Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info TOPIC: The Monday Debate - Contract or Non Contract


Club Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 5456
Date:
The Monday Debate - Contract or Non Contract
Permalink  
 


At our level and with a new manager in place I always think that this area of debate is interesting.

Yes we all want the best players signed up so if they do very well and move on then we get compensation.

However

With a virtually new side what do we do?

Put them all on contract and potentially end up where we were after Paul Parker with a load of sub standard players who we can't shift BUT cover ourselves should they get poached by 'higher' clubs

OR

Take a gamble - don't put them on contract and risk them walking for nothing


Difficult!!!!!!

Neil appears to favour contracts

Next point - One or two (or more) year contracts!!

Always one - yes I think so until say.....Christmas where I would urge Neil to sign again those that impress - Therefore I guess I am favouring 18 mth rolling contracts.

What does everyone think?

__________________


troll catcher

Status: Offline
Posts: 11491
Date:
The Monday Debate - Contract or Non Contract
Permalink  
 


Mark ,

Be Careful, Some you feel who have signed havent, thus they can walk away! Look on the official website from last year "Matt Bodkin has signed for the season" Erm... then walked as a free agent.

Read what Neil said when Leon signed "Come to an arrangement with Leon for this season" (Leave when you want?? no contract or clause?)

I believe you should have your best players on contract. And that meant from last year

Keds, Daisy, Bods, Perks, Mooro

No way can you have them all on contracts of over a year, but i believe the best players should be on 2 year contracts. IE if you sign someone whos scored 20 goals and young. Or a proven player who isnt 35.


Maybe Neil or the club will tell us whos on contract or maybe they wont as players can be tapped up but with those sc umbag agents at our level now then it would get out.

Mark do you concede that we should have had some of the squad from last year signed up whatever the thoughts about what league we were in the next year.

1 We were never going to sign a squad of conference players if we went up
2 We werent going down
3 We knew who were good enough and who werent.

Its a good thread, i hope loads reply to you.


__________________

Alexander O'Neal 1987 "I'm fed up cos all you wanna do is criticize "

Trollspotting

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



Club Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 5456
Date:
The Monday Debate - Contract or Non Contract
Permalink  
 


I agree in part

There was no chance of getting Keds to sign again, Perks was going anyway due to work commitments.
Daisy - yep i agree - but we don't know what was said to him last year
BOD wanted full time football
Moore will be playing for us this season

The problem comes from the new set of players we have - We really don't know yet (not mattering which level they have come from) who will be the best players.

I favour the Christmas signings



__________________


Moderator

Status: Offline
Posts: 4158
Date:
The Monday Debate - Contract or Non Contract
Permalink  
 


Good question Mark.

I would echo JgFc's comments about what signed actually means as it is no longer possible to assume that this means signed on contract terms.

My view is that we should never find ourselves in the position that we did this summer where there are no retained players - the core of the team MUST be contracted for the coming season. This probably means paying at least a retainer during the closed season or put another way spreading the 42 playing weeks wages over 52 weeks.

All closed season additions to the core of the squad should have to prove their worth to earn their place and in my view that means non contract terms initially. I suspect that this would not be too popular with old pros which is why it is absolutely essential that the core of the squad is always in place at the end of the season. However, it should not deter younger players whose primary focus is establishing themselves in a higher league side.

I think Christmas is a bit late to be talking of moving from non-contract to contract for 18-24 months since it is too close to the league transfer window to allow for any negotiation and if we've picked up a gem we could lose out.

Late season signings made outside of the loan system to cover injuries or as part of strengthening the squad in a promotion push/avoidance of relegation probably need to be dealt with differently with 'to the end of the season' contracts being issued since the need is temporary. Obviously in the case of 'promotion push' signings this could be a preliminary to being offered a longer contract if promotion were achieved.

Widening the debate a little there will always be player movement in the closed season but lets hope that this years experience of players not agreeing contract extensions before the closed season is unique. One of the factors probably has to be the reluctance of higher league clubs to pay transfer fees for players from lower leagues which gives rise to situations like that we experienced with Bods who wouldn't sign on contract terms to ensure that he was available on a free should the opportunity present itself. It would be a very brave (most would say foolish) club to make a stand and show a 'core' player like Bods the door if he insisted on staying on non contract terms. In my view one way to counter the problem is to focus on the area where at least we can obtain transfer fees and that is players aged 21-23. If we maintain a good balance of promising players in this age group on contract we will get a tribunal determined transfer fee if they reject an offer of an extension to contract and we at least have monies which can be added to the wages budget.

__________________

YOUTH are the future

****

"The worst thing you can do is make a committment and not meet it and I understand that."  Barrie Hobbins 14 August 2010

 



Club Legend

Status: Offline
Posts: 5456
Date:
The Monday Debate - Contract or Non Contract
Permalink  
 


I wasn't talking about waiting until Xmas to sign non contract players onto contract.

I was talking about getting one year players onto another year if they perform at Christmas not wait until the end of the season


__________________


Moderator

Status: Offline
Posts: 4158
Date:
The Monday Debate - Contract or Non Contract
Permalink  
 


Misunderstood your 2nd post Mark.

Do you agree with the principle of players earning their 'wings' as non contract players before getting contracts? It does fit comfortably with the principle of the Christmas 18 month rolling contract and reduces the risk of giving contract terms to players who may not prove to be best suited to the side for whatever reason.


__________________

YOUTH are the future

****

"The worst thing you can do is make a committment and not meet it and I understand that."  Barrie Hobbins 14 August 2010

 



troll catcher

Status: Offline
Posts: 11491
Date:
The Monday Debate - Contract or Non Contract
Permalink  
 


I agree with bruno about focusing on under 24s as even if they dont sign an extension we would get a tribunal. If they arent good enough we can just fill their position. We do need to get the better players on contract and we will only find out if we have any worth keeping a couple of months into the season.

I still dont think we have too many on a contract if any for this season. If we do its probably the ones who are exposed and wont be tapped up.





__________________

Alexander O'Neal 1987 "I'm fed up cos all you wanna do is criticize "

Trollspotting

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard