| Club Statement on 11:56 - Feb 26 with 2440 views | TVOS1907 |
| Club Statement on 13:19 - Feb 25 by AtThePeake |
Don't even know where to start with this. |
In particular the bizarre interpretation of why someone would want to move from an admin role in the National League (North) to EFL League One! |  |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
|  |
| Club Statement on 14:43 - Feb 26 with 2197 views | BigKindo |
| Club Statement on 10:50 - Feb 25 by 49thseason |
I think the attraction is that our business model seems to be predicated on bringing young players into the team and selling them on. If , with Dan's help, we can do that successfully and at scale, it would be huge for a club of this size. The ability to spot talent earlier or at least as early as many of the Premiership clubs that seem to hoover up kids for fun could make us a go-to shop window for a wide range of UK and overseas clubs. The more players it works for, the more income it generates and the more players we can bring in. BBM gets a deeper, more talented squad, the club actually starts making money and we get to watch racehorses rather than donkeys... Happy days . Eventually this will require new training facilities, possibly accommodation blocks, and a host of people to look after youngsters. But... it is a big IF this works.
Having Dan in a position to influence this process is a big plus in my view as he gets to call the shots , not just ask politely, hence his original demand for 51%. If he has pulled back from that and is prepared to work with the rest of the Board , this could become something really special. The club needs this to work, we the fans need it to work, and the town needs it to work.
I wonder if Richard Tang fancies the chairman's job? |
But wouldn't it be great and a nice change to keep a few of those kids at the Dale rather than selling them on for peanuts (thinking of Adshead in particular) and using the money to recruit some players perhaps past their sell by date? Not all sales with sell on clauses have worked in the past. |  | | |
| Club Statement on 14:50 - Feb 26 with 2176 views | BigKindo |
Doesn't the EFL have to do due diligence on the appointment of Directors ? | | | |
| Club Statement on 15:13 - Feb 26 with 2118 views | James1980 |
| Club Statement on 14:43 - Feb 26 by BigKindo |
But wouldn't it be great and a nice change to keep a few of those kids at the Dale rather than selling them on for peanuts (thinking of Adshead in particular) and using the money to recruit some players perhaps past their sell by date? Not all sales with sell on clauses have worked in the past. |
BK I was thinking about this and I am a little concerned, the jam won't be materialising tomorrow.
Rafferty seems to be out of favour at PNE, who also don't look like getting into the PL anytime soon (im guessing that there would be a promotion to the Premier League add on in the contract); if he does go elsewhere, I would be surprised if there will be much profit and therefore add on money coming our way.
Cannon does appear to be doing well at Portsmouth and his performance is often praised on social media. He is out of contract in the summer, I have read they are hoping to get him to sign an extension.
Adshead, seems to have been a regular in the Telstar squad and it will be great if the experience he has gained there helps him breakthrough into the Norwich first team. I am a little concerned that we won't see much add on money though.
Matheson, is contracted till 2022 and is still very young with the prospect of a long career in football ahead of him. My concern is what if Wolves have taken a punt on him and he doesn't look like breaking into the first team when it comes to looking at renewing his contract. If he goes for a free or is sold for a loss or minimal profit, where do we stand with regards to add ons?
I know we have done extremely well from add ons, but would transfer fees in the hand have been better than add ons in the bush? Only time will tell. |  |
| |
| Club Statement on 15:44 - Feb 26 with 2041 views | 49thseason |
| Club Statement on 14:43 - Feb 26 by BigKindo |
But wouldn't it be great and a nice change to keep a few of those kids at the Dale rather than selling them on for peanuts (thinking of Adshead in particular) and using the money to recruit some players perhaps past their sell by date? Not all sales with sell on clauses have worked in the past. |
It would be great to be in a financial position to hang on to players long enough to maximise their real values. Peterborough have done this really well by being in a financial position to buy real potential, particularly forwards, and then sell on for several millions . It will be small steps at first but I think the trick is to incrementally improve the squad so that young players can be introduced into a decent team rather than one that struggles at the wrong end of L1. Financially, selling a player for £5m is probably more useful than selling 10 for £0.5m over a 5 year period as it permits longer term planning and helps to prevent the need to sell players too early before their true value is realised. If we had kept Adshead for another season or so he might have been worth several multiples of what we sold him for and we would have had the benefit of him being on the pitch for another 100 or so games. |  | | |
| Club Statement on 16:00 - Feb 26 with 2013 views | seasidedale |
Problem is a lot of our youngsters have stagnated lately or even gone backwards, so this is a risk, but one to risk | | | |
| Club Statement on 16:43 - Feb 26 with 1948 views | AtThePeake |
| Club Statement on 15:44 - Feb 26 by 49thseason |
It would be great to be in a financial position to hang on to players long enough to maximise their real values. Peterborough have done this really well by being in a financial position to buy real potential, particularly forwards, and then sell on for several millions . It will be small steps at first but I think the trick is to incrementally improve the squad so that young players can be introduced into a decent team rather than one that struggles at the wrong end of L1. Financially, selling a player for £5m is probably more useful than selling 10 for £0.5m over a 5 year period as it permits longer term planning and helps to prevent the need to sell players too early before their true value is realised. If we had kept Adshead for another season or so he might have been worth several multiples of what we sold him for and we would have had the benefit of him being on the pitch for another 100 or so games. |
It can work both ways that though. You could argue that we kept hold of players like Allen and Camps for a season or two too many, their value decreased and then we ended up getting less for them than we could have at an earlier date. Indeed in one case we didn't get anything at all. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Club Statement on 17:05 - Feb 26 with 1882 views | James1980 |
I know hindsight is a wonderful thing and there is still time for us to benefit handsomely from add on clauses. I just ponder whether we would have been better getting more upfront and cutting the add on percentages. Could that extra cash have been spent on securing a left back. Perhaps we would have been able to tempt Camps into signing a new contract. Used it to fund a change of manager (I don't want us to, but at least it wouldn't be a concern financially).
Hopefully one day we are watching at least one of the players we have sold in recent years playing for one of the big clubs having benefitted from a very lucrative add on. | |
| |
| Club Statement on 17:13 - Feb 26 with 1859 views | SuddenLad |
Craig Dawson fits that bill. |  |
| “It is easier to fool people, than to convince them that they have been fooled†|
| |
| Club Statement on 17:27 - Feb 26 with 1812 views | 442Dale |
| Club Statement on 16:43 - Feb 26 by AtThePeake |
It can work both ways that though. You could argue that we kept hold of players like Allen and Camps for a season or two too many, their value decreased and then we ended up getting less for them than we could have at an earlier date. Indeed in one case we didn't get anything at all. |
Also Camps and Allen were contributing to the first team from very early on in their careers. Adshead showed glimpses but there was no great loss to the side when he moved. His career since backs that up somewhat. |  |
| |
| Club Statement on 18:52 - Feb 26 with 1695 views | James1980 |
| Club Statement on 17:27 - Feb 26 by 442Dale |
Also Camps and Allen were contributing to the first team from very early on in their careers. Adshead showed glimpses but there was no great loss to the side when he moved. His career since backs that up somewhat. |
A quick search shows we apparently got £300K for Daniel. I know the profit is bigger if it does happen, but with such a low fee, where is the incentive to really develop a player purchased for such a piddling amount in top tier football terms. To put it in context it is about 1% of the first year parachute payment a club will get after being relegated from PL to Championship. | |
| |
| Club Statement on 19:12 - Feb 26 with 1668 views | 49thseason |
| Club Statement on 16:43 - Feb 26 by AtThePeake |
It can work both ways that though. You could argue that we kept hold of players like Allen and Camps for a season or two too many, their value decreased and then we ended up getting less for them than we could have at an earlier date. Indeed in one case we didn't get anything at all. |
The thing is , generally our finances didnt allow us to pay what they or their agents could get elsewhere. If our finances were on a more solid basis, we could decide to offer more and match the going rate, or not, based on their value to the squad. As things stand, as soon as someone is prepared to pay more than we are, the player is almost inevitably on his way elsewhere.
Imagine if we had been able to match,or better the offer Cardiff made for out-of-contract NML. And we had subsequently sold him for 3 or 4 million, the net gain would have been huge, then imagine having the statistical data to support that valuation, maybe Cardiff had those stats when they made their offer. | | | |
| Club Statement on 19:32 - Feb 26 with 1604 views | 442Dale |
| Club Statement on 19:12 - Feb 26 by 49thseason |
The thing is , generally our finances didnt allow us to pay what they or their agents could get elsewhere. If our finances were on a more solid basis, we could decide to offer more and match the going rate, or not, based on their value to the squad. As things stand, as soon as someone is prepared to pay more than we are, the player is almost inevitably on his way elsewhere.
Imagine if we had been able to match,or better the offer Cardiff made for out-of-contract NML. And we had subsequently sold him for 3 or 4 million, the net gain would have been huge, then imagine having the statistical data to support that valuation, maybe Cardiff had those stats when they made their offer. |
Or maybe Cardiff were simply able to offer multiple times the amount we’d ever have been capable of, especially as they’d been getting parachute payments from being in the Premier League. At no stage would or should we be offering 6/7/8k a week which undoubtedly would have been the level a Championship player would have been getting then. At least.
As much as I liked watching NML play, again there’s a LOT of revisionist history about his stay at Dale. He wasn’t even making the starting XI regularly when the team was really flying during his final season. From the start of December in 2016 we 7 out of 8 games and went fourth in the league, NML started once (taken off in the only loss v Chesterfield in Checkatrade), and played a total of 24 minutes in the other seven victories. That’s not dismissing how good he was or that if he’d stayed we’d have been a better side, it’s that his impact at Cardiff illustrated just how good he was. | |
| |
| Club Statement on 20:41 - Feb 26 with 1500 views | TVOS1907 |
| Club Statement on 17:05 - Feb 26 by James1980 |
I know hindsight is a wonderful thing and there is still time for us to benefit handsomely from add on clauses. I just ponder whether we would have been better getting more upfront and cutting the add on percentages. Could that extra cash have been spent on securing a left back. Perhaps we would have been able to tempt Camps into signing a new contract. Used it to fund a change of manager (I don't want us to, but at least it wouldn't be a concern financially).
Hopefully one day we are watching at least one of the players we have sold in recent years playing for one of the big clubs having benefitted from a very lucrative add on. |
Camps was never going to re-sign, James. We need to forget this fantasy notion when clubs come with money, particularly at our level where players won't be set up for life, that they aren't going to leave for the best deal, especially when it's one where he didn't need to re-locate.
On a related matter, I've just been catching up with the Salford City documentary that was on over Christmas.
In the January 2020 transfer window, Gary Neville was on the phone to an agent, offering his player a two-and-a-half-year deal on a basic £2500 per week.
On top of that, the player would get £15,000 if Salford were promoted from League Two last season and another £25,000 if they went up from League One this season.
I don't know who the player was and we know Covid scuppered all that, but just do the Maths. That's £365,000 in two-and-a-half years on just one player!
Neville was also trying to get Will Grigg from Sunderland on a two-year deal.
I know Salford a special case, but other clubs won't be far behind - and that's in League Two. | |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Club Statement on 20:54 - Feb 26 with 1469 views | D_Alien |
| Club Statement on 20:41 - Feb 26 by TVOS1907 |
Camps was never going to re-sign, James. We need to forget this fantasy notion when clubs come with money, particularly at our level where players won't be set up for life, that they aren't going to leave for the best deal, especially when it's one where he didn't need to re-locate.
On a related matter, I've just been catching up with the Salford City documentary that was on over Christmas.
In the January 2020 transfer window, Gary Neville was on the phone to an agent, offering his player a two-and-a-half-year deal on a basic £2500 per week.
On top of that, the player would get £15,000 if Salford were promoted from League Two last season and another £25,000 if they went up from League One this season.
I don't know who the player was and we know Covid scuppered all that, but just do the Maths. That's £365,000 in two-and-a-half years on just one player!
Neville was also trying to get Will Grigg from Sunderland on a two-year deal.
I know Salford a special case, but other clubs won't be far behind - and that's in League Two. |
And that's why it was particularly pleasing, in midweek, to see Salford's first half lead overturned through goals scored at 90+4 and 90+6 by... Morecambe |  |
| |
| Club Statement on 21:02 - Feb 26 with 1456 views | AtThePeake |
| Club Statement on 19:12 - Feb 26 by 49thseason |
The thing is , generally our finances didnt allow us to pay what they or their agents could get elsewhere. If our finances were on a more solid basis, we could decide to offer more and match the going rate, or not, based on their value to the squad. As things stand, as soon as someone is prepared to pay more than we are, the player is almost inevitably on his way elsewhere.
Imagine if we had been able to match,or better the offer Cardiff made for out-of-contract NML. And we had subsequently sold him for 3 or 4 million, the net gain would have been huge, then imagine having the statistical data to support that valuation, maybe Cardiff had those stats when they made their offer. |
So is your point "wouldn't it be good if we had more money?" | |
| |
| Club Statement on 21:10 - Feb 26 with 1433 views | tony_roch975 |
| Club Statement on 20:54 - Feb 26 by D_Alien |
And that's why it was particularly pleasing, in midweek, to see Salford's first half lead overturned through goals scored at 90+4 and 90+6 by... Morecambe |
This is the Shrimps year - they're part of my triple bet | |
| |
| Club Statement on 21:39 - Feb 26 with 1385 views | TVOS1907 |
| Club Statement on 21:02 - Feb 26 by AtThePeake |
So is your point "wouldn't it be good if we had more money?" |
Wasn't that a Nik Kershaw song? | |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Club Statement on 09:12 - Feb 27 with 1158 views | electricblue |
| Club Statement on 19:32 - Feb 26 by 442Dale |
Or maybe Cardiff were simply able to offer multiple times the amount we’d ever have been capable of, especially as they’d been getting parachute payments from being in the Premier League. At no stage would or should we be offering 6/7/8k a week which undoubtedly would have been the level a Championship player would have been getting then. At least.
As much as I liked watching NML play, again there’s a LOT of revisionist history about his stay at Dale. He wasn’t even making the starting XI regularly when the team was really flying during his final season. From the start of December in 2016 we 7 out of 8 games and went fourth in the league, NML started once (taken off in the only loss v Chesterfield in Checkatrade), and played a total of 24 minutes in the other seven victories. That’s not dismissing how good he was or that if he’d stayed we’d have been a better side, it’s that his impact at Cardiff illustrated just how good he was. |
Offering high wages to sign a player does not automatically give quality..... |  |
| My all time favourite Dale player Mr Lyndon Symmonds |
| |
| Club Statement on 09:44 - Feb 27 with 1107 views | Dalenet |
| Club Statement on 20:41 - Feb 26 by TVOS1907 |
Camps was never going to re-sign, James. We need to forget this fantasy notion when clubs come with money, particularly at our level where players won't be set up for life, that they aren't going to leave for the best deal, especially when it's one where he didn't need to re-locate.
On a related matter, I've just been catching up with the Salford City documentary that was on over Christmas.
In the January 2020 transfer window, Gary Neville was on the phone to an agent, offering his player a two-and-a-half-year deal on a basic £2500 per week.
On top of that, the player would get £15,000 if Salford were promoted from League Two last season and another £25,000 if they went up from League One this season.
I don't know who the player was and we know Covid scuppered all that, but just do the Maths. That's £365,000 in two-and-a-half years on just one player!
Neville was also trying to get Will Grigg from Sunderland on a two-year deal.
I know Salford a special case, but other clubs won't be far behind - and that's in League Two. |
We can only hope that the pandemic has refocussed that thinking. Camps got a better deal and you can't blame him. But he is now at a club that needed to borrow £800k from the EFL to pay wages earlier this season and has had a transfer embargo imposed. Other clubs will be in a similar position I'm sure. The salary cap idea has been thrown out, but we can only hope that some common business sense returns. But I won't hold my breath | | | |
| Club Statement on 09:48 - Feb 27 with 1101 views | R17ALE |
| Club Statement on 09:44 - Feb 27 by Dalenet |
We can only hope that the pandemic has refocussed that thinking. Camps got a better deal and you can't blame him. But he is now at a club that needed to borrow £800k from the EFL to pay wages earlier this season and has had a transfer embargo imposed. Other clubs will be in a similar position I'm sure. The salary cap idea has been thrown out, but we can only hope that some common business sense returns. But I won't hold my breath |
Camps might have got an even better deal had we accepted the £550,000 offer we turned down from Rotherham back in the days of Hill.
To those who moan that we sell on the cheap...."put that in your pipe and smoke it!". |  |
| |
| Club Statement on 10:30 - Feb 27 with 1036 views | golfaduffy |
| Club Statement on 09:48 - Feb 27 by R17ALE |
Camps might have got an even better deal had we accepted the £550,000 offer we turned down from Rotherham back in the days of Hill.
To those who moan that we sell on the cheap...."put that in your pipe and smoke it!". |
Whoa... hang on. We only turned it down because we were assured that other more lucrative bids were going to come in from local clubs...Preston was one and it never materialised. The only other bid I know of was Peterborough, which the club accepted, but the player rejected because he didn't want to leave home. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
