• Welcome to the ShrimperZone forums.
    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which only gives you limited access.

    Existing Users:.
    Please log-in using your existing username and password. If you have any problems, please see below.

    New Users:
    Join our free community now and gain access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and free. Click here to join.

    Fans from other clubs
    We welcome and appreciate supporters from other clubs who wish to engage in sensible discussion. Please feel free to join as above but understand that this is a moderated site and those who cannot play nicely will be quickly removed.

    Assistance Required
    For help with the registration process or accessing your account, please send a note using the Contact us link in the footer, please include your account name. We can then provide you with a new password and verification to get you on the site.

Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
675
Location
Candieland
Its becoming a ever present year after year that we let 2-3 key players leave on a free. Its just becoming frustrating.

If you look at the set up they have at Peterborough that nurture there young quality players and then sell them on for a hefty transfer fee. Which results in reinvestment back into the squad.

It was obvious back in 2013 that we had a little gem in payne but nothing was done about it.

And don't get me started on the Bentley fiasco

If the contracts are down to Kavanagh then its poor miss management on his behalf. The guy has been involved in football for long enough to know better .
 

rigsby

Life President⭐
Joined
Oct 12, 2014
Messages
14,594
Its becoming a ever present year after year that we let 2-3 key players leave on a free. Its just becoming frustrating.

If you look at the set up they have at Peterborough that nurture there young quality players and then sell them on for a hefty transfer fee. Which results in reinvestment back into the squad.



It was obvious back in 2013 that we had a little gem in payne but nothing was done about it.

And don't get me started on the Bentley fiasco

If the contracts are down to Kavanagh then its poor miss management on his behalf. The guy has been involved in football for long enough to know better .

Quite simple Bentley will earn 10X what he earns at Southend after his move. We simple can't compete with bigger clubs. If none of us had Sky then we could close the gap financially but he should still move on to further his career.
 

Chalky

Coach
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
1,499
We are not 'Rubbish' when it comes to contracts. Football is a business now, agents have a massive impact on the modern game. Bentleys agent is not going to let him sign a contract is he. After last nights performance Jack Paynes agent isn't going to let him rush into a contract.
 
Joined
Apr 26, 2009
Messages
675
Location
Candieland
Quite simple Bentley will earn 10X what he earns at Southend after his move. We simple can't compete with bigger clubs. If none of us had Sky then we could.


I fully accept Bentley will go & move on to bigger and better things regardless of SUFC. But didn't he sign his contract back at the start of the 2013 season ? surely after his brilliant 1st season in the sticks, we should of extended his deal therefore earning a better transfer fee for him and not the peanuts which we will receive.
 

kentblues

Director⭐
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
6,338
Quite simple Bentley will earn 10X what he earns at Southend after his move. We simple can't compete with bigger clubs. If none of us had Sky then we could close the gap financially but he should still move on to further his career.

And we could have done a Peterborough and taken QPR's money- we chose not to (all be it with some protection via tribunal). Jack is a bit more difficult to fathom unless the club just miss judged how much he would improve and be even more effective in L1 (red faces potentially as a tribunal outcome will far less likely be appetising).
 

kentblues

Director⭐
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
6,338
We are not 'Rubbish' when it comes to contracts. Football is a business now, agents have a massive impact on the modern game. Bentleys agent is not going to let him sign a contract is he. After last nights performance Jack Paynes agent isn't going to let him rush into a contract.

I wonder if we make enough use of buy out clauses- sign an extension on a lot more money- good for you now- with a buy out clause that means if a big offer comes along you can go and get the big bucks if you want to or the club wants you to. If I was the agent I would be getting my client more money now plus the big move..

There are clubs who are good at this and others who are certainly not- there are good agents and some are pretty shocking. Being stuck on a poor contract to the very end = a poor agent, getting the best money at all times and the moves you want and security = a good agent but this is where the negotiating of a win/win comes in.
 

amsemp

Director⭐
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
3,960
And we could have done a Peterborough and taken QPR's money- we chose not to (all be it with some protection via tribunal). Jack is a bit more difficult to fathom unless the club just miss judged how much he would improve and be even more effective in L1 (red faces potentially as a tribunal outcome will far less likely be appetising).

Nail on head. Think Brown & co anticipated a steady season for Payne, still as a 'work in progress'. Don't think it was anticipated that he would be better in League One than he was in League Two last season. I think we just assumed that towards the end of this season he would quite gladly pen another contract with us and it wasn't seen as a priority.

So frustrating as tribunal will make mugs of us. Losing both Bentley and Payne to crap tribunal fees will be nothing short of a disaster.
 

Yorkshire Blue

Super Moderator⭐
Staff member
Joined
Oct 27, 2003
Messages
36,631
Location
London
Its becoming a ever present year after year that we let 2-3 key players leave on a free. Its just becoming frustrating.

If you look at the set up they have at Peterborough that nurture there young quality players and then sell them on for a hefty transfer fee. Which results in reinvestment back into the squad.

It was obvious back in 2013 that we had a little gem in payne but nothing was done about it.

And don't get me started on the Bentley fiasco

If the contracts are down to Kavanagh then its poor miss management on his behalf. The guy has been involved in football for long enough to know better .

Because we are too short term.
 

mrsblue

Banned
Joined
Oct 15, 2012
Messages
9,419
Because we are too short term.


Nail on head !


The club over the last 15 seasons have been happy to spend ridiculous amounts on ageing players/injured ex stars and generally over the hill last pay out guys,yet allow the top kids to run down their deals.

Bents will Defo go whilst JP's agent will be busy looking for a bigger stage for Jack.

We all know the club cannot hand out deals willy nilly,but sometimes they need to gamble with bright prospects.

Wouldnt surprise if Williams is released and goes on to better things.

Kightly went for nothing and I think has been involved in several million in transfer fees.
 

londonblue

Topgun Pilot
Joined
Feb 18, 2004
Messages
16,526
Its becoming a ever present year after year that we let 2-3 key players leave on a free. Its just becoming frustrating.

If you look at the set up they have at Peterborough that nurture there young quality players and then sell them on for a hefty transfer fee. Which results in reinvestment back into the squad.

It was obvious back in 2013 that we had a little gem in payne but nothing was done about it.

And don't get me started on the Bentley fiasco

If the contracts are down to Kavanagh then its poor miss management on his behalf. The guy has been involved in football for long enough to know better .

Who is Miss Management, and what made her so poor? Maybe she was paying the players too much?
 

Fairport

Coach⭐
Joined
Jan 21, 2010
Messages
1,944
Location
Shoeburyness
Just to redress the balance a little, we did a good deal when Gary Hooper left and got money after his transfer from Scunthorpe. I am sure the club do the best they can but without much financial clout we do not have much bargaining power.
 

Crawliano

LADYCHARMER80
Joined
Aug 18, 2008
Messages
2,622
Location
Benfleet
That's at least 5 in the running for a job with SUFC making the club a shedload more than the current setup. I'm guessing that if Uncle Ron just logged on here all of his money troubles would be over.

Proper nous.
 

OldBlueLady

Junior Blues Coordinator⭐
Joined
Dec 27, 2007
Messages
48,326
Location
Benfleet
It's not that we're crap with contracts, it's that agents play a lot harder ball at our level than they used to. They've been trying for the last 6 months or so to get Dan to sign.
 

Silencer

Director
Joined
Jan 12, 2009
Messages
2,349
Location
Southchurch Village
Nail on head. Think Brown & co anticipated a steady season for Payne, still as a 'work in progress'. Don't think it was anticipated that he would be better in League One than he was in League Two last season. I think we just assumed that towards the end of this season he would quite gladly pen another contract with us and it wasn't seen as a priority.

So frustrating as tribunal will make mugs of us. Losing both Bentley and Payne to crap tribunal fees will be nothing short of a disaster.

Even if we pick up c600-700k for the pair through a tribunal (still an injustice) the money will still disappear into a black hole as per usual
 

southendkid

Director⭐
Joined
Aug 8, 2010
Messages
4,956
Nail on head !


The club over the last 15 seasons have been happy to spend ridiculous amounts on ageing players/injured ex stars and generally over the hill last pay out guys,yet allow the top kids to run down their deals.

Bents will Defo go whilst JP's agent will be busy looking for a bigger stage for Jack.

We all know the club cannot hand out deals willy nilly,but sometimes they need to gamble with bright prospects.

Wouldnt surprise if Williams is released and goes on to better things.

Kightly went for nothing and I think has been involved in several million in transfer fees.

We don't have the money to gamble on long term deals, if Payne and Bentley do leave us it won't be a Kightly situation because new rules say we're entitled to money even if they are out of contract because they came through our youth system. We did have Bentley on a long term deal anyway, but he's not stupid, he knows his prospects are better by not resigning.
 
Joined
Nov 13, 2011
Messages
8,076
Location
SW1A 0PW
I am also in the "we are not rubbish at contracts" position.

With hindsight it is easy to say we should have used longer contracts on certain players but I also suspect there are a large number of players that we let go at the end of their contracts and we all breathed a sigh of relief that they were no longer at the club/on a longer deal.

If we highlight Jack Payne in particular, there is a very long thread about Jack Payne in this division and whether he would make the standard required. So plenty of discussion there .............. it now seems (85% of the way through the season - 39 out of 46 games) that there is agreement that Payne needs to be on a longer contract.

I would suggest it is easy to say that now rather than after a game earlier in the season where he was subbed because he was having no impact on the game. Remember those days?




Hash tag: It'seasywithhindsight
 

Yorkshire Blue

Super Moderator⭐
Staff member
Joined
Oct 27, 2003
Messages
36,631
Location
London
I am also in the "we are not rubbish at contracts" position.

With hindsight it is easy to say we should have used longer contracts on certain players but I also suspect there are a large number of players that we let go at the end of their contracts and we all breathed a sigh of relief that they were no longer at the club/on a longer deal.

If we highlight Jack Payne in particular, there is a very long thread about Jack Payne in this division and whether he would make the standard required. So plenty of discussion there .............. it now seems (85% of the way through the season - 39 out of 46 games) that there is agreement that Payne needs to be on a longer contract.

I would suggest it is easy to say that now rather than after a game earlier in the season where he was subbed because he was having no impact on the game. Remember those days?




Hash tag: It'seasywithhindsight

I wouldn't blame the club on Payne's contract at all.

Bentley however was established as a first team player so maybe more could have been done earlier.

But it's difficult to long term plan when players fall in and out of favour so much. It's a more expensive managerial style to have the constant state of flux.
 

Beefy

Life President
Joined
Oct 27, 2003
Messages
18,901
Location
Old Leigh
I remember the good old days when we signed all of our top players to long contracts on big money. And then had to stop paying them in order to force them to rip the contracts up before they sent the club into administration.

We have to pick and choose the players we want to tie down and be cautious with the contracts that are given out. The impression I got from PB's post-match interview last night was that the reason a contract isn't signed is at Payne's end.
 
Top