Just seen somewhere that Potts had a release clause - which presumably allowed him to be sold to a club in a higher league as long as they met the valuation. This is highly likely as Potts was signed under the old regime who had form Just wondering if many other of our players are in the same boat - in which case we could lose the core of the team whether the owners want to or not. Hopefully the newer signings like Woodrow Bahre Thiam Dougall + Mowatt dont have them but the players signed over a year ago like Pinnock Lindsay Davies could well be up for grabs - does anyone know?
Maybe just maybe players won’t sign otherwise . Official site mentions some bigger clubs wanted to sign Cauley but he chose us maybe because we gave him a transfer fee clause in his contract . If that were the case should we have not signed him ?
Unfortunately so would I but if its closer to £1.5 million than £5.0 Million I will be very disappointed. Also it had better only be for clubs from a higher level. If we did get promoted this year I would be seriously annoyed if he then went to say Preston or Derby
I touched on this in the summer... it was openly announced that many players had clauses in their contracts that meant they had a significant salary reduction upon relegation to league 1. It seems perfectly fair and natural to have a counter balancing clause that allows a player to leave in a certain scenario if they've had such a pay cut.
Trouble is you can only insert what they agree to and if they have other suitors as Cauley commented then you have to tice them with offers other clubs won’t . No one knew that Brad Potts was gonna come good and invite offers so inserting a clause that doubles what we paid for him wasn’t bad business imo to secure his signature . Bearing in mind he could have gone the way of Hemmings etc. ,
We had Potts tied to a 3 year contract. Offering him a new one with a release clause seems daft to me.
The clause might have already been in his initial contract but only triggered when we were relegated. Suppose we'll never know.
release clauses are a fact of life. in many cases i imagine they're the difference between getting a player and not. "i'll sign, but if i'm really good, or you're really $hit, i want to be able to move on"....seems perfectly reasonable to me.
It was probley done at the time of 1st signing the club want the players wages to reduce by so much % on relegation Potts negotiators say fair enough but we want a minimum fee release clause on relegation.
Yes, this is the problem, especially with young upcoming players. Their agents will want to make sure they can move on, if the club makes a reasonable level of profit on them.
I would imagine that the vast majority of players(at all clubs) have some sort of clause like this in their contracts. The bigger and more attractive the club, the higher the clause obvioulsy.