selling mentality

[Chrysalis]

I am seeing a lot of posts that seem very keen on selling our best players.  I am curious of the thinking, the logic, and the reasoning behind the idea of selling best players purely for money.  

 

To me the aim of the game is to finish as high in the league as possible and to try and win trophies, financially the perfect outcome is to break even or a very small profit, we made a million in the last financial year which was excellent  If the club makes a large profit it means the squad could be stronger than it is, if it loses too much money it puts the stability of the club at risk unless the owners are willing to be liable for those losses.

 

Also many posters seem to think 50-60m is big money for an established EPL player like we are 10 years ago, now days it does mean an expensive player but it definitely isnt silly money territory.  Championship players are now going for 20+ million.

 

There also seems to be perhaps the biggest issue which is that a thinking that new players can be acquired at the flip of a coin and they will fit in to our team perfectly, if it was that easy then the clubs bidding for our players would go for those other players instead to save money.

 

Is my ambition higher than my fellow fans , I want us to break into the top 6.  If the chance arises also to win a trophy.  That wont happen if the squad is dismantled.

 

However I do recognise based on king power's recent direction we probably will need to sell one first team player to fund acquisitions.  This I accept begrudgingly but I dont agree with the idea of selling players just so we can have money sitting in a bank account.

 

I wonder actually which camp others do actually fall in, build on what we have, or just keep wheeling and dealing for maximum profit?

Edited 1 June 2019 by Chrysalis

[jayfox26]

We may sell 1 player but no more.  And that will only be if they either ask to leave or we need some money to help sign 2 or 3 top new players. Im hoping we can keep all our players andsign Tielemans, a striker and a winger but im not sure whether our finances can stretch to that. I hope we can as if we keep everyone and get YT and a top winger and striker then we could easily be fighting for top 6 next season. 

[Micky]

Build a good young team and then dismantle it!

[Babylon]

Other than perhaps one person I’ve not seen anyone wanting to sell based on just getting money in, so I’m not sure that’s even a conversation that needs having.

 

What most think is that selling a player to fund purchases (if the people in charge think it stands a good chance of leaving us in a better position) should be left on the table as a viable option.

[coolhandfox]

For everyone except Man City, football is about wheeling and dealing. Look at Liverpool and Spurs both sold there star players  and moved the club forward.

 

Sell Mahrez allowed us to get Maddiaon, Riccardo etc.

 

It's about selling at the right time and replacing with the right players.

Edited 1 June 2019 by coolhandfox

[Babylon]

6 minutes ago, Micky said:

Build a good young team and then dismantle it!

Build a good young team and then just tread water in mid table until they all leave anyway, because we can’t afford the top class CM, winger and striker that we need. 

 

Without some investment, or some incredible scouting (which apparently nobody trusts when this conversation is had) we are not likely to it push on any further. 

[Chrysalis]

2 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

For everyone except Man City, football is a out wheeling and dealing. Look at Liverpool and Spurs both sold there star player and moved the club forward.

 

Sell Mahrez allowed us to get Maddiaon, Riccardo etc.

 

It's about selling at the right time and replacing with the right players.

It is fine when its used to fund players that are needed I agree.

 

But I will give you this example.

 

Lets say we want to buy 3 players, combined cost 70 million.

 

We sell maguire for 80 million, it gets us all 3 players one of them been tielemans.

 

Then a week later a 100 million offer comes in for chilwell and a 80 million offer for maddison.  We dont need the money as we already got the players we wanted, in your view sell those 2 players or keep?

Edited 1 June 2019 by Chrysalis

[MrMean]

Every club needs to sell good players.

E.G. Maguire for 80 million could mean 3 or 4 great players in a years time.

This creates a stronger club overall however we can't sell all of the best players or else the club will be too affected.

[Dr The Singh]

I don't think we will have a choice if those players want to move on

[Fox85]

I generally believe that people think we are skint and we need to sell in order to buy.

In fairness if we had a lot of money to spent we would of singed Tielemans by now maybe 2 others 

[weller54]

We'll only sell Maguire in this window imo.. He's replaceable so cash in while he's in demand and stock is high. 

[sphericalfox]

Is that Maguire's nickname?  

[Col city fan]

48 minutes ago, Chrysalis said:

I am seeing a lot of posts that seem very keen on selling our best players.  I am curious of the thinking, the logic, and the reasoning behind the idea of selling best players purely for money.  

 

To me the aim of the game is to finish as high in the league as possible and to try and win trophies, financially the perfect outcome is to break even or a very small profit, we made a million in the last financial year which was excellent  If the club makes a large profit it means the squad could be stronger than it is, if it loses too much money it puts the stability of the club at risk unless the owners are willing to be liable for those losses.

 

Also many posters seem to think 50-60m is big money for an established EPL player like we are 10 years ago, now days it does mean an expensive player but it definitely isnt silly money territory.  Championship players are now going for 20+ million.

 

There also seems to be perhaps the biggest issue which is that a thinking that new players can be acquired at the flip of a coin and they will fit in to our team perfectly, if it was that easy then the clubs bidding for our players would go for those other players instead to save money.

 

Is my ambition higher than my fellow fans , I want us to break into the top 6.  If the chance arises also to win a trophy.  That wont happen if the squad is dismantled.

 

However I do recognise based on king power's recent direction we probably will need to sell one first team player to fund acquisitions.  This I accept begrudgingly but I dont agree with the idea of selling players just so we can have money sitting in a bank account.

 

I wonder actually which camp others do actually fall in, build on what we have, or just keep wheeling and dealing for maximum profit?

Selling our best players is barmy

We have the makings here of a great young squad, a good manager and togetherness

We ain’t skint

IMO we need to contribute to this development with a couple of key signings and enjoy watching the evolution of this squad.

[Guest SO1]

8 minutes ago, sphericalfox said:

Is that Maguire's nickname?  

I thought I was on the Maguire thread. Sorry.

[foxfanazer]

I have no problem selling replaceable assets at their peak value. Maguire isn't preforming well enough for us that we'd be able to turn our noses up at £60-70m

 

The likes of maddison, Chilwell and Barnes should be kept though 

[st albans fox]

24 minutes ago, Fox85 said:

I generally believe that people think we are skint and we need to sell in order to buy.

In fairness if we had a lot of money to spent we would of singed Tielemans by now maybe 2 others 

and you know the details of our transfer policy and where we are on the incoming deals ????.

 

I realise that this is a place for discussion and opinions but there is often so little evidence for things posted ......

 

i dont recall this type of discussion past few summers ...... can’t we just discuss who we want to buy rather than who we want to sell (of our best players) ??

 

in case anyone has been asleep for the  past few weeks ......... we can nett spend 100 m if we want to ......I’m fairly certain that Rodgers wouldn’t have come here unless he was given assurances on available finances (and we wouldn’t have spent 9m to get him here if we were going to undermine him within three months). 

 

So why not just see how the next two months pans out ..... it’s a big market place and targets will come and go in the media although they may not in reality - it could be that our targets are all sorted and it’s just about getting the i’s dotted and the t’s crossed .......making negative assumptions is hardly going to help the atmosphere on the forum ........

[murphy]

40 minutes ago, Fox85 said:

I generally believe that people think we are skint and we need to sell in order to buy.

In fairness if we had a lot of money to spent we would of singed Tielemans by now maybe 2 others 

If we singed Tielemans we might get our fingers burnt.

[Nalis]

58 minutes ago, coolhandfox said:

For everyone except Man City, football is about wheeling and dealing. Look at Liverpool and Spurs both sold there star players  and moved the club forward.

 

Sell Mahrez allowed us to get Maddiaon, Riccardo etc.

 

It's about selling at the right time and replacing with the right players.

Exactly this.

 

The best 'selling club' in recent history is Atletico Madrid, they've been stripped of their best players numerous times and purchased /developed even better replacements for those sold. They've set the benchmark for the rest to follow.

[Dahnsouff]

It is not so simple.

Sell Harry to fund Tielemans (sensible - right?)

Does Ben, Or James get the arse when we won’t sell them into Pep’s crèche?

it does not have to be a major public meltdown (Riyad you silly boy), just a silent malaise.

Still damaging to all parties except the would be buying club.

Just cos it ain’t public doesn’t mean it does not exist, like hopeful imminent incomings 

[Foxxed]

1 hour ago, coolhandfox said:

For everyone except Man City, football is about wheeling and dealing. Look at Liverpool and Spurs both sold there star players  and moved the club forward.

 

Sell Mahrez allowed us to get Maddiaon, Riccardo etc.

 

It's about selling at the right time and replacing with the right players.

Selling when we have a good replacement is good business.

 

That's why selling Maguire is understandable. But selling Chilwell is madness.

 

 

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, Foxxed said:

Selling when we have a good replacement is good business.

 

That's why selling Maguire is understandable. But selling Chilwell is madness.

 

 

Or a replacement lined up I guess, such as Tierney for Chilwell, or say Ziyech for Maddison.

Would of course rather keep.

[Foxxed]

1 hour ago, Dahnsouff said:

Or a replacement lined up I guess, such as Tierney for Chilwell, or say Ziyech for Maddison.

Would of course rather keep.

I'd rather buy young or promote through the academy. Buying a player who you haven't worked with to replace one of your best seems something to be avoided if possible.

Edited 1 June 2019 by Foxxed

[Dahnsouff]

Just now, Foxxed said:

I'd rather buy young or promote through the academy. Buying a player who you haven't worked to replace one of your best seems something to be avoided if possible.

Yup, this is the dream for sure. The whole rationale behind the new training complex I assume.

But until that starts to produce, then we may still have to gamble occasionally.

[Dahnsouff]

Also, let us not ignore that if we are 100% unwilling to sell players, we have less chance to sign these young prospects in the first place.

(until we obviously start to win consistent trophies/qualify for European football)

 

”treat the club as a stepping stone" - reluctant agreement.

[hackneyfox]

If you want to make top six then you almost certainly  need to buy at least two quality players who are guaranteed to hit the ground running.