The club cant win sometimes.damned if you do,damned if you dont
But what if Tadic doesn't? We do lose leverage next year if Tadic only has one year left. But we also lose leverage if at 29, Tadic is currently making a larger wage on a long term contract and will therefore demand more money from whatever club wants him.
Other than JWP, we are essentially buying up post-peak seasons. The odds aren't on your side when you do that. And in my mind none of these guys are big enough superstars where it's like "Okay, the contract is for four years but really we're just paying them a ton of money for two good seasons and spreading the payment out over four years."
It's not like if you don't extend players they vanish into thin air. It's not like paying them more money is suddenly going to turn them into world-beaters, either.
All of these guys would be playing for us next year anyway. We're just paying them more to do it. And now we'll also be paying them in two years where, if things go according to plan they will probably be bench players.
Can we think of a better song for Dusan now please?
"He plays well on the left,
He plays **** on the right
Dusan Tadic
Makes Lallana look ****e*"
*backing group singing softly to fade, "Well, not really on the right, but definitely on the left"...*
Well sure, every transfer or signing looks like a good deal if you assume the recipient is going to have a breakout season.
But what if Tadic doesn't? We do lose leverage next year if Tadic only has one year left. But we also lose leverage if at 29, Tadic is currently making a larger wage on a long term contract and will therefore demand more money from whatever club wants him.
Other than JWP, we are essentially buying up post-peak seasons. The odds aren't on your side when you do that. And in my mind none of these guys are big enough superstars where it's like "Okay, the contract is for four years but really we're just paying them a ton of money for two good seasons and spreading the payment out over four years."
Dubious. Tadic after a somewhat below-expectations season is likely to have at least the same value with three years remaining as he would with one year remaining coming off a very good season.
Here you go:
Tadic Prem stats:
Played: 65
Scored: 12
Assists: 21
Lallana Prem stats:
Played: 125
Scored: 21
Assists: 23
So Tadic is 9 goals behind and two assists. Having played 60 games less.
But that's just it. Why are we giving him an extension after he performed below-expectations? I would also say that Tadic is pretty much already at the end of his peak. For a winger, I'd say it's like 26-28. I wouldn't expect him to just fall off a cliff at 29, but 30 and after all bets are off. 31 is well past prime.
If we had gone out and signed a near-28 year old with a spotty track record who was not a full-time starter the previous year, I don't think people would be nearly so excited. It's just because Tadic is a Saint, and people have grown to like him.
Is it not a two way process. We are rewarding performance (OK, this can be debated for various players) thus putting confidence and belief in the player. Some of this may be based on conjecture for how we are predicting individuals to perform; a less expensive gamble perhaps. If these guys we're 'superstars' would they be here anyway. Through my Saints glasses, any player that performs for my team is a superstar!
The thing is, you could argue that about anyone. If we signed Caulker for 500k a week we're showing a ton of belief in him. Would our belief be justified? Almost certainly not.
The gamble to extend a player is not inherently less expensive than to sell them and bring in a new one. If I knew the terms of Tadic's deal, and he was giving us a decent hometeam discount, then this could be a good move. If we're paying him market price despite already having him under team control, then it's not.
But that's just it. Why are we giving him an extension after he performed below-expectations? I would also say that Tadic is pretty much already at the end of his peak. For a winger, I'd say it's like 26-28. I wouldn't expect him to just fall off a cliff at 29, but 30 and after all bets are off. 31 is well past prime.
If we had gone out and signed a near-28 year old with a spotty track record who was not a full-time starter the previous year, I don't think people would be nearly so excited. It's just because Tadic is a Saint, and people have grown to like him.
So we're complaining when the club doesn't spend money and loses players, and we're complaining when the club does spend money and keeps players. Just, once again, checking.
But that's just it. Why are we giving him an extension after he performed below-expectations? I would also say that Tadic is pretty much already at the end of his peak. For a winger, I'd say it's like 26-28. I wouldn't expect him to just fall off a cliff at 29, but 30 and after all bets are off. 31 is well past prime.
If we had gone out and signed a near-28 year old with a spotty track record who was not a full-time starter the previous year, I don't think people would be nearly so excited. It's just because Tadic is a Saint, and people have grown to like him.