The not STFC Transfer Rumours thread

[Peter Venkman]

Ipswich signing Ali Al-Hamadi from Wimbledon.

£1.75 million.

Some fee that

Wow thats huge, I didnt think he was THAT good when they played us but I dont watch him every week.

At least the Dons will reinvest any fee they get in strengthening their team.

[tans]

At least they get a fee for under contract players too

[Peter Venkman]

At least they get a fee for under contract players too

True hopefully we will get a good fee if any of our players move on now rather than them using "closer to home" as an excuse when they move to a club 25 mins closer

[RobertT]

That's how you do "sustainability" at this level. You won't easily balance the books on regular income alone, you need to get players sold and - especially - sell on fees. Exeter have made so much from that path.

If we'd have shelled out the small fees for Kemp and Young in summer we'd be looking at a serious windfall now or in summer. But we didn't, so here we are.

That was the Sandro model really, he just overdid it and got the PR wrong.

I agree on everything apart from the Sandro bit because we are still repeating some of his mistakes right now.  his model was to buy up possible missed talent based purely on some stats he had devised from his bookmaking friends I assume.  However, we only ever put people on 1 and 2 year deals and sold them as soon as anyone offered remotely more than we paid out.  That creates massive turnover which increases the risks in the gamble and creates squad decimation.  What the teams that do this well do, is invest in a few, develop and nurture them, tie them up for a whole and then sell for decent fees one at a time.  Not create an entire squad in the same mould.

[Batch]

I still don't see how this works to its best unless you have a spine of "experienced" talent with those being developed around them.

[Nemo]

I agree on everything apart from the Sandro bit because we are still repeating some of his mistakes right now.  his model was to buy up possible missed talent based purely on some stats he had devised from his bookmaking friends I assume.  However, we only ever put people on 1 and 2 year deals and sold them as soon as anyone offered remotely more than we paid out.  That creates massive turnover which increases the risks in the gamble and creates squad decimation.  What the teams that do this well do, is invest in a few, develop and nurture them, tie them up for a whole and then sell for decent fees one at a time.  Not create an entire squad in the same mould.

Sandro definitely hadn't got it right, particularly trying too high a turnover, but he was aiming in that direction at least. I don't disagree with your assessment of what he got wrong, but at least it felt like that was a plan that could work with refinement, whereas our transfer strategy in the summer was... worse. Difference between a badly executed plan and no plan at all, I guess.

But yeah, I think we all broadly agree - have an experienced core and then five or six project players, one or two of whom might come off in a big way.

[AbraMoDabre]

I still don't see how this works to its best unless you have a spine of "experienced" talent with those being developed around them.

It doesn’t  but in order to get in a few decent, experienced players you actually have to spend a bit of money, which is where it comes unstuck for us.

[RobertT]

Sandro definitely hadn't got it right, particularly trying too high a turnover, but he was aiming in that direction at least. I don't disagree with your assessment of what he got wrong, but at least it felt like that was a plan that could work with refinement, whereas our transfer strategy in the summer was... worse. Difference between a badly executed plan and no plan at all, I guess.

But yeah, I think we all broadly agree - have an experienced core and then five or six project players, one or two of whom might come off in a big way.

Kemp was a good example of what we should be looking for in that model.  It wouldn't have taken a rocket scientist to see he had some promising stats, not least the second half of last season.  I presume we watched him, or videos, before deciding to target him, so we had an idea it wasn't just on paper or a fluke.  To then go and get him on loan is stupid - buy him, sign him to a three year deal.  If he repeats the previous season, he gets interest, and because he is a forward player, he is in the premium transfer fee range.

Some people will say hindsight helps here, but if we are going to go down the polish rough diamonds road, he ticked all the boxes.  Precisely the type you gamble on.  You make that gamble a little lest risky by having competent professionals making up the core of your squad.  Loaning such a player makes no sense to me.  It didn't with Doyle, It didn't with Young and is still doesn't with Devoy (who may turn out to be shit by the way).  You loan from higher, you buy from here and below, or just above for "failed" talent.  I understand your squad at this level will still churn, but having them on 3 year deals at least gives you the chance to try and build, or get a fee.

[Nemo]

Loaning Doyle made some sense because he had no resale value, but I agree with the others.

As for long term contracts, we did give out a couple - Wakeling signed for four years (that one even worked, we got a supposedly decent fee) and Aguiar three. I do wonder if the more senior players simply wouldn't accept them?

[AbraMoDabre]

Even a 2 year deal would have been good business in the summer, with an option for a further year.

Even though we missed that boat, Kemp is still available for a below market amount - with six months on his contract and only being able to play for us or Franchise, it would still be excellent business to fork out 200k or whatever it would be, 2.5 year deal and we would make that back and then some in 12-18 months time. I still have a bit of hope that we will do this, but it does require an initial investment that I just don’t think we have atm.

[Trashbat?]

Getting out of L2 is probably worth more than £200k to MK

[iParadise]

Ipswich signing Ali Al-Hamadi from Wimbledon.

£1.75 million.

Some fee that

That's a crazy fee. Is he really that good?

[Bob's Orange]

That's a crazy fee. Is he really that good?

Ipswich Town clearly think he is.

[iParadise]

Ipswich Town clearly think he is.

13 goals in 23 games, although is impressive, doesn't scream 1.7m.

Jake Young must also be worth the same then, no?

[Bob's Orange]

13 goals in 23 games, although is impressive, doesn't scream 1.7m.

Jake Young must also be worth the same then, no?

It's quite an interesting question that initially I thought no, but when you take the 2 players separately, their goal tally this season is almost identical and they are of a similar age. So why is one going for 1.75 million quid and the other not reaching the asking price of 500k? (I think I saw it quoted)