26 years old in October and in the last year of his contract. At what point does a player become too old? Is it within our recruitment framework to resign Marley at 26 because he cost nothing originally? Do we have to say sorry Marley you wont bring us in a fee so its dead wages. Then look to replace him with a younger model who can be sold on within 3 years? Do we gamble on Marley? He could get 10-15 goals this season and become a 500k-£1million player. In which case it would be worth giving him a 1 year extension now and sell him in the summer. We done want to lose him for nothing. Especially if he's been successful.
I think if he was 29, it may have been a different story. Saying that, Cryne has also said in the past that everybody he signs up in the future, he hopes they will retire at the club if they are still good enough as they get older. If that's the case with Marley, there's still plenty of time at Oakwell left for him.
I suspect the recruitment framework refers principally to new signings rather than resignings so I guess they would be looking to extend hos contract. I guess the tipping point is knowing exactly when to sell before market value of a player diminishes.
I guess it should depend on scope to develop rather than age. I agree that Marley Watkins could become a better player right up into his early 30's. He's somewhat of a late bloomer. For me I would be looking to extend his contract as early as possible.
I fear this policy of signing young players with resale value Is gonna fall down on actually selling them. Sam and Conor could go for free next season. It's a great idea signing good young players, but if we can't afford to get these players to extend their contract beyond their initial one we'll struggle to make any money out of them.
no brainer for me - sign him up! My interpretation of our transfer policy is that we sign young hungry players that we can improve. The end goal is certainly not to sell them, that is just a bi-product of the policy. We sign 5 young players and improve them all. One of the five is sold for big money, the other four all stay through their best years and bring the club success. The funds from the one that was sold is reinvested in another 5 young players for us to develop and so it goes on. Only my opinion mind
On the field its worked perfectly in terms of recruiting better players. We also hit the jackpot with the promotion. However off the field we're currently no better in terms of income from transfers. I expected the sale of Winnall this summer and a big push to extend Conors contract. It could be happening for all I know. You've got to expect the club have a plan in regards to making money out of these players. It does worry me but I think they'll surprise us.
Didn't they cost us less than 500k between them? And since representing us they've been absolutely massive, key to regaining our second tier status. A captain who's scored 25 goals from midfield and created close to double that, led us to two Wembley wins. And a striker who's just scored 24 goals in a season, the first player in nearly 40 years (?) to manage that for BFC. I would imagine that's 500k well invested. I don't believe every player we recruit is a player we must sell in the future. By all accounts, the club are happy for Conor and Sam's contracts to run down. It's down to those two then to get themselves a new deal, be that here or elsewhere. And so the onus is on them to continue to excel at Oakwell. Maybe Moncur is Hourihane's replacement, and Bradshaw is Winnall's? Like stock control. All speculation though innit? Personally, I'm delighted that it looks like we'll be seeing Mawson, Roberts, Hammill, Conor and Sam still reds and at this new level. As for Marley Watkins, I think there's more to come. But again, it can be seen as a gamble not having players tied down. But then, what if by late September, Marley, Conor and Sam have stunk the place out and lost their shirts? Risk/reward. We've never been quite good at that in the past - look at the Vaz and Butterfield contracts/transfer messes. Fingers crossed the club know what they've got and what they're doing this time.
We won't sign anyone in their 30s. But he's already with him so would be treated differently to a new signing.
I was unsure as I was told we were close to not signing Hammill due to his age and lack of resale value to cost of wages. I didnt know if we went against policy on Hammill because hes such an exceptional player.
Completely agree as well as strengthening resigning Conor, Sam, Marley and Josh would seem an equally important element of the recruitment strategy. I can only see Marley improving over the next couple of years particularly if played as a central striker.
