• The forums will be unavailable for a few hours on Saturday 6th June, when they do return they will initially be in a degraded state with some features missing, but normal posting/reading will be possible. The main website will not be affected by these updates.
    New user registrations are currently disabled.
    Some other features of the forum are also currently disabled.

Another youngster heading off

Grumpy Old Man said:
What being at a PL club gives a young player is a bigger safety net if (as is the case for most) they don't break into the first team. A PL under 23 could be picked up be a Championship or L1 club, whereas anyone released from a L! club is looking at League 2 or non-league. Making the move improved their chances of a decent pro career at any level.
Click to expand...
Equally going to Man U etc. means they are up against the cream of talent from Spain, France or Japan. Some will leave and get lost. For some lads it will work for some they would probably be better off staying. Its a lottery and, no doubt, a tough decision for the parents.
 

kildaremackem said:
people who are local to safc wont want to say that their kids want out so they can get to the prem. so they say the owner forced them.
btw none of the players that leave would come with compo unless they rejected a contract on at least the same terms as they were on before...so...why did they reject the contracts?
Click to expand...
Yessss here he is being wrong again. Splendid stuff
 
Summerbee said:
Not at all, as I've said before if you read carefully. I'm not convinced many, if any, of them have the quality to succeed at the higher levels. I was surprised to see Sam Greenwood's recent good performances at that level, and I can admit that and I'm happy to hold my hands if I'm wrong. Would many of the Bali Mumba cult who have harassed me for a while do the same? Coburn's another excellent prospect, and one that often gets overlooked in these conversations. I have a balanced view.
Click to expand...
Mumba has featured in the PL this season and is playing at a higher level than Sunderland, what exactly have people been wrong about with regards to him?
 
1 million to a 3rd tier club for a 14 year old.
Crazy not to take it.
The kid will probably never be heard of again until he turns out for N Shields in 5 years time .
The stats back that up. 95% of these kids crash and burn.
 
Arfa Sleep said:
Mumba has featured in the PL this season and is playing at a higher level than Sunderland, what exactly have people been wrong about with regards to him?
Click to expand...

Ah OK, so he's in the same bracket as Ryan Noble and Richie Ryan then.

He played 45 minutes for one of the worst Premier League sides in recent years, losing the game 0-5 and the poor lad was widely ridiculed (have a listen to the Guardian's podcast on the game). He hasn't played since at that level. He's subsequently joined a side hopelessly out of their depth at Championship level, and after a handful of starts, quickly fell out of the team and barely makes the bench now. You'd think the club had lost the plot if we spent £315k on someone who couldn't get any minutes at Peterborough this season. Good luck to the lad, good kid but time has now shown it was a good deal and the club were right to sell him. He'll likely carve out a career for himself at the lower end of League One or more likely League Two. I respect people have their own views but perhaps the conspiracy nuts and the Bali cult club who have been desperate to discredit me on that can now hold their hands up. I won't hold my breath though.
 
kildaremackem said:
i thought they only left because of the previous owners...

tunrs out its the league we are in after all..as some of us pointed out
Click to expand...

Any opportunity to have a pop at fans again.

Previous owners were actively trying to get rid of some regardless of whether they wanted to go or not. Thats what happens when chancers without a clue try to run a club far too big and too expensive for them
 
Gaz said:
Any opportunity to have a pop at fans again.

Previous owners were actively trying to get rid of some regardless of whether they wanted to go or not. Thats what happens when chancers without a clue try to run a club far too big and too expensive for them
Click to expand...
A succinct and accurate description of the horrendous running of our academy by Donald and his slimey mate.
 
Gaz said:
Any opportunity to have a pop at fans again.

Previous owners were actively trying to get rid of some regardless of whether they wanted to go or not. Thats what happens when chancers without a clue try to run a club far too big and too expensive for them
Click to expand...
the previous owners (the ones that still co own the club) had the wrong approach to the academy for sure...but you cant get rid of a player under conyract..and dont get any money if you dont oiffer them a good contract. I dont know what you mean by safc being too big for them? sartori has run far bigger businesses than safc will ever be..mathven ran a bigger business than folk on here think but quite small in the scheme of things..as for too xpensive..donald spent £12m on eastleigh...he can easily afford his commitment to safc.
 
kildaremackem said:
the previous owners (the ones that still co own the club) had the wrong approach to the academy for sure...but you cant get rid of a player under conyract..and dont get any money if you dont oiffer them a good contract. I dont know what you mean by safc being too big for them? sartori has run far bigger businesses than safc will ever be..mathven ran a bigger business than folk on here think but quite small in the scheme of things..as for too xpensive..donald spent £12m on eastleigh...he can easily afford his commitment to safc.
Click to expand...
What contracts are you talking about? They are kids. The only way you can keep them is to convince them and their parents they are valued and are better off staying.
Or if you don’t want to keep them, you can offer them to other clubs and ensure the kids know you’re not the best option for them.
 
joop said:
What contracts are you talking about? They are kids. The only way you can keep them is to convince them and their parents they are valued and are better off staying.
Or if you don’t want to keep them, you can offer them to other clubs and ensure the kids know you’re not the best option for them.
Click to expand...
if a player is not offered new terms..they can leave. and there is no compo. if they are offered terms and then move..it goes to a tribunal...
oifn they have no contractsetc why offer to tiwhr clubs..if no contract then rival clubs dont have to pay?
 
kildaremackem said:
the previous owners (the ones that still co own the club) had the wrong approach to the academy for sure...but you cant get rid of a player under conyract..and dont get any money if you dont oiffer them a good contract. I dont know what you mean by safc being too big for them? sartori has run far bigger businesses than safc will ever be..mathven ran a bigger business than folk on here think but quite small in the scheme of things..as for too xpensive..donald spent £12m on eastleigh...he can easily afford his commitment to safc.
Click to expand...

The fact they are still involved is for the money they think they’ll get if / when we go up.

Would kids be on a contract, or was it just an opportunity for SD & co to make money on those not tied in contractually? I know what i’ve heard and read about the chancers.

As for CM running a much bigger company, you missed the word “badly”, reading any reviews or feedback from staff he employed tells me all i need to know
 
Gaz said:
The fact they are still involved is for the money they think they’ll get if / when we go up.

Would kids be on a contract, or was it just an opportunity for SD & co to make money on those not tied in contractually? I know what i’ve heard and read about the chancers.

As for CM running a much bigger company, you missed the word “badly”, reading any reviews or feedback from staff he employed tells me all i need to know
Click to expand...
ifa plkayuer isnt toied ion contractually..why would any club pay a fee for them? i dont think contract is the right word in the sense that minors cant sign legally binding agreements...but a player offered terms and wanting to leave..the fee goes to a tribunal. donalds rationale seems to be that if the player turns it down, he can negotiate better fees than a tribunal would award, and paert of the way to do that ois to drum up interest from the maximum number of clubs.
joop said:
not for kids. Do some research.
Click to expand...
so why are clubs paying money for safcx kids if there is nothing keeping the kids at safc? surely the kid can just sign for whomever they want (they cant there arwe rules)
 
kildaremackem said:
ifa plkayuer isnt toied ion contractually..why would any club pay a fee for them? i dont think contract is the right word in the sense that minors cant sign legally binding agreements...but a player offered terms and wanting to leave..the fee goes to a tribunal. donalds rationale seems to be that if the player turns it down, he can negotiate better fees than a tribunal would award, and paert of the way to do that ois to drum up interest from the maximum number of clubs.

so why are clubs paying money for safcx kids if there is nothing keeping the kids at safc? surely the kid can just sign for whomever they want (they cant there arwe rules)
Click to expand...
Because the clubs are entitled to compensation. There is a minimum amount payable in terms of time spent on development. If more clubs are interested, they can and often do offer more.
so you’re right, there isn’t anything keeping the kids there unless they are made to feel valued and wanted and persuaded they are in the right place for their development.
 
kildaremackem said:
the previous owners (the ones that still co own the club) had the wrong approach to the academy for sure...but you cant get rid of a player under conyract..and dont get any money if you dont oiffer them a good contract. I dont know what you mean by safc being too big for them? sartori has run far bigger businesses than safc will ever be..mathven ran a bigger business than folk on here think but quite small in the scheme of things..as for too xpensive..donald spent £12m on eastleigh...he can easily afford his commitment to safc.
Click to expand...
And again. Wrong on the contract part.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top