Total disrespect of a talent by Robins (1 Viewer)

[Esoterica]

Sure, I just preferred it when we offered two year deals with options in our favour

Would imagine the uncertainity of that is a harder sell to foreign imports though. If you think you are on to a gem with sell on potential and offer 2 with an option but they come back asking for a straight 3 years, it become s a tricky scenario.

 

---

[Johhny Blue]

We need some wrestling style theatre. KASTa in a big cage on the sideline and someone bringing Robins the key in the 88th minute

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

We need some wrestling style theatre. KASTa in a big cage on the sideline and someone bringing Robins the key in the 88th minute

There is a precedent

 

[PVA]

Sure, I just preferred it when we offered two year deals with options in our favour

Can't have it both ways though.

If you offer longer term deals you run the risk of being stuck with someone who is no good (but still able to sell for a fee).

Offer shorter deals and run the risk of losing a good player for nothing when the contract is up.

There's a balance to be had and it's difficult to get right, but I much prefer these longer deals than shorter deals.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Can't have it both ways though.

If you offer longer term deals you run the risk of being stuck with someone who is no good (but still able to sell for a fee).

Offer shorter deals and run the risk of losing a good player for nothing when the contract is up.

There's a balance to be had and it's difficult to get right, but I much prefer these longer deals than shorter deals.

I think offering with an option is the best compromise. It is what it is, we’re stuck having spent 9 figures on Kasta

 

[Greggs]

Maybe Robins is missing a trick and putting the player's biggest weakness on the front of their shirt is the kick up the arse that they need to progress.

View attachment 18406

been trying to press play on this for about 5 minutes, cheers

 

[Earlsdon_Skyblue1]

Ordinarily you would just bomb him out, but with the position he would be playing in badly needing something else, I would just play him a bit. Again, I honestly don't see how he could be worse than Shipley.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I think offering with an option is the best compromise. It is what it is, we’re stuck having spent 9 figures on Kasta

But they have the right to refuse. Difference between 3 year and 2+1 could be enough between them signing at all or not, esp for overseas players who will have a lot of upheaval and feel its gives them time to settle in and that the club has confidence on you. Might even be a case they'd accept slightly less per week for 3yrs than for 2+1 due to more uncertainty and that gives you more budget flexibility short term.

Now maybe you'd say if that's what they want we won't sign them but if you're willing to offer them a 2+1 it's hardly likely you're that unsure about them.

 

[RegTheDonk]

Which begs the question why we give players like that 3 year deals when we don’t know much about their character

Perhaps he had a good agent and they set a deadline.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

But they have the right to refuse. Difference between 3 year and 2+1 could be enough between them signing at all or not, esp for overseas players who will have a lot of upheaval and feel its gives them time to settle in and that the club has confidence on you. Might even be a case they'd accept slightly less per week for 3yrs than for 2+1 due to more uncertainty and that gives you more budget flexibility short term.

Now maybe you'd say if that's what they want we won't sign them but if you're willing to offer them a 2+1 it's hardly likely you're that unsure about them.

I get the pros and cons, but we’re sat here with wasted money on Kasta for an extra 12 months.

 

[procdoc]

Didn’t Kasta play for the Dutch under 21’s etc ? Down to man management of the player ?

In that case the development of players who improved when we signed them, such as Kelly, Hyam, McCallum, Dabo, Rose, McNulty, Marosi and quite a few others is also down to man-management

 

[RegTheDonk]

There is a precedent

Maybe we need a different shirt sponsor to motivate him.

 

[stupot07]

You watch that, and the lad has raw talent, but he just doesn't have the heart or desire to use it.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

You watch that, and the lad has raw talent, but he just doesn't have the heart or desire to use it.

Sent from my SM-G965F using Tapatalk

He seemed pissed off that he had to go off there. Wonder what happened

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

I get the pros and cons, but we’re sat here with wasted money on Kasta for an extra 12 months.

But IF he'd been successful that'd be a good thing.

Take Hamer. We gave him a three year contract. Was that a mistake too? Imagine we'd offered him 2+1 and he'd rejected it and gone somewhere else on a three year contract. We'd be sitting here saying why didn't the club just add the extra year in to secure his signature.

You win some, you lose some.

I'm a bit more mystified as to taking up the option on Baka given MR had had 2 years working with him to see he doesn't use his clear physical abilities to any kind of effect and doesn't appear to have any sort of footballing brain.

 

[cc84cov]

Luke Thomas starting for Ipswich on sky let’s see if he’s found any end product now he’s dropped back down a level...Burge in goal for Sunderland,Jordan Willis also playing

 

[mark82]

I think offering with an option is the best compromise. It is what it is, we’re stuck having spent 9 figures on Kasta

3 years with an option is what you want to maximise a players value after a couple of seasons. 2+1 essentially means you'd have to sell after a season to get best value. Always a balancing act, risk Vs reward. At 2 years, even with an option, means you're turning the majority of the team over every year (or max 2). Doesn't give a lot of stability at this level. Will also struggle to attract players at this level on short contracts.

 

[mark82]

But IF he'd been successful that'd be a good thing.

Take Hamer. We gave him a three year contract. Was that a mistake too? Imagine we'd offered him 2+1 and he'd rejected it and gone somewhere else on a three year contract. We'd be sitting here saying why didn't the club just add the extra year in to secure his signature.

You win some, you lose some.

I'm a bit more mystified as to taking up the option on Baka given MR had had 2 years working with him to see he doesn't use his clear physical abilities to any kind of effect and doesn't appear to have any sort of footballing brain.

Baka's just a cheap emergency option. To replace him would cost significant money in wages, let alone any transfer fee.

 

[BornSlippySkyBlue]

Sure, I just preferred it when we offered two year deals with options in our favour

Maybe we did but with the limited amount we could offer in wages a 3 year deal was the least he (or his agent) would accept? No idea, and it would make more sense to offer 2+1 deals sometimes, so you have to think there’s a reason they don’t / can’t.

Guess we have got to tempt them somehow if you’re looking for players you think can compete at a level you can’t afford the wages at. If you see what I mean.

 

[BornSlippySkyBlue]

3 years with an option is what you want to maximise a players value after a couple of seasons. 2+1 essentially means you'd have to sell after a season to get best value. Always a balancing act, risk Vs reward. At 2 years, even with an option, means you're turning the majority of the team over every year (or max 2). Doesn't give a lot of stability at this level. Will also struggle to attract players at this level on short contracts.

True, although I guess you could always offer the promising ones a new contract. Are 2+2 deals a thing?