Leicester banked £80m lump sum from Manchester United for Harry Maguire - and Brendan Rodgers is preparing to spend it

[LCFCSOULBOY]

I am kind of torn about what type of players we should be bringing in. Do we want to bring in younger players to develope only to sell after a couple of years at a profit or players with quality who will hopefully instantly make a difference to our current first team. My problem is, is that I feel we will just become a feeder club for the so-called big guys. We won't progress by selling our better players after a season or two. Also how many of the younger players will really develope into better players. By buying and nursing them we will end up with the crap and sell the better players. I know we will hold out for top money but I don't know how we will ever progress. Having a real problem deciding what is our better way to go. Any ideas?

[MPH]

17 hours ago, yag101 said:

Zaha is a fantastic dribbler and one of the most skilful players in the league, but we need goals from wide. We need a natural finisher to bury the many chances we create. Which Zaha is not. 

 

 

oh come off it... they’d need to be a golden boot winner to do that and we’ll never have one of those!

[Grebfromgrebland]

9 hours ago, LCFCSOULBOY said:

I am kind of torn about what type of players we should be bringing in. Do we want to bring in younger players to develope only to sell after a couple of years at a profit or players with quality who will hopefully instantly make a difference to our current first team. My problem is, is that I feel we will just become a feeder club for the so-called big guys. We won't progress by selling our better players after a season or two. Also how many of the younger players will really develope into better players. By buying and nursing them we will end up with the crap and sell the better players. I know we will hold out for top money but I don't know how we will ever progress. Having a real problem deciding what is our better way to go. Any ideas?

Support Chelsea?

[Raw Dykes]

8 hours ago, LCFCSOULBOY said:

I am kind of torn about what type of players we should be bringing in. Do we want to bring in younger players to develope only to sell after a couple of years at a profit or players with quality who will hopefully instantly make a difference to our current first team. My problem is, is that I feel we will just become a feeder club for the so-called big guys. We won't progress by selling our better players after a season or two. Also how many of the younger players will really develope into better players. By buying and nursing them we will end up with the crap and sell the better players. I know we will hold out for top money but I don't know how we will ever progress. Having a real problem deciding what is our better way to go. Any ideas?

I think it's clearly best to generally target younger players with potential. Whether you keep them or sell them, you'll either be making the squad steadily better over time, or selling at a profit.

 

We will and do progress by selling our better players after a season or two. We do it well, though. We've been selling one key player a season on our own terms, and this has been enough to give us the funds we need to invest in more than one position in the team. £80m for Maguire, for example, is over 4 times what we paid for him just 2 years prior. £62m(?) after Hull's bonus is still over 3 times. If you put that money into a replacement and still have enough left over to buy one or two others, then you're progressing very well, provided your scouting is adequate.

 

Scouting is so important for a club like ours. Luckily, I'm sure the owners realise this, and the great work that Pearson, Shakespeare and Walsh did behind the scenes remains to this day. We've had scouting staff poached off us because our scouting is clearly something special - any PL-winning XI built for around £24m(?) in 2016 must know how to spot a bargain. Despite losing backroom staff and selling key players, we're still up there, narrowly missing out on CL. We have a fantastic set-up that means we're ahead of the curve, and it doesn't really matter if individual scouts leave - the system is what's important, Managers will come and go, but the backroom set up is mostly outside their control (Ranieri had a go at breaking it up, I believe). There's a really interesting interview with one of our backroom staff explaining all this. Someone will have the link.

 

How many of the younger players develop into better players depends on your scouting, and I think ours is excellent. You're not going to get them all right, but I don't think many clubs have a better hit rate than us.

 

Do we end up with crap and always sell our better players? I think that's obviously not the case. Just look at the first XI. There's probably only one or two players in there who wouldn't be wanted by one of the big 6 clubs. We sold Maguire for £80m last year, who wasn't even our 2nd best defender that season, and had a better, younger replacement in the reserves all along.

 

Anyway, I think we're doing exactly the right thing re: recruitment. Generally target younger players, but go for experience when the price is right.

 

I don't know if there even is an alternative. If you only go for players at their peak, you'll constantly be losing money from sales, and the model becomes unsustainable for a club with our resources very quickly.

[Fightforever]

17 hours ago, LCFCSOULBOY said:

I am kind of torn about what type of players we should be bringing in. Do we want to bring in younger players to develope only to sell after a couple of years at a profit or players with quality who will hopefully instantly make a difference to our current first team. My problem is, is that I feel we will just become a feeder club for the so-called big guys. We won't progress by selling our better players after a season or two. Also how many of the younger players will really develope into better players. By buying and nursing them we will end up with the crap and sell the better players. I know we will hold out for top money but I don't know how we will ever progress. Having a real problem deciding what is our better way to go. Any ideas?

Only sell one a season that way none can have a huge impact on the club. Sign replacements a year earlier and then if they arent good enough buy one with the money we got from the initial sale. 

 

Wait a minute we are already doing that.

[Beachyboy]

On 02/08/2020 at 16:49, pmcla26 said:

It’s a sustainable model for sure but it’s one where we will inevitably lose out on some top targets by refraining from bigger fees. 

The players that command £60 million plus wouldn't come to us anyway, CL football or not, we may buy the odd £40 million player here an there in a loan to buy like the Tielmans deal. 

Edited 3 August 2020 by Beachyboy

[LCFCSOULBOY]

18 hours ago, Grebfromgrebland said:

Support Chelsea?

Lol. Sod off

[LCFCSOULBOY]

18 hours ago, Raw Dykes said:

I think it's clearly best to generally target younger players with potential. Whether you keep them or sell them, you'll either be making the squad steadily better over time, or selling at a profit.

 

We will and do progress by selling our better players after a season or two. We do it well, though. We've been selling one key player a season on our own terms, and this has been enough to give us the funds we need to invest in more than one position in the team. £80m for Maguire, for example, is over 4 times what we paid for him just 2 years prior. £62m(?) after Hull's bonus is still over 3 times. If you put that money into a replacement and still have enough left over to buy one or two others, then you're progressing very well, provided your scouting is adequate.

 

Scouting is so important for a club like ours. Luckily, I'm sure the owners realise this, and the great work that Pearson, Shakespeare and Walsh did behind the scenes remains to this day. We've had scouting staff poached off us because our scouting is clearly something special - any PL-winning XI built for around £24m(?) in 2016 must know how to spot a bargain. Despite losing backroom staff and selling key players, we're still up there, narrowly missing out on CL. We have a fantastic set-up that means we're ahead of the curve, and it doesn't really matter if individual scouts leave - the system is what's important, Managers will come and go, but the backroom set up is mostly outside their control (Ranieri had a go at breaking it up, I believe). There's a really interesting interview with one of our backroom staff explaining all this. Someone will have the link.

 

How many of the younger players develop into better players depends on your scouting, and I think ours is excellent. You're not going to get them all right, but I don't think many clubs have a better hit rate than us.

 

Do we end up with crap and always sell our better players? I think that's obviously not the case. Just look at the first XI. There's probably only one or two players in there who wouldn't be wanted by one of the big 6 clubs. We sold Maguire for £80m last year, who wasn't even our 2nd best defender that season, and had a better, younger replacement in the reserves all along.

 

Anyway, I think we're doing exactly the right thing re: recruitment. Generally target younger players, but go for experience when the price is right.

 

I don't know if there even is an alternative. If you only go for players at their peak, you'll constantly be losing money from sales, and the model becomes unsustainable for a club with our resources very quickly.

Cheers