Semenyo

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
I don’t think NP will encourage their sell as the previous regime did, but if an offer comes in and the players want to go there’s really not much he’ll be able to do. It seems NP’s management style is more likely to encourage loyalty but there’s only so far that will go.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jiffie and Red Robin
AshtonRed said:
It seems NP’s management style is more likely to encourage loyalty but there’s only so far that will go.
Click to expand...
need to get some players on longer term deals 4 years? with contract review after each year [ wage wise ]
 
AshtonRed said:
Remember what happened last time we put players on long term contracts, 1982 ring a bell?
Click to expand...
Yep .. but were for longer. Could settle for 3 plus a year option! but review annually [ as get better / more experience player worth more, play crap then ..... ]
A 2 YEAR CONTRACT should be 2 +1 , and after first year looked at as renewing as 2 +1 3 year done the same a 3 year plus 1 = 4 years potential, so after 1 year renew as 3 +1 still got the 3 years, after that renew again maybe as a 2 +1 etc
BCFC IS NOT likely to keep talented players even if in PREM so no good having a player on a 3 year deal if after 2 1/2 years is worth £40m and goes free in 6 months ..........
 
Last edited:
realred1952 said:
Yep .. but were for longer. Could settle for 3 plus a year option! but review annually [ as get better / more experience player worth more, play crap then ..... ]
A 2 YEAR CONTRACT should be 2 +1 , and after first year looked at as renewing as 2 +1 3 year done the same a 3 year plus 1 = 4 years potential, so after 1 year renew as 3 +1 still got the 3 years, after that renew again maybe as a 2 +1 etc
BCFC IS NOT likely to keep talented players even if in PREM so no good having a player on a 3 year deal if after 2 1/2 years is worth £40m and goes free in 6 months ..........
Click to expand...
We are still suffering from long contracts .
, wells , palmer for example
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jiffie and RedorDead
The problem is every player has their price, it's pointless bitching about players sold, the conversation should be about players brought in to replace those sold. We can start with spending half of the Brownhill fee on Wells for instance and probably paying him triple the wage Brownhill was on, good business?
 
Jiffie said:
The problem is every player has their price, it's pointless bitching about players sold, the conversation should be about players brought in to replace those sold. We can start with spending half of the Brownhill fee on Wells for instance and probably paying him triple the wage Brownhill was on, good business?
Click to expand...
I agree with what you’re saying about replacements. But from memory Wells was part of the deal or it went to the summer when Brownhill contract had that low release clause. Should of pushed them for Vydra but that is only my opinion.
 
RedorDead said:
I agree with what you’re saying about replacements. But from memory Wells was part of the deal or it went to the summer when Brownhill contract had that low release clause. Should of pushed them for Vydra but that is only my opinion.
Click to expand...

He was indeed part of the deal and IMHO was a panic buy, people are still under the illusion that he was a top striker, but he has never scored 20 league goals in his entire career, he was signed on the back of the season he was enjoying at QPR, which had a midfield that included Eze and other talented players and by my calculation, has wiped out the whole Brownhill fee + 8mil, it wasn't good business and is reminder of how poor our recruitment had become.
 
AshtonRed said:
We are still suffering from long contracts .
, wells , palmer for example
Click to expand...
they were not are not long contracts what would you have done ? every player shows up worthy of being signed so give them a 1 YEAR CONTRACT! with option = insecurity for player and club!
NP has his own idealism play well = in team = bad day or 2! out of team. YESTERDAY we won without any of the NP signings !
How would you give a contract, based on trying to build a team? and how would you attract a player to signing given 3 year contract is to long. What is your cross over point in terms of " the starting point of a long contract!" eg 2 year 3 year or ?
 
RedorDead said:
You won’t win, he would of done a spreadsheet on it somewhere I bet.
Click to expand...
I do have a few spread sheets, but mostly notes where peeps say "you are wrong" <whistle> but actually the result was correct, but no admission of apology from "the accuser", when I am wrong I always admit it ........one such individual is on 5 strikes!!!!!:emoticon-0140-rofl:
 
realred1952 said:
they were not are not long contracts what would you have done ? every player shows up worthy of being signed so give them a 1 YEAR CONTRACT! with option = insecurity for player and club!
NP has his own idealism play well = in team = bad day or 2! out of team. YESTERDAY we won without any of the NP signings !
How would you give a contract, based on trying to build a team? and how would you attract a player to signing given 3 year contract is to long. What is your cross over point in terms of " the starting point of a long contract!" eg 2 year 3 year or ?
Click to expand...

The problem is the handing out of longer contracts to the likes of Palmer and DaSilva, that have cost a big fee + big wages and have not represented value for money. The 2nd contract given to ODowda was another huge and costly mistake. Signing Williams when he was injured was another huge mistake.

Our recruitment has been poor for far too long.
 
RedorDead said:
I agree with what you’re saying about replacements. But from memory Wells was part of the deal or it went to the summer when Brownhill contract had that low release clause.
Click to expand...
The 2 deals were not linked, in so much as they happened at same time. We had to "sell" or as stated a much lower release clause could have been activated by a number of clubs in the summer. One of the 4 parties wanted the deals separate .. not dependent on the other .... Burnley had NW surplus to requirements and suited both sides to happen at time.
 
realred1952 said:
they were not are not long contracts what would you have done ? every player shows up worthy of being signed so give them a 1 YEAR CONTRACT! with option = insecurity for player and club!
NP has his own idealism play well = in team = bad day or 2! out of team. YESTERDAY we won without any of the NP signings !
How would you give a contract, based on trying to build a team? and how would you attract a player to signing given 3 year contract is to long. What is your cross over point in terms of " the starting point of a long contract!" eg 2 year 3 year or ?
Click to expand...
It’s a question of balance, giving out long Contracts have downfalls too, it’s not just question of handing out long contracts to everyone, I merely pointed out some of the possible downfalls of that approach.
 
Jiffie said:
The problem is the handing out of longer contracts to the likes of Palmer and DaSilva, that have cost a big fee + big wages and have not represented value for money. The 2nd contract given to ODowda was another huge and costly mistake. Signing Williams when he was injured was another huge mistake.

Our recruitment has been poor for far too long.
Click to expand...

Add Simpson to that, how did NP hand him a new contract in the summer for what is an alleged huge wage (£15k a week) given the current financial climate, yet he hasn't kicked a ball, this shows me as a club we haven't gotten any better at signing and valuing players.
 
Supcon72 said:
Add Simpson to that, how did NP hand him a new contract in the summer for what is an alleged huge wage (£15k a week) given the current financial climate, yet he hasn't kicked a ball, this shows me as a club we haven't gotten any better at signing and valuing players.
Click to expand...

As you know I do not believe that he is anywhere close to 15k a week.

Atkinson is a good signing as is Tanner and James and although King and James are now both currently injured, at least their injuries are from playing actual games and not from poor medical back up.

PS:- sadly he has kicked a ball and gave it straight to an opposing striker, who scored. Still 64 to go.
 
AshtonRed said:
It’s a question of balance, giving out long Contracts have downfalls too, it’s not just question of handing out long contracts to everyone, I merely pointed out some of the possible downfalls of that approach.
Click to expand...
yes but what is your opinion on it ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back