Returning to old ground I know but

I criticised the board on Twitter last night regarding the policy of buying players to improve and sell on but not seeking to protect your investment by including club benefiting extension clauses into the original contract. I was then roundly abused, is it just me that sees the glaring mistake the club keep making or am I wrong.
The clauses work like this, the player agrees a 1,2 or 3 year deal with the club and the club insist on a clause where if the club want anytime in the last 12 months of the contract the club can extend it a further 12 months they could include a modest pay rise as a reward for the player.
If the player doesn't work out the club don't extend the player leaves after original contract expires if he improves and becomes a saleable asset or an irreplaceable first team member (Hourihane) the club can extend his contract and either keep him for a further year or have more control over any transfer fee or when the transfer happens.
I was told last night players wouldn't accept it but yet Rotherham have the clause in Wards contract that's why he's still at Rotherham because the protected their investment I believe Chesterfield have just implemented that type of clause in Evans contract meaning they will get a fee for him this summer. With the type of players we are recruiting I'm sure most if not all would accept such a clause to move to a club in a higher league or if from the same league the promise of first team action.
I just think it's incompetent of the board not to have been doing this given its stated policy and if it had the club would either have even more money in the bank or three very good players still in red shirts and a better shot at the playoffs this season.

 

You are quite right, until the board stop being amateurs in this department we will never reach the next level.
This is why I'm worried for next season, we could be needing 12+ players, especially if we don't get contracts signed by our current players.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

But then what? You extend it a year but then all you've done is delay the situation by a year when you still sell them cheap in Jan as they only have 6 months left on their contract and won't sign a new one. I get a year is better than nothing obviously but it doesn't solve everything. Perhaps we already give players the year upfront, so we sign them for 3 straight away rather than 2 + 1 for example. You're also assuming that players would want to sign for that long, let's take a player we signed from League 2 to play in League 1 as an example. They may not want to commit to 3 years as they may believe in themselves and think that we could get relegated to League 2 and they don't want to be stuck there for years. They may think that we will stay in League 1 but that if they've played 2 years at that level they will be ready to move on to the Championship by then. They may think that we will get promoted but they may believe that even if we do they could re-sign with us if doing well or sign to another Championship team (or higher) for more money.

 

It would have meant we had more control over the fee and timing of the three transfer out this last window meaning more money or even better 3 players still in our squad. I accept its not the perfect solution but it's better than what currently happens eg Hourihane, Winnall and Bree already gone for a lot less than actual value. Plus possibly Scowan, Watkins gone for free in summer and Roberts and Mcdonald sold in Summer to prevent another fire sale next January.

 

I don't understand how it wouldn't just mean a fire sale next January instead?

 

It may not prevent players leaving it may still mean fire sales in January. I've said it's not a panacea. But it would have given the club a bit more control last summer and in January we may not have known the player with 12 months left on their contracts would step up to Championships level in the summer but we certainly did at the start of January so we could have said to messers Winnall Hourihane and Bree we are invoking our option to extend your contract for a further 12 months to protect our investment in you. They may indeed still have left but their sale would have returned a bigger fee. They could have knuckled down stayed played well got us promoted and signed new contracts in summer or still left. They could have got the Monk on and forced a move this January anyway but so what they've gone now so it's either a better result for Barnsley or its the same but the club either gain or don't lose any more it's a no brainer for me.

 

i raised it to PC before the season even started and it was dismissed as not an issue. happy for them to leave for nowt at end of contracts. Barmy as it means a rebuilding job every 2-3 years on 50-70% less than what what we could have had.

 

Didn't Mansford oversea the signing of Conor & SW and then failed to tie them down to longer contracts, this guy was a football agent thus knows every trick in the book regarding player contracts

 

The automatic extension is common sense as is automatic performance related pay increases. Basic stuff needs sorting out going forwards.

Seems like we are still very amateur in negotiations the Mcgeehan deal broke down because of a sell on clause with all else agreed. Daft.

 

The Stevie Mallan deal seemed to die a death, which is a shame as i thought he could be the ideal replacement for Hourihane.

 

You're kinda implying that you that you have more insight than our professional recruitment team. Do you really mean that ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

So far the board have been. Exceptionally. Professional

 

These are the sort of posts that. Worry me. Blackpool Syndrome

 

Not at all. It was widely reported we were in talks with St Mirren and we couldn't agree a fee.

 

Are you being serious?