brad blit Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 Considering 'some' would think that its more likley we will stay in League 1 if we win on Saturday after the result on Tuesday (and previous 2 games), perhaps its time we look ahead to our squad next year and work out who should stay/go.... I dont have a list of people up for renewal this year but im sure im right in saying the following are up - Marvin Elliott Louis Carey Stephen Pearson Liam Fontaine I know JET only has 1 more year left but who else in this catagory and should we look to tie them up for another year minimum? I would like to see Gillett and Wade Elliott signed on if possible as they are out of contract at respective clubs this summer, Tyrone Barnett can leave as he's not offered us anything (currently) and I would say we still need another good striker (similar to Baldock) to complete the squad - dont see no sense in too much overhaul as the constant change in personnel is probably one of the reasons we have struggled last couple years, we need stability with less quantity and more quality added Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
!james Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 As far as I am aware: Summer 2014: Fontaine Carey Pearson Elliott Summer 2015: Parish Burns Moloney Reid Bryan Pack Wynter Baldock JET Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brad blit Posted March 14, 2014 Author Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 You could argue that we should be potentially looking to tie down all of next years players on that list - not many people would say they wouldnt be happy to see any of them in starting 11 especially considering the ages of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 As far as I am aware: Summer 2014:Fontaine Carey Pearson Elliott Summer 2015: Parish Burns Moloney Reid Bryan Pack Wynter Baldock JET Get rid of all apart from Pearson give him a one year deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 its a little early to be speaking of this, but JeT, Burns and Baldock aside the rest don't deserve new contracts yet, remember they are the same players who put us in this situation in the first place, If they start off well next season then the club should think about renewing but not before then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derk94 Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 Get rid of all apart from Pearson give him a one year deal. So you would release Marv but keep Pearson? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dezgimed Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 So long as we're still in League 1, we need Marv 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashton_fan Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 Baldock may get offers from Championship clubs (maybe JET also), if that's the case they'll probably be on their way since they'll be offered much higher wages than we can give them in L1, and the club will want to sell with only one year left on their contracts if they refuse to sign an extension. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Always Believesham Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 If you don't start talking about contracts this summer for those OOC next year, they will start to look elsewhere, if they do start well, it will just raise their profile and get better offers. another 2 year contract a player that performs between Feb and May for every place we finish above the relegation zone; if the worst happens, as Monkeh says, these are the players that have got us into this position Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samo II Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 its a little early to be speaking of this, but JeT, Burns and Baldock aside the rest don't deserve new contracts yet, remember they are the same players who put us in this situation in the first place, If they start off well next season then the club should think about renewing but not before then We'd be mad to do that in the case of JET and Baldock. Unless we tie them down, we have to cash it, and regardless of where we are now, neither of these players are the most culpable, and could contribute a lot in a more stable team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 So you would release Marv but keep Pearson? Yep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 We'd be mad to do that in the case of JET and Baldock. Unless we tie them down, we have to cash it, and regardless of where we are now, neither of these players are the most culpable, and could contribute a lot in a more stable team. aye thats why a said JeT and Baldock aside, those are the two I would tie down, the club are damned if they do damned if they don't really, tie them down now and we have another season like this and they will be accused of handing out big contracts to under performing players don't tie them down and we start well they will be accused of no forward thinking, A player can only start to look and agree to sign for another club in the final 6 months of their contracts (offically I think) so thats why I would wait and see how they start the season first, Baldock and JeT aside Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexukhc Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 I would give Bryan and Reid long term contracts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 I would give Bryan and Reid long term contracts 2 years max, remember James Wilson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich-TWSC- Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 You've only got four players out-of-contract? Sheesh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad Cyril Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 Get rid of all apart from Pearson give him a one year deal. so a player on a bosman and looking at a lovely signing on fee and two to three years of fresh job security.....why exactly would he want to bin all that for just a year with us exactly? perhaps what he really would want is one of those splendid 'pay as you play' deals. I think the reality is that it is harder to sign players for peanuts than we realise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tins Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 As far as I am aware: Summer 2014: Fontaine - Release Carey - Release Pearson - 1 year pay as you play contract Elliott - 1 year Summer 2015: Parish - From what I've seen - release Burns - 1 year to 2016 Moloney - 1 years to 2016 Reid - 2 years to 2017 Bryan - 2 years to 2017 Pack - 1 year to 2016 Wynter - depends how next season goes Baldock - 2 years to 2017 JET - If next season starts well then 2 years to 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciderbeans Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 In fairness Bryan and Reid have been much more heavily involved in the first team in comparison to Wilson and have shown they can compete. Long term contracts for these two should be of no concern. Regardless of people's worries, we should give Jet and baldock at the very minimum 2 year deals. We have seen what they can do and there value will only increase given they are not old. It would be silly to be hesitant and lose out altogether. In regards to centre backs, we have one too many in el abd. I would be happy with osbourne, Williams and flint with brundle, batten as last resort. Especially if we play 4 at the back as we have Moloney and Cunningham out wide with Bryan and osbourne that can cover. I wish I had an understanding of why we signed el abd on such a long contract... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 In fairness Bryan and Reid have been much more heavily involved in the first team in comparison to Wilson and have shown they can compete. Long term contracts for these two should be of no concern. Regardless of people's worries, we should give Jet and baldock at the very minimum 2 year deals. We have seen what they can do and there value will only increase given they are not old. It would be silly to be hesitant and lose out altogether. In regards to centre backs, we have one too many in el abd. I would be happy with osbourne, Williams and flint with brundle, batten as last resort. Especially if we play 4 at the back as we have Moloney and Cunningham out wide with Bryan and osbourne that can cover. I wish I had an understanding of why we signed el abd on such a long contract... You need 4 first team centre backs, we have 4 with 2 currently unavailable so we need to bring some one in, I will have a tenner with you now that Brundle will leave this club without playing for us and go on to play in the conference somewhere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
You Do The Dziekanowski Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 You've only got four players out-of-contract? Sheesh. That's what happens when you don't loan Tottenham Hotspurs u20's and actually pay money for your own players to keep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickle Rick Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 2 years max, remember James Wilson How can he be forgotten? What's your point? Bryan and Reid have both played around about (or more) times than Wilson - and looked much better than Wilson and his hype. This being in a much shorter span of time. We need to keep these players for as long as we maintain and look to improve for the next 4/5 years. Unless someone 'big' comes in for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexukhc Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 What Scrumpy said Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 How can he be forgotten? What's your point? Bryan and Reid have both played around about (or more) times than Wilson - and looked much better than Wilson and his hype. This being in a much shorter span of time. We need to keep these players for as long as we maintain and look to improve for the next 4/5 years. Unless someone 'big' comes in for them. Reid and Bryan both promsing young players like wilson, accept we gave wilson a massive long contract and he went backwards, The same could happen with reid and bryan hence the two years, The club should never issue 4 or 5 year contracts again full stop, its what got us in such a mess with regards to the wage bill in the first place (recently and back in 82) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickle Rick Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 Reid and Bryan both promsing young players like wilson, accept we gave wilson a massive long contract and he went backwards, The same could happen with reid and bryan hence the two years, The club should never issue 4 or 5 year contracts again full stop, its what got us in such a mess with regards to the wage bill in the first place (recently and back in 82) Not justified Monk. Wilson may have had a long(ish) contract, but never stayed fit and never looked as good as the 'hype' attached. He also didn't go 'forwards' - unlike the already established Reid & Bryan. Wilson never 'established' himself. Bryan and Reid have stepped up and proven their worth. We are trying to create an ethos of bringing our best players through and putting faith in their ability - these two are the flagship products and the prime example. They're both clearly good enough and can step up a level - compare them to Wilson and it's fairly pointless. Both players need to be put on long term contracts as we continue to bring our crop of youngsters through out system. 2 year deals are a joke to the future of our club. Why put them on 2 year deals, develop them and then let them go on the cheap or free at the end of their lame 2 year deals to then move on. A long term contract would ensure good business IF we were to sell them on. They would even be cheaper on the long run than signing new players after their deals expire as we'd have to: A. Buy a replacement player/sign one (most probably) on higher wages. B. Keep renewing deals and give them additional signing on fees and higher wage hikes, along with agent fees each time they sign a new deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 Not justified Monk. Wilson may have had a long(ish) contract, but never stayed fit and never looked as good as the 'hype' attached. Bryan and Reid have stepped up and proven their worth. We are trying to create an ethos of bringing our best players through and putting faith in their ability - these two are the flagship products and an example. They're both clearly good enough and can step up a level - compare them to Wilson and it's fairly pointless. Both players need to be put on long term contracts as we continue to bring our crop of youngsters through out system. 2 year deals are a joke to the future of our club. Why put them on 2 year deals, develop them and then let them go on the cheap or free at the end of their lame 2 year deals to then move on. A long term contract would ensure good business IF we were to sell them on. and give them a 5 year deal and they snap their leg then be out for 18 months? equally a joke, Offer them a two year deal with the option of an extenstion if they play a fixed amount of games, its the safe bet not a gamble, Long term contracts mean nothing, if a player wants to move he moves regardless of how many years he has left Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robbored Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 So you would release Marv but keep Pearson? So would I. Marv is way past this best. Time for him to move on to see out his career. Pearson is a far more gifted footballer than Marv has ever been and still has lots to offer. Carey won't get another playing contract and I understand that Fontaine has been already told that he can leave City this summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich-TWSC- Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 That's what happens when you don't loan Tottenham Hotspurs u20's and actually pay money for your own players to keep I'm not wanting to derail the thread most of L1 and L2 have players on a 1 or 2 year contract. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I BELIEVE Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 So you would release Marv but keep Pearson? I would as well Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pickle Rick Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 and give them a 5 year deal and they snap their leg then be out for 18 months? equally a joke, Offer them a two year deal with the option of an extenstion if they play a fixed amount of games, its the safe bet not a gamble, Long term contracts mean nothing, if a player wants to move he moves regardless of how many years he has left El Abd has a 3.5 year deal at 29. He's also bound to be on more money. This could have been a 4 year deal if signed in the summer - he could break his leg *touch wood* and struggle in his latter years to make it back. So with this in mind a good 4 year deal to two of our brightest prospects who've established themselves in the first team would be a gamble? Weigh it up lad. If the board/club decide on what's suitable for a guy's contract at 29, whats to stand in the way of a similar in length contract for the players we aim to further develop and become the clubs talismatic figures? Again, we can also get good money if a team comes in, rather than sell them on the cheap when they've a year left of their contract. We'd get more money and justify the sums already put into our youth setup, much like Southampton and Crewe do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted March 14, 2014 Report Share Posted March 14, 2014 El Abd has a 3.5 year deal at 29. He's also bound to be on more money. This could have been a 4 year deal if signed in the summer - he could break his leg *touch wood* and struggle in his latter years to make it back. So with this in mind a good 4 year deal to two of our brightest prospects who've established themselves in the first team would be a gamble? Weigh it up lad. If the board/club decide on what's suitable for a guy's contract at 29, whats to stand in the way of a similar in length contract for the players we aim to further develop and become the clubs talismatic figures? Again, we can also get good money if a team comes in, rather than sell them on the cheap when they've a year left of their contract. We'd get more money and justify the sums already put into our youth setup, much like Southampton and Crewe do. I disagree with that contract as well, anyway I thought it was only a 3 year deal he was on, I'm not going to agree with you on it as I think long contracts are too much of a risk and drain on clubs resorces given the fact that we don't have a good track record with them, That and most lower league clubs don't offer them ether, Unless the player is bale like I would never offer anything more then 2 years with an option for a third, Players have all the power they move if they want regardless of legth of time, they simply sulk and go on strike until they get a move thus forcing the clubs hand anyway, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.