Detailed interview with Brian

[brendywendy]

the precedent that club A has to sell to club B, because club B is bigger and richer has been set
probably around the time the first player was ever sold.

[sandman]

Yes but sometimes club A does a little more to fight it than allowing the Chief Scout of club B into training and driving him to games to watch the player. Sometimes like Martin O'Neill club A's manager walks out because the owner wants to sell to club B and won't reinvest the money recieved. Sometimes club A asks the player to stick around for one more season, telling them they can move to club B if club A doesn't achieve anything in the coming season. They don't just roll over and have their bellies tickled.

[Smoking Kills Dancing Doe]

There is a massive difference between the club that got promoted and the club we have now.

We were a club that didn't sell it's best players, we were a club that were always fighting for the best players at the level we were at. The investment was always there.

To say it just cost £5m ignores all the investment that went before it. We were consistently imrpoving and spending from the point Pards took over to promotion. Today we couldn't afford Oster or Makin without selling Sidwell to fund it.

This isn't a knock on JM, it was his investment in the 1st place. You just cant compare the 106 team, to the club as it is now.

no one wanted them. hence why they were mostly free transfers, and cheap buys

I'm pretty sure that plenty of clubs would have been in for our best players when they were in there prime. The facts the likes of Butler, Forster, etc left when the did was because the club had moved on. Plus the Chairman at the time was happy to let contracts run down and see players leave for free. We could have sold Curo to Norwich, but we kept him knowing he would leave on a free.

You really think if we had announced that we wanted to sell players before the promotion season no one would have been in for the likes of Sidwell, Harper, Kitson, Shorey etc.

[Terminal Boardom]

the precedent that club A has to sell to club B, because club B is bigger and richer has been set
probably around the time the first player was ever sold.

Not so. Certainly in the days before the maximum wage was abolished, players were treated like crap. This was why Everton chose to sell Tommy Lawton to Notts County just after the second world war. Thiswould expain the attendances for Notts County games where the best centre forward in England was plying his trade in the old Div 3 South/North.

[Uke]

Yes but sometimes club A does a little more to fight it than allowing the Chief Scout of club B into training and driving him to games to watch the player.

So the club sells it's best asset as well as it can to maximise the value gained and to close the sale as quickly as possible? Nothing wrong there, would you buy a house without being shown around first?

Sometimes like Martin O'Neill club A's manager walks out because the owner wants to sell to club B and won't reinvest the money recieved.

Managers are not always the best people to understand business finance. The sooner we call them "Coaches", the better.

Sometimes club A asks the player to stick around for one more season, telling them they can move to club B if club A doesn't achieve anything in the coming season. They don't just roll over and have their bellies tickled.

That's why Gylfi signed a three year contract with a release clause of three million which at the time seemed like a good price for him. This meant that we would also be better compensated if we sold earlier as the buying club would need to compensate for the early termination of his contract



Basically, the club received an offer which it couldn't refuse, which by definition means you can't refuse it

[brendywendy]

Yes but sometimes club A does a little more to fight it than allowing the Chief Scout of club B into training and driving him to games to watch the player. Sometimes like Martin O'Neill club A's manager walks out because the owner wants to sell to club B and won't reinvest the money recieved. Sometimes club A asks the player to stick around for one more season, telling them they can move to club B if club A doesn't achieve anything in the coming season. They don't just roll over and have their bellies tickled.

lol

we need the money you dope

[brendywendy]

There is a massive difference between the club that got promoted and the club we have now.

We were a club that didn't sell it's best players, we were a club that were always fighting for the best players at the level we were at. The investment was always there.

To say it just cost £5m ignores all the investment that went before it. We were consistently imrpoving and spending from the point Pards took over to promotion. Today we couldn't afford Oster or Makin without selling Sidwell to fund it.

This isn't a knock on JM, it was his investment in the 1st place. You just cant compare the 106 team, to the club as it is now.

no one wanted them. hence why they were mostly free transfers, and cheap buys

I'm pretty sure that plenty of clubs would have been in for our best players when they were in there prime. The facts the likes of Butler, Forster, etc left when the did was because the club had moved on. Plus the Chairman at the time was happy to let contracts run down and see players leave for free. We could have sold Curo to Norwich, but we kept him knowing he would leave on a free.

You really think if we had announced that we wanted to sell players before the promotion season no one would have been in for the likes of Sidwell, Harper, Kitson, Shorey etc.

imho comparing the situation when we had just been promoted on 106 points, to now when we have bene relegated, and now lost parachute payments is laughable. and its no wonder there seems to be some disparity between the two

[brendywendy]

Sometimes like Martin O'Neill club A's manager walks out because the owner wants to sell to club B and won't reinvest the money recieved.

thats not even whats happened at villa though.

M oneill recieved ~120 million from learner for players over ~4 years.
learner stated that if he wanted more just now he would have to get rid of all the players that are on big wages who never play like sidwell.
martin wanted to keep all these just in case, and also realised that the chances of repeating or bettering his 6th place finishes were slim this year, so got out at the right time with reputation intact

[Smoking Kills Dancing Doe]

But Brendy you were the one saying that the 106 team only cost £5m to counter peoples arguments about the need for investment. Also that we were not previously a selling club because no one wanted our players.

I agree with most of what you are saying here, think we may be arguing the same point in a rather backward way.

[brendywendy]

But Brendy you were the one saying that the 106 team only cost £5m to counter peoples arguments about the need for investment. Also that we were not previously a selling club because no one wanted our players.

I agree with most of what you are saying here, think we may be arguing the same point in a rather backward way.

i meaNT LESS OF A SELLING CLUB- MY POINT BEING THAT EVERYONE IS A SELLING CLUB,Except maybe real and barca.


and yes, backwards is me all over

[sandman]

I'd expect any club looking to sign one of our players to go to games under their own steam because that is common procedure. I certainly wouldn't allow them into our training sessions as they would be a distraction to the other players and imo playing hard to get as it were would drive the price up not down.

Managers may not understand business but equally owners don't understand football. I'm not trying to attack SJM but as a renowned entrepreneur you'd expect him to at least try to come up with some more inventive ways of paying a debt wouldn't you? Maybe he has, I'm well aware we needed money and I'll admit selling players wasn't a big issue for me when the players sold were fringe men. It just seems like SJM immediately goes for the easy option now rather than trying to find a more creative solution.

What if we'd asked Gylfi to stick around for one more season he scores another 20+ goals but we just fall short would that not drive the price up as well? It would compensate for what we'd lost on the pitch as opposed to his contract. What if we hadn't fallen short and got promoted? Money comes with success as well.

We've got the money now but it won't fix what is a long-term problem that will resurface this time next year if we're still in this league especially having sold the player the team was built around.

[brendywendy]

it looked to me like we tried to get the money gap filled by selling those who were surplus, like rasiak, cisse, matejovski etc
and wer eapparently toutimng long and fed around for sale so we wouldnt have had to.
but in the end it came down to us needing the cash, and no one wanting to do business for any of our other players at realistic prices. so we ended up having very little choice

[Svlad Cjelli]

No - it eventually came down to an offer being made for Sig that was above the figure at which we'd promised to put such offers to him - and him accepting said offer.

No great conspiracy, no great cashing in - just an offer being put to us and the player choosing to accept it.

[Smoking Kills Dancing Doe]

I suppose having a very good relationship with one of the fastest growing clubs in the world, couldn't help us out in anyway at all.

Not like we are now in a position to send or coaches to go and learn in a totally different environment.

Or that Hoffenhiem have got an incredible scouting network we could now benefit from.

Hoffenhiem love us now.

This is how football works.

[sandman]

I'd prefer Barcelona to love us more than Hoffenhiem .

Wally Downes went to Lyon's training ground a few years ago to learn from their coaches it didn't mean a load of their players came over here.

[Smoking Kills Dancing Doe]

Yeah but it made Wally into the mild mannered, continental style coach that he is today....

[westendgirl]

What if we'd asked Gylfi to stick around for one more season he scores another 20+ goals but we just fall short would that not drive the price up as well? It would compensate for what we'd lost on the pitch as opposed to his contract. What if we hadn't fallen short and got promoted? Money comes with success as well.

From what I have heard the club realises now that if the player wants to go you have to let them and get the best price. And don't say don't tell about the offer as that is preciseley the problem we had with Shorey - he thought there was an offer that hadn't been passed on to him and it could be said that if he had been told we would be in the Premiership.

Listening to BM's reaction to the offer it was one that Gylfi really wanted to take, so at least it means that the squad has been strengthened in depth.

Sometimes you just have to accept that you can't always get what you want.

[Z175]

I htink it was a combination of desperately needing the money and him wnating to go.

Obviously Hoffenheim and their billionnaire accounting software backer can pretty much tell the sig to name his price - they must lose 10s of millions each year anyway.

[Terminal Boardom]

Managers may not understand business but equally owners don't understand football. I'm not trying to attack SJM but as a renowned entrepreneur you'd expect him to at least try to come up with some more inventive ways of paying a debt wouldn't you?

Maybe he will do a kiss and tell expose about his nocturnal exploits with Cilla and flog it to the NotW.

[brendywendy]

I htink it was a combination of desperately needing the money and him wnating to go.

Obviously Hoffenheim and their billionnaire accounting software backer can pretty much tell the sig to name his price - they must lose 10s of millions each year anyway.

arent there stringent financial controls to stop clubs operating with such defecits in german fussball?