Ajani Burchall turned down contract?

SlowDownDerek said:
We got both for well below their value because they'd refused to sign a contract. It's the same thing Waz.
Click to expand...
100k for a good league 2 player at the time is not below value, highly likely if we bid that and he’s in contact then we’d have signed him. 500k for Fraser at that point was fair too imo.
 
Waz afcb said:
100k for a good league 2 player at the time is not below value, highly likely if we bid that and he’s in contact then we’d have signed him. 500k for Fraser at that point was fair too imo.
Click to expand...

Are you really trying to argue that players on short contracts who have refused to sign extentions don't go for less than they would on a full length contract?

What do you reckon Ben Pearson is worth out of interest?
 
Waz afcb said:
Have fun rotting in a big clubs reserves/being constantly loaned out to lower league teams. If you were really that grateful then you wouldn’t be walking away for nothing would you?
Click to expand...
And yet again you demonstrate your naivety over how the football world works. You need to get over things like this, it happens, we cannot change it, nor can we influence it.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Are you really trying to argue that players on short contracts who have refused to sign extentions don't go for less than they would on a full length contract?

What do you reckon Ben Pearson is worth out of interest?
Click to expand...
Of course not. I’m arguing that at least these players repaid their clubs somewhat for the investment put into them, in the form of on the pitch and with a transfer fee. Pugh giving Hereford a very good season and leaving for a fee is not comparable to this situation. Ben Pearson probably worth around 3m in today’s market, so of course we got him for a cut price fee.
 
Waz afcb said:
Of course not. I’m arguing that at least these players repaid their clubs somewhat for the investment put into them, in the form of on the pitch and with a transfer fee. Pugh giving Hereford a very good season and leaving for a fee is not comparable to this situation. Ben Pearson probably worth around 3m in today’s market, so of course we got him for a cut price fee.
Click to expand...

So it's people moving on a free transfer you have a problem with and those that generate a small transfer fee are fine? Even if they've ren down their contracts and cost the selling club ten times more than the market value of this Burchall lad?

Are you sure it's not just that this guy did it to AFCB and Pugh, Fraser, Pearson, etc. did it to other clubs (Fraser also did it to us tbf but I only recall you taking issue with one of the times he did it funnily enough).
 
Its all a load of bollux.

As kids we could get the Topical Times Football Annual for Xmas.

What is it now ?..........The Bumper Book of ' Business Models ' for W@nkers !
 
At the time the feeling was that we had been stitched up a bit with the pugh fee., bearing in mind he only was at hereford for 1 season.

with hindsight was an absolute bargain, but relative to where we were at the time and what we were generally paying for players (nothing?), it was a significant sum. I think it's safe to say we wouldn't have offered anywhere near 100k for him or anyone without being forced to back then, contract or no contract

and if we were to use old cherrys black and white logic, pugh must have been sh1t and worth nothing as hereford were relegated to the non-league that season and if pugh was any good that wouldn't have happened :D ...

'Pugh signed for newly promoted League One club AFC Bournemouth on 4 June 2010 on a three-year contract, for a compensation fee.[54][55] The fee of £100,000, which was decided by a tribunal, was described as "quite excessive" by Bournemouth vice-chairman Jeff Mostyn'.

I don't think we expected to pay 50k, never mind 100. The fee is regarded as a 'development' cost. The argument was how did they arrive at 100k for a 23 year old, that to date, had a pretty unremarkable career for several lower league clubs, only 1 of which at hereford. Not like he had been nurtured there for years. Although tbf, he did stand out as a very good player when we played an otherwise poor Hereford side.
 
Last edited:
paul49 said:
What's the point of a new ground if we're back in div 1 or 2. That is basically the present philosophy. Bums on seats don't win you matches. You're forgetting that we don't own our stadium and the new ground was going to go where the players currently train. So you have to start getting the training facilities and the Academy sorted first.
Click to expand...

You sure about that?

1620965344251.png
 
DJ said:
I know one thing. All the talk of what benefit is there in investing in the training ground...if we had and were cat 1 or even cat 2, the youth systems set-up would be operating on a higher level with organised games and competitions and showing more ambition for such players as Birchall to maybe want to stay...
Click to expand...

This...

It's a domino effect... You build the new training facilities and get upgraded status... That in turn then attracts both better academy and senior players as the training facility (their office) is top quality...

As a result, both academy and senior players, not getting regular first team football, are playing a higher standard of academy and reserve fixtures... For the academy side of things this brings them closer to the first team a lot quicker hopefully, or at least moves them on to maybe better sides I(also an attractive aspect of joining our academy), yielding money for us, and for the senior players, it means we don't see examples of previous years where our fringe players look like they've never seen a football before... because they've had little if no game time, and when they do, it's against Woking FC...

The academy is key to the future of this club, at this level...
 
DJ said:
I know one thing. All the talk of what benefit is there in investing in the training ground...if we had and were cat 1 or even cat 2, the youth systems set-up would be operating on a higher level with organised games and competitions and showing more ambition for such players as Birchall to maybe want to stay...
Click to expand...
I don't disagree. However in this instance it depends on the agent: "Ajani, you have a choice of staying here with the clubs shiny new Cat 1/2 training ground, or I know Arsenal/Spurs/etc., etc., are keen to sign you...of course it's your choice..."
 
  • Like
Reactions: DJ
DJ said:
I know one thing. All the talk of what benefit is there in investing in the training ground...if we had and were cat 1 or even cat 2, the youth systems set-up would be operating on a higher level with organised games and competitions and showing more ambition for such players as Birchall to maybe want to stay...
Click to expand...

Does it though? How much more cash will it generate than we are at present? It's not like Southampton and the big London clubs aren't still going to hoover up all the local talent.
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Does it though? How much more cash will it generate than we are at present? It's not like Southampton and the big London clubs aren't still going to hoover up all the local talent.
Click to expand...

... the cash it generates is PL cash, as our squad and academy players are of a better standard so we have better squads that can yield better results... Spend £30m to build a training academy, that gives you a. better chance of keeping £150m each year...

In football you have to take that plunge at some time, if your intention is long-term investment... Otherwise you see what's happening now... We spent shedloads on senior pros to keep us in the PL... All 'ifs' and 'buts' but maybe an academy could have fast tracked 1 or 2 academy or fringe players... saving a spend of £10-£40m on ready made players and bringing more fringe players within reach of the first team... giving greater options for the managers and allowing more players to be rested/rotated...

But, it's not my money... :)
 
SlowDownDerek said:
Does it though? How much more cash will it generate than we are at present? It's not like Southampton and the big London clubs aren't still going to hoover up all the local talent.
Click to expand...

I did say “maybe”.

I didn’t argue whether it would be enough or if it had a financial return I said it would maybe be a benefit in this one off scenario. Of course I’m not advocating we should spend £10million so we could keep Burchill, but if it aided in improving our chances of keeping the next 10 Burchill’s then...

Along with first team players being happier about where they spend the vast majority of their time. It might not be tangible but no doubt if player x has a choice of identical contracts at identical clubs but one has a big training ground complex and indoor facilities and the other has portakabins and a field where they have to tip toe past dog poo to get in...they’re not going to look favourably on the latter.
 
... As side note to my earlier post, you do hear a lot of really good things about our facilities already, even tho they are somewhat makeshift with the portable pavilion and the half arsed fence wrapped in tarpaulin...

I know of a certain recent ex-player that moved to Newcastle that couldn't believe how basic things were at SJP compared to down here...

But... You should always be looking to improve... Improve the club as a whole and it will be so much stronger...
 
SteveJonesLegend said:
... the cash it generates is PL cash, as our squad and academy players are of a better standard so we have better squads that can yield better results... Spend £30m to build a training academy, that gives you a. better chance of keeping £150m each year...

In football you have to take that plunge at some time, if your intention is long-term investment... Otherwise you see what's happening now... We spent shedloads on senior pros to keep us in the PL... All 'ifs' and 'buts' but maybe an academy could have fast tracked 1 or 2 academy or fringe players... saving a spend of £10-£40m on ready made players and bringing more fringe players within reach of the first team... giving greater options for the managers and allowing more players to be rested/rotated...

But, it's not my money... :)
Click to expand...

You might be right of course. If it were my money I'd want to know what tangible improvements this investment would yield compared to the present situation. People who know more than me have said Cat 1 is unlikely even if we had the best facilities because there is only a limited amount of space for Cat 1 academies and there is already a waiting list of clubs with top level facilities.

We are apparently only an indoor training pitch short of Cat 2 as it is. Would Cat 2 guarantee better outcomes than what we have? There are fringe first team players coming through atm so. I'm not sure how we compare to Cat 2 clubs in that regard.

I guess it comes down to whether academies always pay for themselves in the long run? Brentford didn't think so but loads of other clubs obviously do.
 
DJ said:
I did say “maybe”.

I didn’t argue whether it would be enough or if it had a financial return I said it would maybe be a benefit in this one off scenario. Of course I’m not advocating we should spend £10million so we could keep Burchill, but if it aided in improving our chances of keeping the next 10 Burchill’s then...

Along with first team players being happier about where they spend the vast majority of their time. It might not be tangible but no doubt if player x has a choice of identical contracts at identical clubs but one has a big training ground complex and indoor facilities and the other has portakabins and a field where they have to tip toe past dog poo to get in...they’re not going to look favourably on the latter.
Click to expand...

I'm sure I saw that the training ground plans were going to cost £30m somewhere. That's probably why I'm a bit down on the idea as I'd rather that was put towards a new ground.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

;