Had we been doing well in the league, I'd probably agree with the view of taking the money and 'run'. Alas, there's too many issues for my liking to 'capitalize' on Man City's apparent interest, simply for money sake.
- the defence has one of our strengths. we had the joint 3rd best defence in the league last season.
- last season was the first time Agger partnered Skrtel as a mainstay in the defence. it was also his most involved season (league-wise) ever. can we guarantee a new partnership will work right away? can we guarantee he'll manage to stay fit as much/even more in the coming season?
- playing staff wise, there are other areas of concern that are more pressing. why not focus on strengthening rather than be distracted with replacing? besides, in the event that he's sold and an external reinforcement is sought, surely the price of the targeted signing will increase?
- he's no star like Suarez or Gerrard, but has been a mainstay in the XI for the past 2 seasons. what kind of ambition/message are we showing in accepting an offer simply because the price is too good to be rejected, rather than 'we've got an excellent, ready made backup' or 'there's a similar/better replacement available who'll fit in instantly'. (In case anyone point out, I do remember this soccernomic rule: "Sell a player either before buyers see deterioration in his game or when a club offers more than he’s worth.") 😛
- we saw last season how an influx of new players needed integration into the team, is there a need to risk that again, especially under a new manager?
Of cos, if Man City make an offer that is irresistable (20m is only 'very good', imo) or if Skrtel has no intention to commit beyond the duration of his current contract, then I'm all for it.
Unfortunately, this is not FM where making a profit from sales getting replacement for a lower fee is as easy as ABC.
- the defence has one of our strengths. we had the joint 3rd best defence in the league last season.
- last season was the first time Agger partnered Skrtel as a mainstay in the defence. it was also his most involved season (league-wise) ever. can we guarantee a new partnership will work right away? can we guarantee he'll manage to stay fit as much/even more in the coming season?
- playing staff wise, there are other areas of concern that are more pressing. why not focus on strengthening rather than be distracted with replacing? besides, in the event that he's sold and an external reinforcement is sought, surely the price of the targeted signing will increase?
- he's no star like Suarez or Gerrard, but has been a mainstay in the XI for the past 2 seasons. what kind of ambition/message are we showing in accepting an offer simply because the price is too good to be rejected, rather than 'we've got an excellent, ready made backup' or 'there's a similar/better replacement available who'll fit in instantly'. (In case anyone point out, I do remember this soccernomic rule: "Sell a player either before buyers see deterioration in his game or when a club offers more than he’s worth.") 😛
- we saw last season how an influx of new players needed integration into the team, is there a need to risk that again, especially under a new manager?
Of cos, if Man City make an offer that is irresistable (20m is only 'very good', imo) or if Skrtel has no intention to commit beyond the duration of his current contract, then I'm all for it.
Unfortunately, this is not FM where making a profit from sales getting replacement for a lower fee is as easy as ABC.
