.

So all this will do is unsettle our player if we refuse any bid. Because McCabe is right about one thing, if a Prem team offers life-changing money, we have to expect the player to want it, and we certainly cannot match it.But as we saw with Kyle Walker, if we can just hold on until these lads have had a year in the first team, their value could rocket. Question is, how do we do that? Even if we did up the lad's money, just doing that could ruin his progression.

Money is truly spoiling football.

Said it before but we can, £6M would have paid for 3/4 of the future England back four instead we got 70 donkeys.

One thing for sure SUFC will cost McC a lot of dosh the next two years. Grow some Kev and instead of picking up the tab at the end spend some now.

If the Prem want to pay Slew £15K/£20K a week to be a reserve tell em to do one and match it.

Just think where £40K a week for Jags and £30 for Walker would have got us. You'd have banked £100M instead of forking out the £6M you've wasted, come on grow some McC and LEARN from your montimental mistakes.

 

[Foxy]

If the Prem want to pay Slew £15K/£20K a week to be a reserve tell em to do one and match it.

You have got to be having a laugh.

 

[BladeHearts]

Said it before but we can £6M would have paid for 3/4 of the future England back four instead we got 70 donkeys.

One thing for sure SUFC will cost McC a lot of dosh the next two years. Grow some Kev and instead of picking up the tab at the end spend some now.

If the Prem want to pay Slew £15K/£20K a week to be a reserve tell em to do one and match it.

Just think where £40K a week for Jags and £30 for Walker would have got us. You'd have banked £100M instead of forking out the £6M you've wasted, come on grow some McC and LEARN from your montimental mistakes.

Seriously, is this an excerpt from your new book...... "How to bankrupt a football club in 10 easy steps".

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

You have got to be having a laugh.

Like I've said before I'm speaking with hindsight and if McC had paid the players enough to keep them he would have seen as a total fruit basket but histroy shows that the money wasted on loans could have kept four good players and I'm sure those players would have put us in with a chance of going up two seasons ago.

What happens is we spend the same amount and finish up where?

 

[Beighton_Blade]

Said it before but we can £6M would have paid for 3/4 of the future England back four instead we got 70 donkeys.

One thing for sure SUFC will cost McC a lot of dosh the next two years. Grow some Kev and instead of picking up the tab at the end spend some now.

If the Prem want to pay Slew £15K/£20K a week to be a reserve tell em to do one and match it.

Just think where £40K a week for Jags and £30 for Walker would have got us. You'd have banked £100M instead of forking out the £6M you've wasted, come on grow some McC and LEARN from your montimental mistakes.

Point is Grumpy - we don't have to spend a penny right now, Slew is (i assume) on a professional contract which still has a few years to run - if we do not want to sell him for anything less than say £5-6m then we don't have to. He is being paid probably no more than £1k a week at the minute, yes £15k a week as a Fulham reserve might appeal right now, but unless we agree to any transfer (of which we are happy with the fee) then he stays, and we get to retain him on his current salary to the end of his contract.

In reality this will cause issues, so the trick, one would expect, is to offer an improved contract (but still very acceptable to us as a L1 club) i.e. £4-5k per week, tell him we're rejecting Fulham as he's got a job to do here, and that if he scores the goals this season to get us back up, we'll grant him his wish next summer once he's proven himself more and at that point he should (if he continues his progression) be able to attain a bigger transfer fee and also a better wage for himself and maybe a better chance of breaking into a Premiership team.

But i fear we sell now for £1m in fear of him not carrying his development on and us potentially losing £1m - whilst at the same time blowing £50,000 a week on the likes of Ched, Simmo, Hendo, Cresswell et al - a bit contradictory me thinks!!!

UTB!

 

[davidpinder]

McCabe wants his money back he is the only one we owe money to, we don't owe any clubs because we don't buy players, McCabe said we have no bank loan so he is the only person the club owes money to. He is taking out every penny he can get and with the club set to make a loss again next season then he will sell whoever he can to get the money back. Remember guys " it will be a good deal for the club".

 

[Beighton_Blade]

But the point is pinder, if that is the case, he's doing himself an injustice...

yes he'll gain £1m now from Slew, but if we're instead keeping the likes of Cresswell, Boggy etc on ~£10k each a week then in the long term your no better off. What would be better is to lose money now on the disposal of the above 'dead wood' and keep the lesser paid Slew, Lowton, McAllister etc (increasing thier contracts to reasonable L1 salaries when they start doing it week in week out) and let their stock rise, and sell on when their value increases. Should they not perform, its then not cost you £15-20k for the privaledge, but instead a much more managable wage bill...

 

[sufc1988]

It would not suprise me if McCabe said - Yes you can have Slew as long as its a straight swap for the Michael Jackson statue

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

Point is Grumpy - we don't have to spend a penny right now[/B

My point is SUFC will continue to cost McC a lot of money [long may he continue to support us] but the thinking needs to change. Some of the money he's going to spend needs to be up front instead of through the season. He needs to stop looking at what it's cost him but work out what it might cost him and invest. Very different to just paying out.

Thats the culture that needs to change

and his choice of managers as well.

Six of the last managers would not have even had an interview if I'd been in charge.

 

[Bergen Blade]

Young strikers can be a bit hard to valuate. A young Marcus Bent had pace, strength, height, skill and he scored goals (while with us). In the last ten years his good attributes has made him attractive to several Premiership clubs, although he's never been great, let alone prolific.

This is why I doubt any Premiership club will be willing to pay £5-6m at the moment. However we can insist on a deal that takes his future development into account. If he goes on to win an England cap, there should be a clause that gives us a very realistic £7-8m. Any interested club may say that they won't commit to that much for a younster - well, our reply should be that it's pretty cheap for an England striker, take it or leave it. Obviously the deal should include other clauses (appearances/goals/sell on) as well. Let's show that we're not fools who didn't learn from the pathetic Walker deal.

 

[SteelCity Blade]

If they sell Slew they can fuck their season ticket.

I am rapidly becoming disillusioned by football and by our sorry excuse for a club, but never mind - I'm sure we can buy more Collins' and Doyle's with the money!

Fed up.

 

[Beighton_Blade]

Young strikers can be a bit hard to valuate. A young Marcus Bent had pace, strength, height, skill and he scored goals (while with us). In the last ten years his good attributes has made him attractive to several Premiership clubs, although he's never been great, let alone prolific.

This is why I doubt any Premiership club will be willing to pay £5-6m at the moment. However we can insist on a deal that takes his future development into account. If he goes on to win an England cap, there should be a clause that gives us a very realistic £7-8m. Any interested club may say that they won't commit to that much for a younster - well, our reply should be that it's pretty cheap for an England striker, take it or leave it. Obviously the deal should include other clauses (appearances/goals/sell on) as well. Let's show that we're not fools who didn't learn from the pathetic Walker deal.

Exactly my point Bergs - if we do have to sell (which i stil argue we shouldn't when there are others from which greater savings could be made), then let it be on our terms - problem is, does McCabe recognise what would be good "on our terms"?? I'm not sure any more, especially given the relative Bargain Spurs have got in Walker, and conversely the bad deals we've agreed for/given to the likes of Nos, Ched, Cresswell, Hendo, Yeates etc...

UTB!