Building for the future

[Masbroughstreet]

Actually your wrong there are clubs who stick right to buy on players who will be out of contract the next year. Derby county for exsample did it with tom ince so did Smaller clubs however they were buying from league below them or same league.

The downside to it is the money is a fixed sum of money that is decided no by the buying club but by the selling club.

Say we did it for Moore and Ipswich said yeah ok that’s fine but if you want him it will cost you 500k
If Rotherham agree they can’t get him any cheaper.
However they have to give them a month notice.

They do it because it’s garenteed income for the next transfer window. PSG did it with that young French player they loaned him with a right to buy attached.

The selling club will always have the right to tell the buying club where to go. The buying club can't tell a selling club they must stick a right to buy clause on, they can ask but they can't insist. Who's to say we haven't asked? With all due respect, you're just speculating, you don't actually know what you're on about, so don't tell me I'm wrong when everything you've said is just a complete guess.

[mellowmiller]

Bear in mind that training and academy facilties cost money and that the odds of producing a series of good sellable players is fairly low (if they weren't. every club would be doing it).

So why did Mr Stewart buy a large plot of land at Brinsworth/Tinsley and announce he was going to build state of the art training facilities to be used by the first team through to the development squad?
Do you think he didn't realise it would cost money?

[millertop]

Building but I’d be happy if we sign someone before they are all taken

[caytonmiller]

Signing imminent

[Silly-miller]

The selling club will always have the right to tell the buying club where to go. The buying club can't tell a selling club they must stick a right to buy clause on, they can ask but they can't insist. Who's to say we haven't asked? With all due respect, you're just speculating, you don't actually know what you're on about, so don't tell me I'm wrong when everything you've said is just a complete guess.

Yes I am guessing but my guessing is done on logic and research ,not half assed information. Would you loan a player knowing full well you won’t get a chance to sign him on a permanent basis, I wouldn’t Moore was out of contract at end of year could have got him for nothing. If we had asked Ipswich would have agreed to add one on its cash for them in end of the day.

And no I said your wrong because you said we can’t ask for stipulations and that it’s all don’t by the selling club. No it’s not it’s done by something called negotiations.

So you can get pissy all you want mate but in my opinion we need to be more creative when signing players

[Masbroughstreet]

Yes I am guessing but my guessing is done on logic and research ,not half assed information. Would you loan a player knowing full well you won’t get a chance to sign him on a permanent basis, I wouldn’t Moore was out of contract at end of year could have got him for nothing. If we had asked Ipswich would have agreed to add one on its cash for them in end of the day.

And no I said your wrong because you said we can’t ask for stipulations and that it’s all don’t by the selling club. No it’s not it’s done by something called negotiations.

So you can get pissy all you want mate but in my opinion we need to be more creative when signing players

If you read it properly you'd see that I didn't say we can't ask for stipulations, I said we can't demand or dictate, there's a difference. You're just saying we should stick buy out clauses in, with no clue if we actually have tried or not. Isn't that 'half assed information'? You don't know if we asked Ipswich and they said no, which as he was their player, they had every right to. It's unfair to criticise the club when you don't know any of the facts, none of us do.

As for would I sign a player on loan who we had no chance of signing on a permanent basis? Yeah I would, Izzy Brown being an example. Not every loan signing has to end in a permanent deal, that's not what the loan system is for, but then your logic and research should tell you that already shouldn't it?

[mellowmiller]

Yes I am guessing but my guessing is done on logic and research ,not half assed information. Would you loan a player knowing full well you won’t get a chance to sign him on a permanent basis, I wouldn’t Moore was out of contract at end of year could have got him for nothing. If we had asked Ipswich would have agreed to add one on its cash for them in end of the day.

And no I said your wrong because you said we can’t ask for stipulations and that it’s all don’t by the selling club. No it’s not it’s done by something called negotiations.

So you can get pissy all you want mate but in my opinion we need to be more creative when signing players

Bit touchy aren't you Silly? 😕
The reality is we rarely sign any player we take on loan because we generally can't afford them.
There is very little prospect of any club who loans us a player agreeing to a clause that we should have first chance of signing him. Why should they as it would reduce their negotiating power.
We are what we are and loanees will come here, hopefully do well for us and then move on elsewhere unless the club radically changes its policy which seems highly unlikely.

[Yak]

It’s the same for a lot of clubs.
We’re no different it’s the food chain unfortunately.

[animallittle3]

So why did Mr Stewart buy a large plot of land at Brinsworth/Tinsley and announce he was going to build state of the art training facilities to be used by the first team through to the development squad?
Do you think he didn't realise it would cost money?

The vision of a state of the art academy and training facilities is a good one and in an ideal world you guys would have one .

Unbelievably costly , we paid for ours including the indoor facility out of our Sky tv revenue from the PL season , it cost millions twenty years ago and it costs over a million pounds a year to run it today .

There's only Stones , Holgate and James Bree who have come through and earned the club serious money in the 20 years we've operated it .

Before that kind of money is invested there are many pro's and con's to be considered .

Without finding the real talent its hardly worth the effort and expenditure in my opinion .

[Silly-miller]

If you read it properly you'd see that I didn't say we can't ask for stipulations, I said we can't demand or dictate, there's a difference. You're just saying we should stick buy out clauses in, with no clue if we actually have tried or not. Isn't that 'half assed information'? You don't know if we asked Ipswich and they said no, which as he was their player, they had every right to. It's unfair to criticise the club when you don't know any of the facts, none of us do.

As for would I sign a player on loan who we had no chance of signing on a permanent basis? Yeah I would, Izzy Brown being an example. Not every loan signing has to end in a permanent deal, that's not what the loan system is for, but then your logic and research should tell you that already shouldn't it?

You don’t know we have tried ether and like I said before if we can’t add them then why bother loaning for half a year.

No not every loan is ment to be a buy at end of it but I just don’t see point in half a year loan contracts and the clauses Ipswich added made it so they could pull him out half way and sell to someone else.

It’s just not smart

But that’s just my view