Marko...WHY ?

[Twiggster]

and you've made my point....

YUP

[weasel]

As a fan of bacon, Marko, I'm glad I don't live near you as it must be very expensive.

Would Howson have signed a new contract? Probably yes if he'd stayed till the end of the season and we'd been promoted. Were Leeds in a position to gamble a £2m transfer income on hoping the team that was around 8th at the time would definitely get promoted? Of course Howson would have liked to have got promoted with Leeds and played in the prem with Leeds, that is fairly clear, but the reality is that if we'd not got promoted he would have gone and we'd have got no fee. Even going to a Norwich is a good career move as it is the Premiership. Even if Norwich get relegated he has had the opportunity to show what he can do in the premiership and as such put himself in a position to get a move to a better club than Norwich. Heck maybe even an England cap or two.

[Martyn]

As a fan of bacon, Marko, I'm glad I don't live near you as it must be very expensive.

Would Howson have signed a new contract? Probably yes if he'd stayed till the end of the season and we'd been promoted. Were Leeds in a position to gamble a £2m transfer income on hoping the team that was around 8th at the time would definitely get promoted? Of course Howson would have liked to have got promoted with Leeds and played in the prem with Leeds, that is fairly clear, but the reality is that if we'd not got promoted he would have gone and we'd have got no fee. Even going to a Norwich is a good career move as it is the Premiership. Even if Norwich get relegated he has had the opportunity to show what he can do in the premiership and as such put himself in a position to get a move to a better club than Norwich. Heck maybe even an England cap or two.

Also, of course, in the cases of Gradel and Howson, Bates got in some money that he could either (a) reinvest in the squad or (b) trouser.

He promised one and did the other

[OCAFC]

Using the term "forced out" is probably the wrong use of words. Nobody is forced to do anything in this type of situation.

Ultimately though Leeds have not offered JH or BJ a competetive amount of money (in comparison with other teams). Kilkenny moving to Bristol is another example of how we simply will not compete with the wages of other clubs (Championship clubs). How people can try and justify this lack of investment and short sightedness is beyond me.

Do you honestly think as a player who came through the youth team and whos family live in leeds, JH wouldn't have stayed if Leeds had made a reasonable offer?

[gessa]

Do you honestly think as a player who came through the youth team and whos family live in leeds, JH wouldn't have stayed if Leeds had made a reasonable offer?

I have a nephew who is about to sign professional terms with a league 2 side, he has been in and around football since he was 7 years old, his take on football is totally different to most generations , they are taught that basically this is your trade be as good at it as you are able and go as far as you can with whoever it may be, playing for the team you support may be a bonus but never let it cloud your judgement, it's a short career, financially make the most of it while you can.
We all think as fans , players think of it as business.

[Martyn]

I have a nephew who is about to sign professional terms with a league 2 side, he has been in and around football since he was 7 years old, his take on football is totally different to most generations , they are taught that basically this is your trade be as good at it as you are able and go as far as you can with whoever it may be, playing for the team you support may be a bonus but never let it cloud your judgement, it's a short career, financially make the most of it while you can.
We all think as fans , players think of it as business.

And they are right to do so.

Calling them Judases if they leave is just plain stupid.

[markolufc]

To blame any player for leaving is just madness.

The "get a transfer fee now or let him go for nothing" argument is a non-argument. The club has shown it lacks the intent to actually replace players that leave adequately. The club can use that as an excuse all day long, but for fans to use it as an excuse? How are we better off? Not a single one of these "might as well sell him now rather than lose him for nothing" situations has benefited the club even the tiniest bit, because with each one the squad has been worse off. Howson's fee was something around £1 million, not even worth mentioning. But there's a ready made excuse to keep flak away from those responsible - "he wanted premiership football and we couldn't compete". Rubbish. What a load of crap. It's a ready made excuse for not putting any effort into keeping a player. I'm going to start sending email scams to the people that genuinely believe there's nothing more the club could have done, because if they believe that they'll believe anything.

Wilfried Zaha. Premier League interest has been sniffing around him for years, and we're talking the really big guns, not Norwich City. But he's still at Crystal Palace. He just got an England call up. Crystal Palace, who are they? Yet they still do what it takes to hold onto their best players, even while hanging around the relegation zone for the last 3 seasons. And where are they now? Looking like serious promotion contenders.

http://www.mirrorfootball.co.uk/news/Cr ... 44685.html

Got him to sign a 5 and a half year deal while he was in the spotlight, so don't give me that "he wanted Premier League" crap. Given the correct terms a player will sign on the dotted line.

[LUFCRACE]

And they are right to do so.

Calling them Judases if they leave is just plain stupid.

This

[Armleywhite]

This

That

[weasel]

There is no loyalty in football. Yeah it's nice to play with the team that you support but if someone offers more, or a chance to win trophies off they go. I remember Gary Speed, the Everton fan, leaving Leeds to go to Everton as it was his dream move. A couple of years later, despite being a regular in 'his' team he moved to Newcastle.

The Zaha situation is completely irrelevant. Zaha had signed a 4.5 year contract as fairly much an unknown in November 2010. As such when he signed his new 5.5 year deal last December he still had 3.5 years left on a contract that was probably paying him very litte.

If he hadn't signed the new deal Palace had no pressure to sell. He still had 3.5 years so no rush to sell, his value would likely rise as well and he was on low wages. So it was in Zaha's interest to sign a new deal with no doubt a substantial pay increase (much like how Tresor Kandol and Jermaine Beckford signed improved contracts when we were in league 1).

There is a huge difference between a player having half a year and having 3.5 years left on their contract.

The club was right to sell Howson. Where the money went is a different matter.

[markolufc]

There is no loyalty in football. Yeah it's nice to play with the team that you support but if someone offers more, or a chance to win trophies off they go. I remember Gary Speed, the Everton fan, leaving Leeds to go to Everton as it was his dream move. A couple of years later, despite being a regular in 'his' team he moved to Newcastle.

The Zaha situation is completely irrelevant. Zaha had signed a 4.5 year contract as fairly much an unknown in November 2010. As such when he signed his new 5.5 year deal last December he still had 3.5 years left on a contract that was probably paying him very litte.

If he hadn't signed the new deal Palace had no pressure to sell. He still had 3.5 years so no rush to sell, his value would likely rise as well and he was on low wages. So it was in Zaha's interest to sign a new deal with no doubt a substantial pay increase (much like how Tresor Kandol and Jermaine Beckford signed improved contracts when we were in league 1).

There is a huge difference between a player having half a year and having 3.5 years left on their contract.

The club was right to sell Howson. Where the money went is a different matter.

Which further begs the question, why does the club never renegotiate contracts earlier? Why do we have so many of our best so close to the end of their contracts when negotiations even begin? Furthermore, why are the contracts we offer so short? The risk is that you end up with a player not good enough or injured or whatever on a long contract. It's not a risk if the board account for player overheads in the budget. There will always be players out of favour, not being used at any football club, so why does ours so often try unsuccessfully to avoid an inevitability, then refuse to pay for it when it does happen?

Contracts are the responsibility of the board, and contracts are being handled poorly, time and time again. If the money isn't going to be reinvested (and we know it never will, or at least it never will in full while bates is in charge), selling any player is a bad decision. If you have a player good enough to contribute to a promotion chasing side like a Howson or a Gradel or a Snodgrass, and you tell the manager that they have to sell them to bring in other players and then don't even allow the manager the full sum, then it will end badly. It has ended badly. Players brought in for the same price are rarely as good, and a high risk, as they may not perform. In this situation, always side with keeping the player that you know is good enough and you know will fit into the side. Failure to provide the funds through other means because the budget for other areas of the club are managed so horrifically poorly is the fault of the board. They've made their bed, now let them sleep in it, instead of offering them a nice new one.

[Silky]

[Wolfetoneleeds]

Does that relate to you as we'll!!

[Silky]

heyheyhey...... we're not talking about me here, we're poking fun at marko

[Wolfetoneleeds]

heyheyhey...... we're not talking about me here, we're poking fun at marko

;)
Be carefull though he will write a 10 paragraph response!!

[Gino 1959]

Plus ca change plus c'est la meme chose.

[weasel]

Jeez Marko there is a clue to why the club doesn't renegotiate contracts earlier when I mentioned Beckford and Kandol both being offered new improved deals because of their good start to the first league 1 season. As shown JB went on to do well whereas Kandol didn't and we ended up paying a lot of money out on wages for a player who quickly became surplus to requirements. You'd offer these new improved deals to everyone who showed a bit of promise and guess what you'd have even more players clogging up our squad as no other team would take them off our hands as they wouldn't want to pay the wages that they are on.

Perhaps cast your mind back to a certain former chairman who handed out great contracts to players. Remember how their wages helped dragged the club under as we ended up paying their wages for years even after they'd left the club.

Very easy to say with hindsight why wasn't he offered a better deal, not so easy to get it right at the time. Take the case of Bradley Johnson. We all thought he was fairly sh*t. He'd failed to establish himself under Macca (sent out on loan) and Grayson. He wasn't really seen as a first team starter as he entered the last year of his contract but then suddenly started playing really well. By this stage it was too late as he was now attracting the attention of premiership clubs. No one would have given him an improved contract prior to his final year.

[markolufc]

Jeez Marko there is a clue to why the club doesn't renegotiate contracts earlier when I mentioned Beckford and Kandol both being offered new improved deals because of their good start to the first league 1 season. As shown JB went on to do well whereas Kandol didn't and we ended up paying a lot of money out on wages for a player who quickly became surplus to requirements. You'd offer these new improved deals to everyone who showed a bit of promise and guess what you'd have even more players clogging up our squad as no other team would take them off our hands as they wouldn't want to pay the wages that they are on.

Perhaps cast your mind back to a certain former chairman who handed out great contracts to players. Remember how their wages helped dragged the club under as we ended up paying their wages for years even after they'd left the club.

Very easy to say with hindsight why wasn't he offered a better deal, not so easy to get it right at the time. Take the case of Bradley Johnson. We all thought he was fairly sh*t. He'd failed to establish himself under Macca (sent out on loan) and Grayson. He wasn't really seen as a first team starter as he entered the last year of his contract but then suddenly started playing really well. By this stage it was too late as he was now attracting the attention of premiership clubs. No one would have given him an improved contract prior to his final year.

There's a balance. Ridsdale might have gone too far. bates isn't going far enough. One extreme isn't better than the other.

Why wasn't he offered a new contract as a reward for helping get us promoted?

I already explained my point is that the board refuse to offer contracts sooner out of some fear that we'll end up with players we can't get rid of. It's their JOB to cover those expenses, expenses that can be covered if money isn't pissed down the drain in other areas, like it so often is at this club. The club could have done so very much more to give themselves a stronger bargaining position, it doesn't always have to mean throwing money at players like Ridsdale did. It just means taking a few risks and being prepared to cover the costs if those risks don't pay off. As it stands, they've taken a conservative stance and we're now suffering badly for it. Explain to me how the situation we're now in is better than if they'd taken a couple of risks on promising young players like Snodgrass, Johnson and Gradel?

For the sake of proving my point, you can go ahead and assume that the money used to take those risks has been made available by the board instead of spending it on legal fees and building work.