AAARRRGHHH!!
Why are people so obsessed with this?! This isn't Football Manager!
He's not going to have any resale value is he?
What's football manager got to do with owt or nowt?
AAARRRGHHH!!
Why are people so obsessed with this?! This isn't Football Manager!
AAARRRGHHH!!
Why are people so obsessed with this?! This isn't Football Manager!
I think long term it needs to be considered, not with every player but it certainly needs to be a factor. We cant just buy players than let all go on a free at the end of contracts. Ultimately, the club is a business. On the other side, sometimes it has to be accepted that players will come (given Dawsons age) and we will see no return from him, its an acceptable price to pay for what he could bring for 3/4 yrs.
I think long term it needs to be considered, not with every player but it certainly needs to be a factor. We cant just buy players than let all go on a free at the end of contracts. Ultimately, the club is a business. On the other side, sometimes it has to be accepted that players will come (given Dawsons age) and we will see no return from him, its an acceptable price to pay for what he could bring for 3/4 yrs.
He's not going to have any resale value is he?
What's football manager got to do with owt or nowt?
AAARRRGHHH!!
Why are people so obsessed with this?! This isn't Football Manager!
I agree to an extent, but also, it's not something that we as fans generally have to worry about. When the time comes to sell a player on, we can look at him and decide if we are being ripped off or not. I'd point to the Michael Turner deal as an example; he was 22 when he signed for us in the Championship in 2006, but how many people were thinking of how much we could get for him 3 seasons down the line?
Because what does his resale value have to do with anything? By taking that into account when looking at young players, we're already accepting that a) he's definitely leaving at some point in the next few years and b) he's actually going to turn out to be amazing. Now, the latter might not turn out to be the case (a la Cameron Stewart) anyway. Yes, we all want to buy some random 18 year old and have him sold on for £50m quid 18 months as he dazzles his way across the PL, but honestly, ask yourself this; what good is a teenager that's going to be good in 5 years time, when we're in the PL and Europe now? We need to bring in players that can make a difference now, not fannying about looking at young lads who may or may not turn out to be future superstars.
Things like Football Manager and FIFA are pretty mainstream, so I'm guessing they're becoming the reason that everybody would rather have a team of 20 year olds over a team of 25 year olds, like it makes a difference. The way players develop on that game is nothing like real life; in that game they stop developing at 24 and just slowly get worse. If that happened in real life there'd be no quality left!
It would be wreckless for a club like ours to sign a lot of players with no resale value, as we found to our cost when we last got relegated.
I've never played Football Manager either.
I still don't see what relevance it has with football manager.
So browny and duffen did it the right way?
Because on Football Manager/FIFA you can buy young players for very little and sell them on for obscene amounts of money. It's not to say that doesn't happen for real, but it's not something that Hull City should be trying to do at this present moment in time. Our income will be mostly generated from competition prize money.
People aren't making the point of resale value in order to sell players for more money than we buy them. The only requirement is to receive most of the money we paid.
Graeme Bailey ‏@GraemeBailey
Four clubs in talks with Norwich over Robert Snodgrass - Sunderland, West Brom, QPR and Hull CIty - all likely to agree fee.
Were not a big club, we could find ourselves relegated any season. It's risky business for a club like ours spending big on a player like Dawson. The transfer fee for a player of that quality is modest, but he'll be on a big wage, and in two seasons time we could find ourselves relegated with a struggle to even remove his unaffordable wage from the bill, never mind recoup any of the outlay.
We learned the hard way with Jimmy Bollard, surely that experience shouldn't be in vain?
I agree that not every signing has to have a money back security sort of factor to it, but if it's going to be an expensive one it certainly has to. Our club at present just cannot afford to spend big on ageing players and see nothing back from it, not only because we haven't exactly the biggest budget in the league to juggle dead money with, but because anything could be round the corner. Finding ourselves on our way back to the championship with a bunch of 30 odd year olds on 40/50k per week would surely be a death sentence.
And I still don't see any relevance whatsoever to football manager or FIFA.

I honestly don't think people are bothered. If he's good enough, he is good enough. There are clear benefits of signing a 23 year old over a 29 year old though. Age and potential being a definitive part of it.Now imagine if that player was 23. He's still exactly the same player, still scores the same amount of goals with the same techniques and skill levels. But people aren't bothered about his age all of a sudden. Why is that?
I honestly don't think people are bothered. If he's good enough, he is good enough. There are clear benefits of signing a 23 year old over a 29 year old though. Age and potential being a definitive part of it.
I'd like to back ourselves over Sunderland and West Brom, but QPR might be a problem
I agree with you that we shouldn't get stung again like we did in 09/10, that was a detritus and I can't see it happening again.
.