Article: In defence of the transfer window | Football

This is something i wrote on another site in january (for the detectives amongst you who realise someone called Edmundomcpot wrote the original, that was my very original online guise, which i briefly used on the old 606, which then became edmundomctractor before i realised how odd it sounded and i became Mike) Ive edited it only slightly to remove the intro which was specific to the site i wrote it on, which also explains the references to american football near the end.

I post it now because were near the end of another transfer window and i see that Jewell has said he thinks the transfer window is a pain.

either way, hopefully a good debate can arise from it. Enjoy.


-------

People arguing against the transfer window claim that it's the reason prices for players are so inflated and that no other business has such restrictions on trading, smaller clubs need the opportunity to sell.

None of those arguments wash with me. I’ll take them down one by one.

Inflated prices – Clubs are inevitably reluctant to get rid of their star players midway through a season so prices are sure to go up. The trend of spending more and more money in football was well in place by the time the transfer window was introduced in the 2002-03 season. Since then most of the big transfers money wise have been in the Summer Window not January. For example £30.8m Manchester United paid for Dimitar Berbatov September 2008. Chelsea paid the same amount for Andriy Shevchenko in May 2006. Most Recently Cristiano Ronaldo Leaving Manchester United for Real Madrid in a £80m deal July 2009. Last point on that bit in this current climate wouldn’t you be a little bit pissed off if your star player left for a pittance, Ian Holloway and Blackpool wanting £10m plus for Charlie Adam, a player they brought for under £1m is testament to that. (Summer window addition - Ok Adam ended up going for less than Connor Wickham but really Blackpool were in a far poorer bargaining position and still only lost £3m from the asking price . £225m spent in january by premier league clubs (telegraph) So far this window £370m (http://www.betinf.com/england_transfer.htm, My calculator, and XE Conveter), ok theres a longer period to do business but i think my point stands.)

No other business have such tight restrictions – While that’s probably true. As much as some club owners might like to think it is Football is not a business, its a sport. Now i know clubs finances should be run with the responsibility of a business, but to let that frame of mind ruin the excitement of the game is something that should be prevented at all costs. (Summer addition - Arsenal, a club admirably refusing to follow the trend of big spending now risking being unceremoniously shoved out of the big time and ruining or at least tainting their fans enjoyment of the game) Which is essentially the core of my argument, the transfer window adds another level of excitement. The counter argument here is that a constant transfer window would provide the excitement all the time. Not True. well maybe you’ll have the constant possibility of the excitement but it wouldn’t have the same effect im sure people would get bored of it anyway as clubs negotiate transfers at their own pace. The same way you’d find Christmas and a birthday nothing special if you got presents everyday. To this it seems to me the same reason they dress up the drafts in the “big 4″ American sports as big events.

The other thing i was going to say on that point was the level of money involved, i know it seems like I’ve jumped back a bit but I felt I needed to cover the excitement bit. I look at other forms of Sport Entertainment such as the Super Bowl or WWE (yes i know its more of a stage production then a sport but i think it counts) the amount of money invested into them is insane and i very rarely see or hear people complain that money is ruining the sport. I’d much rather sit (or at least have the option of sitting) in a well built stadium provided the fans are able to get an atmosphere going and watch the players play on a well maintained surface then be forced to stand in a… stand that looks like it might blow away at any moment watching a game played on a terrible surface because of no money. Going back to the transfer window 40million is far more exciting figure then 40thousand.

Smaller clubs need the opportunity to sell – and as soon as they get that they’ll be complaining that the bigger clubs are constantly snapping up any player that looks half decent. Selling players is a quick fix that allows for financial mismanagement in the other areas.

Now some comparisons. Obviously i like and prefer the transfer system that’s in place in association football but i believe its taken the good things about the draft system, in a sense that you have a registered squad for the season. I’ve always thought its impossible to say that you're part of a team if there’s a possibility of you being sold at any moment. The reasons i don’t like draft system is firstly that it means there needs to be some central pool of players taking away the importance of the Clubs individual youth academies which ‘guarantees’ the club local players. and Secondly the fact the worst team from last season gets first pick. Not only is that just impractical in a league where you have promotion and relegation, it’s unfair on the players to go the worst teams (although presumably they do have a bit of a say on where they end up).

So yeah to sum up. Keep the Transfer window, its not responsible for inflated prices and, like the drafts it provides that extra level of excitement, especially deadline day.

 

I think the whole point about this is that it was brought in along with the Bosman free transfer rules as a matter of legality so as far as I'm aware it's not even debatable.

 

Doesn't seem to stop managers and pundits arguing against it, either way last i checked we were allowed to debate law

 

The good thing about the worst team getting first pick in the draft means that you generally don't end up with a certain team dominating for years just because they are richer. It evens the playing field and helps to keep a good rotation of success for many teams. Players don't see it as going to a weak team but more as a chance to shine and bring success to that team. The trouble with football now is that if you have money you can nearly buy success, like City, at least with the draft the wealth doesn't come into it so much when it comes to the new players coming through. Sure there are still transfers between clubs but contracts are normally honoured until the end.

 

Yes of course Mike, I'm just making the point it's not a decision down to our football authorities. Unless we pull out of European Human Rights legislation the window is there whether we like it or not, I'm not sure anyone does.

 

yeah but even so, wouldn't you pick the Steelers over the Browns if given the choice, especially if you were being touted as a future superstar. Imagine Rooney as he reached professional age only have the option of the worst performing premiership sides. In america it probably works well because everyone has the money to at least get top training facilities but its not like that in the premier league, and its not only the players that get attracted to the top teams, its the same with the staff, the best staff get attracted to the best teams. It seems the top teams almost get punished for success. I hate the fact teams can and do buy success, but would you rather see many teams with one fantastic player or a few teams with a team of good players, which happens with the all-star games.

 

Regardless of the teams recent performance, players still make the same wages. It's not like by going to a so called better team that you will make more, like it is in football. The draft is only for college students turning pro, there are still transfers going on but like I said, contracts are mostly honoured to the end unless someone gets really pissed off or has a bit of a diva attitude (Brett Favre). Most teams have some history about them, be it recent or not, so it's not like you are going to an unknown team. Look at from the students point of view, you are in the draft, about to turn pro and are about to be handed a monster contract for a team that you haven't even had a trial with. Would you be picky about your destination? It's only the start of a long career for many players and stars are made not because of the team they play for but how they do for the team they are in.
The Chicago Bulls used be the ones to beat in the Jordan, Pippen, Rodman era, now they are nothing. It makes a change from always having the same teams challenging for honours.