Looks like John Stones to be named in provisonal 30 man World Cup squad

Totally disagree.

 

Can't we just be pleased for him rather constantly moaning that £3 million wasn't enough?

 

How much did Sheffield United get for the Kyles?

 

Some of us predicted this at the time. Perhaps we should have been consulted!!

 

I'm pleased for him and it wasn't anywhere near enough.

 

Exactly.

 

It was so obvious to see that Stones had everything and he was simply getting better and better every game. Nothing phased him. At the time, and my posts will be on here, i said he would go all the way and we held all the cards and ahould hold out for 5m min and he would have been a 10m player within a year. Not that far off the mark i dont think.

We let the crown jewels go for a song.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

He's a great prospect and good luck to him , he's probably as good as we've (England) got central defensively at the moment, which is a bit of a backhanded compiment

 

I hope you're not suggesting the man who saved the club is somehow culpable?

Wash your typing fingers in turps.

 

Can't we be pleased for him AND moan that £3m wasn't enough. Because it wasn't.

 

There are add-ons for international apps, and a sell on clause, according to what Flitcroft once said. Not sure if it's a % of the next fee, or a % of the profit, but either way, if he's as good as we're all now reckoning him to be and gets a £20m+ move in the future, will it stop folk bairning?

We got £3m for a lad who played ok for us in a shocking spell. The worst spell ever, according to many on here.

What if folk come in for Jennings now, how much do you expect? And if he turns out to be the next Messi, will it be enough?

I'll stick to my guns and say it was the right thing to do at the time, taking £3m when facing down relegation for a kid with potential. He's had 15 games for them this season and is getting great reviews. I'm delighted for him, and would be proud as **** if he made it to Brazil.

 

Clearly John Stones was destined for the Premier League but the most frustrating thing for me was the timing of the sale. We weren't in a postion where we were forced into selling. It wasn't a situation a la Vaz Te where a journeyman wanted out and was prepared to hold us to ransom, else run his contract down and leave for nowt. John is a Barnsley lad with a clear affinity to the club. If someone had put an arm round him and said "look, you'll get your move but not until the summer", I wouldn't imagine he'd spit the dummy out.

We could have quite easily refused to sell a key player whilst in a relegation battle, his value only liable to go up as he played more games. Also, we would have had the whole summer to stir some interest and create a bidding war, much greater opportunity to bump up the price than attempting to conclude the deal in the last 24 hours of the January window as we did.

Whether it's The Don, Cryne, or Mystic Barry to blame I don't know, but it must be said that our outgoing transfer dealings in the last couple of years have made us resemble the desperate middle-aged spinster who cottons on to the first bloke who talks to her at the bar, regardless of what he looks like.

 

I have to agree. I thought the deal was **** especially considering we didn't need to sell. If there are no significant add on clauses in the deal then we have been well and truly mugged off.

Excellent news for John though, I hope he is in the squad and I wish him all the best.

 

Stones asked to speak to Wigan and then Everton. Ball was in his court. He wanted to move.

 

Completely wrong there mate. Walker had only played twice for the Blunts in the Championship before his transfer. Naughton was more regular but he played just 40 games for the Blunts (all in the Championship) before he and Walker were transferred to Spurs. Blunts were relegated to League three a couple of years later so I would say they were struggling just as much as us. The big difference is what you said in the 2nd sentence - we're a soft touch on transfers.

 

And then consider these two scenarios:

1 - we keep Stones till the end of the season and are relegated, with Stones' performances dipping because he was denied the big money move. What price for an18 year old League One defender at a club who desperately needs to sell its best players to try to balance the books. Not £3m, that's for sure, add-ons or no add-ons.

2 - we keep Stones till the end of the season and two weeks later he's crocked, like his mate Luke Potter, like Dave Watson, like many of our players over the years. What price for someone who has to retire through injury? Er, nowt!

Anyway, didn't we sell a certain other young prospect for a relatively low fee, but with appearance add-ons we're never likely to get? Getting decent add-ons usually lowers the initial fee, e.g. the deal that brought Gerry Taggart to us and possibly Adam Hammill too.

 

Or another scenario - we call their bluff, ask for £5 million with add-ons and they agree. Blunts always seem to get top dollar but we never seem to be able to.

 

No problem, pal. I wasn't sure myself that's why I asked.

Did they definitely receive the quoted £9m though?

 

My favourite ever add-on was the £100,000 we received when David Hirst played for England. We sold him for peanuts, not much more than double that £100,000, but when the cheque for that international bonus thing came in, particularly as it was from Wednesday, it brought a smile to my face. Hirst played a grand total of 135 minutes for England, so we earned £44444.44 an hour on the deal, or £740.74 per minute or £12.34 per second.

 

Thanks for that. Totally agree.

We got 700k up front for Butterfield. A further 250k after playing 25 Prem games, and a final 250k if he got an England cap. All decided by tribunal though.

Look at Jacob though, he was going to Newcastle in January for £2m. He then gets injured and Ashley pulled the plug.

I can see the other sides to things like this now. The club and the players, not just what I'd like to see as a biased supporter of BFC.