Who gets shipped out and when?

[kingjulian]

That is probably true. Everyone has made their own assumptions on what is value for money. But that is what a forum is for.

For me the large problem is that, we just about have 11 players who are good enough to be in the squad, but yet we have the 4th highest wage bill, i assumed everyone would be as surprised as I am at that little fact...there is a chain of thread that discusses how the hell we ended up here. (The pro-rafa and anti-rafa debate). Why not a thread on what needs to be done to change this?

 

[kingjulian]

[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42594.msg1212167#msg1212167 date=1288960580]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42594.msg1212158#msg1212158 date=1288959179]
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42594.msg1212149#msg1212149 date=1288958000]
i'm not quite sure why a player's age is relevant when talking about the value for money of his salary. what difference does it make?

transfer fees, length of contracts - i can see the link with age and value for money there, but not wages.
[/quote]

Does it make you happy if i said that Kuyt is probably not likely to sustain the performance he gave us at his best, and for the money he is earning there are better players available? Age is a factor in that we are going to get a declining return on investment both in term of transfer fee we may be able to recoup and on the field performance. We have two other who are aging in Gerrard and Carra but they are indispensable for the club, and Kuyt, Maxi and Jovanovic are not in that category......happy with that explanation?


[/quote]

no.

wages aren't an investment - in accounting parlance, they're an operating cost, a revenue item. if a player does a job for one year that's 'worth' £60k a week, what's the difference if that player is 24 or 37? none, as far as i can see. the important thing is not to pay out excessively large transfer fees for older players, and avoid giving older players excessively long contracts.
[/quote]

I did say on the field performance. If a player is earning X$ and playing at a level when he is 30, it's unfair to expect the same level of performace at 31, but the salary does not decrease however, so it is best to move some of these players at this stage....a problem that AC Milan are now recovering from.

 

[keniget]

Well, one argument put forward in the past is that Rafa was badly mismanaging the playing squad at his disposal and we were in fact better than perhaps our league position suggested. The same argument has also been put forward during Roys tenure.

To say we have only 11 players who are good enough to be in the squad is just being a bit sensationalist about it all. There is no denying that our squad needs a fair bit of work though.

 

[peterhague]

[quote author=ibromurph link=topic=42594.msg1212170#msg1212170 date=1288960885]
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42594.msg1212167#msg1212167 date=1288960580]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42594.msg1212158#msg1212158 date=1288959179]
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42594.msg1212149#msg1212149 date=1288958000]
i'm not quite sure why a player's age is relevant when talking about the value for money of his salary. what difference does it make?

transfer fees, length of contracts - i can see the link with age and value for money there, but not wages.
[/quote]

Does it make you happy if i said that Kuyt is probably not likely to sustain the performance he gave us at his best, and for the money he is earning there are better players available? Age is a factor in that we are going to get a declining return on investment both in term of transfer fee we may be able to recoup and on the field performance. We have two other who are aging in Gerrard and Carra but they are indispensable for the club, and Kuyt, Maxi and Jovanovic are not in that category......happy with that explanation?


[/quote]

no.

wages aren't an investment - in accounting parlance, they're an operating cost, a revenue item. if a player does a job for one year that's 'worth' £60k a week, what's the difference if that player is 24 or 37? none, as far as i can see. the important thing is not to pay out excessively large transfer fees for older players, and avoid giving older players excessively long contracts.
[/quote]

I think the obvious thing here is it's better to sell Kuyt whilst his value is high than to give him a short-term contract (and risk him leaving at the end of it for a pittance). For younger players, you can afford to give them lesser money (they've not been in the game for long) and longer contracts (hence their value is protected). It's a legitimate strategy to sell older players on big contracts and not risk them going on free (if they're not happy with short-term deals).
[/quote]


but that's not what i'm saying. why is it necessarily a bad thing to have an older player on high wages? that doesn't make sense to me at all. let's say jovanovic is on £70k a week - surely that seems a lot because he's not very good rather than because he's 29 doesn't it? what's age got to do with anything?

value for money wages are whatever a player's performance deserves, i can't see why anything else matters.

 

[ibromurph]

[quote author=keniget link=topic=42594.msg1212178#msg1212178 date=1288961615]
Well, one argument put forward in the past is that Rafa was badly mismanaging the playing squad at his disposal and we were in fact better than perhaps our league position suggested. The same argument has also been put forward during Roys tenure.

To say we have only 11 players who are good enough to be in the squad is just being a bit sensationalist about it all. There is no denying that our squad needs a fair bit of work though.
[/quote]

Fair point, but the squad is horribly imbalanced anyway and for the money we're paying, it shouldn't be looking so poorly.

 

[kingjulian]

[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42594.msg1212179#msg1212179 date=1288961629]

but that's not what i'm saying. why is it necessarily a bad thing to have an older player on high wages? that doesn't make sense to me at all. let's say jovanovic is on £70k a week - surely that seems a lot because he's not very good rather than because he's 29 doesn't it? what's age got to do with anything?

value for money wages are whatever a player's performance deserves, i can't see why anything else matters.
[/quote]

Yes the performance over the contract is likely to decline when the player is in his late 20s early 30, that is simply how it is. But the contract is a fixed commitment it doesn't adjust according to performance over the period. If a manager is not mindful of that, there is chance of ending up with several 30+ but good players at the same time, and the value of the squad erode to nothing very quickly - which is what AC Milan experienced.

24 year old playing at a level wants 70k
29 year old playing at the same level wants 70k

who would you give the contract to? it's a no brainer.

 

[Wilko7]

[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42594.msg1211973#msg1211973 date=1288942833]
There is a lot of clearing of deadwood that needs to be done, and we may also have to rid of some of the aging high earners. Who needs to be moved out and when?

For obvious reasons i have excluded youngsters like Shelvey, Kelly, N'gog, Pacheco etc.


To move out
Poulsen - (Shit aging player. He really is worse than Lucas. The only question is, how soon can we move him out?)
Maxi - (Aging player and high earner)
Kuyt - (Good player but he is getting on and he is a high earner, probably be the best time to move him out)
Jovanovic - (High earner as he came on a free and we will never use a player like him. Not unless we play 4-3-3. Adapting to the league is another question)
Kyrgiakos - (He is 32. He is not that good. Probably a high earner too.)
Babel (Not good enough)
Aquilani - (Sicknote must go regardless of talent)

Undecided
Konchesky (Aging but he is English and we can probably hang on to him for the quota system as he can play a role of providing injury cover)
Lucas (He really seems to be developing. It's not just about football, he seems physically far superior compared to when he came. He seems faster and stronger, but he still has very very ordinary games...so i don't really know)
Cole - (Very high earner nearing 30 and at times looks like that he doesn't have much more football left in his tank. But he is English and is still a good player and will play well when the team plays well.)
Brad Jones - (My opinion is that this reserve keeper should always be a rookie coming through the ranks. But this guy qualifies for local player quota. He probably makes a lot for just sitting on the bench for ever.)

For keeps
Gerrard
Reina
Torres
Carra
Johnson
Agger
Skrtel (It has to be one of Skrtel/Agger, but i wouldn't let either of these go without the chance to properly assess Kelly, Wilson and Ayala)
Meireles (has just come in, and looks like he belongs. At 27, he is no spring chicken, but i think we can keep him)


Have i missed anyone? Because that is 19 players, and it is a ridiculously thin squad and if we have the 4th highest wage in spite of that, then there is something horribly wrong. Are Torres, Gerrard, Pepe and Cara earning that much?

[/quote]

Fixed for you.

Kyrgiakos - (He is 31. 6' 4" and dominant in the air, he is our best defender so far this season. Probably on a comparatively low salary.)
Carragher - (He is 33 in January. Still a great organizer of the defence however has been in decline for over two years. Just signed a new 2 yr contract for NINETY THOUSAND POUNDS a week.)

 

[kingjulian]

[quote author=keniget link=topic=42594.msg1212178#msg1212178 date=1288961615]
To say we have only 11 players who are good enough to be in the squad is just being a bit sensationalist about it all. There is no denying that our squad needs a fair bit of work though.
[/quote]

There are 19 player with 4 youngster who we would like to keep in and around the squad Pacheco, Shelvey, Kelly and N'gog.

Of the 19 i can't see more than 11 players who would all walk in to the 4th best squad (not first team) in the premiership...let's say Spurs or City for example....help me count.

I don't think i'm being sensationalist at all. We are clearly behind at least 5 squads, and there may be one or two other that can give us a run for our money in terms of squad strength. But the cold hard figure is that we are the 4th most expensive squad, which should ideally mean at least the 4th best squad.

 

[ibromurph]

[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42594.msg1212179#msg1212179 date=1288961629]
[quote author=ibromurph link=topic=42594.msg1212170#msg1212170 date=1288960885]
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42594.msg1212167#msg1212167 date=1288960580]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42594.msg1212158#msg1212158 date=1288959179]
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42594.msg1212149#msg1212149 date=1288958000]
i'm not quite sure why a player's age is relevant when talking about the value for money of his salary. what difference does it make?

transfer fees, length of contracts - i can see the link with age and value for money there, but not wages.
[/quote]

Does it make you happy if i said that Kuyt is probably not likely to sustain the performance he gave us at his best, and for the money he is earning there are better players available? Age is a factor in that we are going to get a declining return on investment both in term of transfer fee we may be able to recoup and on the field performance. We have two other who are aging in Gerrard and Carra but they are indispensable for the club, and Kuyt, Maxi and Jovanovic are not in that category......happy with that explanation?


[/quote]

no.

wages aren't an investment - in accounting parlance, they're an operating cost, a revenue item. if a player does a job for one year that's 'worth' £60k a week, what's the difference if that player is 24 or 37? none, as far as i can see. the important thing is not to pay out excessively large transfer fees for older players, and avoid giving older players excessively long contracts.
[/quote]

I think the obvious thing here is it's better to sell Kuyt whilst his value is high than to give him a short-term contract (and risk him leaving at the end of it for a pittance). For younger players, you can afford to give them lesser money (they've not been in the game for long) and longer contracts (hence their value is protected). It's a legitimate strategy to sell older players on big contracts and not risk them going on free (if they're not happy with short-term deals).
[/quote]


but that's not what i'm saying. why is it necessarily a bad thing to have an older player on high wages? that doesn't make sense to me at all. let's say jovanovic is on £70k a week - surely that seems a lot because he's not very good rather than because he's 29 doesn't it? what's age got to do with anything?

value for money wages are whatever a player's performance deserves, i can't see why anything else matters.
[/quote]

If you're talking solely about the wages (and not the length of contract) then there's nothing wrong with that.

But, in football, those 2 things aren't mutually exclusive. A player like Kuyt is looking at 30 and thinking "it could be my last big contract" before an inevitable decline. Hence he'd be looking for at least a 4 year deal. At that point, you have the option of signing him up for that, knowing that after 4 years (and an investment of 20m (considering he's on about 5m a year)), and knowing that after those 4years, you'll have to spend another 15m (10m + selling a 33year old decling, less, effective Kuyt for 5m) on a replacement for him.

Alternatively, you can sell Kuyt now (whilst his value is 15m) and bring in a younger 23 year old version of him (same quality/level of eprformance) for the same 15m value and on a 2.6m a year deal for the same 4 years. Hence you're not left out of pocket and are left with a player of the same value/quality for half the money in wages.

Again, it's a legitimate strategy that managers like Ferguson and Wenger have used. Difference between them is that Fergie has kept a nucleus of homegrown older players who protect the character of the side (Scholes, Giggs, Neville).
It's something that KingJ is suggesting with Carra and Stevie G too, which I agree with. Kuyt, i'm not sure if he fits in that bracket.

 

[peterhague]

[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42594.msg1212184#msg1212184 date=1288962069]
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42594.msg1212179#msg1212179 date=1288961629]

but that's not what i'm saying. why is it necessarily a bad thing to have an older player on high wages? that doesn't make sense to me at all. let's say jovanovic is on £70k a week - surely that seems a lot because he's not very good rather than because he's 29 doesn't it? what's age got to do with anything?

value for money wages are whatever a player's performance deserves, i can't see why anything else matters.
[/quote]

Yes the performance over the contract is likely to decline when the player is in his late 20s early 30, that is simply how it is. But the contract is a fixed commitment it doesn't adjust according to performance over the period. If a manager is not mindful of that, there is chance of ending up with several 30+ but good players at the same time, and the value of the squad erode to nothing very quickly - which is what AC Milan experienced.

24 year old playing at a level wants 70k
29 year old playing at the same level wants 70k

who would you give the contract to? it's a no brainer.
[/quote]

not necessarily. as i said above, the important issue would be the length of contract and general club policy re: ageing players (whether to cash in or not, basically). as long as you generally aspire to keep players as long as possible (like we have with gerrard and carra) then it seems fair enough to carry on paying the market rate right up to retirement.

 

[kingjulian]

[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42594.msg1212189#msg1212189 date=1288963048]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42594.msg1212184#msg1212184 date=1288962069]
[quote author=peterhague link=topic=42594.msg1212179#msg1212179 date=1288961629]

but that's not what i'm saying. why is it necessarily a bad thing to have an older player on high wages? that doesn't make sense to me at all. let's say jovanovic is on £70k a week - surely that seems a lot because he's not very good rather than because he's 29 doesn't it? what's age got to do with anything?

value for money wages are whatever a player's performance deserves, i can't see why anything else matters.
[/quote]

Yes the performance over the contract is likely to decline when the player is in his late 20s early 30, that is simply how it is. But the contract is a fixed commitment it doesn't adjust according to performance over the period. If a manager is not mindful of that, there is chance of ending up with several 30+ but good players at the same time, and the value of the squad erode to nothing very quickly - which is what AC Milan experienced.

24 year old playing at a level wants 70k
29 year old playing at the same level wants 70k

who would you give the contract to? it's a no brainer.
[/quote]

not necessarily. as i said above, the important issue would be the length of contract and general club policy re: ageing players (whether to cash in or not, basically). as long as you generally aspire to keep players as long as possible (like we have with gerrard and carra) then it seems fair enough to carry on paying the market rate right up to retirement.
[/quote]

Really? You don't see the difference between locking in a player on the decline with a contract and locking in a player on the upward curve?

We'll have to agree to disagree....

 

[peterhague]

who said anything about 'locking in'? it's a length of contract issue. 29 yr old might get a 2-3 year deal, 24 yr old a 5 or 6 year deal.

 

[keniget]

[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42594.msg1212187#msg1212187 date=1288962726]
Of the 19 i can't see more than 11 players who would all walk in to the 4th best squad (not first team) in the premiership...let's say Spurs or City for example....help me count.
[/quote]

Let's look at it slightly differently. How many of the following players would City or Spurs be particularly interested in taking?

Owen
Neville
Anderson
Park Ji-Sung
Scholes
O'Shea
Obertan
Macheda
Gibson
Kuszczak
Bebe
Hargreaves
Fabio
Rafael
Smalling
Brown
Evans
Carrick
Giggs

I'd argue that most City / Spurs fans would prefer their own players / prospects to most of those listed there.

 

[spider-Neil]

the squad is thread bare as it is and people want to strip it down to the ground. one of rafa's flaws is he had a ridiculously high turnover with regards to players.

 

[kingjulian]

[quote author=keniget link=topic=42594.msg1212196#msg1212196 date=1288963637]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42594.msg1212187#msg1212187 date=1288962726]
Of the 19 i can't see more than 11 players who would all walk in to the 4th best squad (not first team) in the premiership...let's say Spurs or City for example....help me count.
[/quote]

Let's look at it slightly differently. How many of the following players would City or Spurs be particularly interested in taking?

Owen
Neville
Anderson
Park Ji-Sung
Scholes
O'Shea
Obertan
Macheda
Gibson
Kuszczak
Bebe
Hargreaves
Fabio
Rafael
Smalling
Brown
Evans
Carrick
Giggs

I'd argue that most City / Spurs fans would prefer their own players / prospects to most of those listed there.
[/quote]

I was not talking about real interest in acquiring the players. I was talking about performing at a level that would merit a place in those squads.

You have removed Rooney, Berba, Ferdinand, Vidic, Nani, VDS, Fletcher, Hernandez and Evra from that list. That is 9 players who would walk in to City or Spurs squad possibly first team. Of the rest Scholes, Giggs, Evans, Carrick, Anderson and Ji Sung Park are worth a squad place in any of the top 4 teams. So that is already 15 players.

Of the rest, for example, City is the only team with a better second keeper than Kuzack. Arsenal and Spurs would probably be willing to snap him up. O'Shea, Brown et all have proved to be reliable steady eddies who Alex can depend upon, and then there are some promising youngsters about.

United clearly still have a very good squad.

They don't have a wage/quality imbalance that stands out like it does with ours.

Are you disagreeing that we are not clearly behind those 5 teams? Are you disagreeing that there may be clubs in the rest of the league with a squad that is good enough to give us a run for our money?

If you were to look at it like that for our squad, i'm struggling to think past Gerrard, Torres, Reina, Johnson, Carra, Agger, Skrtel, Kyrgiakos, Meireles, Kuyt and Cole. I was being very generous in rating players like Kyrgiakos, Sktel, Agger and Meireles but even then i just about get 11 players. Who else is good enough?

 

[keniget]

[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42594.msg1212212#msg1212212 date=1288965908]
I was not talking about real interest in acquiring the players. I was talking about performing at a level that would merit a place in those squads.

You have removed Rooney, Berba, Ferdinand, Vidic, Nani, VDS, Fletcher, Hernandez and Evra from that list. That is 9 players who would walk in to City or Spurs squad possibly first team. Of the rest Scholes, Giggs, Evans, Carrick, Anderson and Ji Sung Park are worth a squad place in any of the top 4 teams. So that is already 15 players.

Of the rest, for example, City is the only team with a better second keeper than Kuzack. Arsenal and Spurs would probably be willing to snap him up. O'Shea, Brown et all have proved to be reliable steady eddies who Alex can depend upon, and then there are some promising youngsters about.

United clearly still have a very good squad.

They don't have a wage/quality imbalance that stands out like it does with ours.

Are you disagreeing that we are not clearly behind those 5 teams? Are you disagreeing that there may be clubs in the rest of the league with a squad that is good enough to give us a run for our money?

If you were to look at it like that for our squad, i'm struggling to think past Gerrard, Torres, Reina, Johnson, Carra, Agger, Skrtel, Kyrgiakos, Meireles, Kuyt and Cole. I was being very generous in rating players like Kyrgiakos, Sktel, Agger and Meireles but even then i just about get 11 players. Who else is good enough?
[/quote]

I'm not disputing the fact that United have a good squad, but there are a lot of players there that many fans would turn their nose up at... perhaps in the same way that you're doing to our own players who you might have a different opinion of if they were in and out of a winning team like Utd.

 

[KopKing]

[quote author=keniget link=topic=42594.msg1212232#msg1212232 date=1288967282]
[quote author=kingjulian link=topic=42594.msg1212212#msg1212212 date=1288965908]
I was not talking about real interest in acquiring the players. I was talking about performing at a level that would merit a place in those squads.

You have removed Rooney, Berba, Ferdinand, Vidic, Nani, VDS, Fletcher, Hernandez and Evra from that list. That is 9 players who would walk in to City or Spurs squad possibly first team. Of the rest Scholes, Giggs, Evans, Carrick, Anderson and Ji Sung Park are worth a squad place in any of the top 4 teams. So that is already 15 players.

Of the rest, for example, City is the only team with a better second keeper than Kuzack. Arsenal and Spurs would probably be willing to snap him up. O'Shea, Brown et all have proved to be reliable steady eddies who Alex can depend upon, and then there are some promising youngsters about.

United clearly still have a very good squad.

They don't have a wage/quality imbalance that stands out like it does with ours.

Are you disagreeing that we are not clearly behind those 5 teams? Are you disagreeing that there may be clubs in the rest of the league with a squad that is good enough to give us a run for our money?

If you were to look at it like that for our squad, i'm struggling to think past Gerrard, Torres, Reina, Johnson, Carra, Agger, Skrtel, Kyrgiakos, Meireles, Kuyt and Cole. I was being very generous in rating players like Kyrgiakos, Sktel, Agger and Meireles but even then i just about get 11 players. Who else is good enough?
[/quote]

I'm not disputing the fact that United have a good squad, but there are a lot of players there that many fans would turn their nose up at... perhaps in the same way that you're doing to our own players who you might have a different opinion of if they were in and out of a winning team like Utd.
[/quote]

Good point as usual Keni, I think the impression of our squad is down to our poor league position last year and our form this year thus far. On both counts I believe that we have underperformed. Its an unbalanced squad, but we had more players than any other Premier league team in the last world cup so it can't be *that*bad.

 

[kingjulian]

[quote author=keniget link=topic=42594.msg1212232#msg1212232 date=1288967282]

I'm not disputing the fact that United have a good squad, but there are a lot of players there that many fans would turn their nose up at... perhaps in the same way that you're doing to our own players who you might have a different opinion of if they were in and out of a winning team like Utd.
[/quote]

I think you are counting the bad players, and i'm counting the good players. We don't have half as many good players, but we hav
e just as many bad players. This probably sounds annoying that i'm repeating this again, but it needs to be said. Compared to the wages paid, we should have far better in terms of quality. Since there is a 25 player limit on the squad sizes, we will have to ship out some players to bring some in.

I can't see how you can look at our squad and say that the only reason it looks weak is because of the league position. Putting 100% of the blame on the manager, and none on the squad we have. Both are equally poor problems right now, but even with a great manager we are not going to be winning anything with that squad.

 

[keniget]

I never said that. I recognize as everyone does that the squad needs a fair bit of work doing to it.

I just think you are exaggerating the shitness of the squad and we've gotten into a weird unconstructive debate about it.

 

[kingjulian]

[quote author=keniget link=topic=42594.msg1212271#msg1212271 date=1288971324]
we've gotten into a weird unconstructive debate about it.
[/quote]

agreed...apols, been in a confrontational mood i think.

 

[Spionkop69]

[quote author=Ryan link=topic=42594.msg1212057#msg1212057 date=1288949628]
Mass cleariuts in one go never happen at any club ever.
[/quote]

I seem to remember Juve having a huge clearout just before Rushie joined them in 87. Or maybe they just bought a load of players in?

 

[Squiggles]

Portsmouth had a much needed fire-sale.