We could have got more for Commons!

[Rapid]

I know I'm in dangerous territory here on a subject that has been done to death, reincarnated and done again but...

I was adamant that we could have pushed celtic harder when we sold commons for a paltry A?300k (reported?) about 5 days before the transfer deadline a few seasons back. celtic are set to complete a move for wolves striker leigh Griffiths and this has followed the same patterns as their move for commons.

they started about 5 days before deadline at A?400k. wolves have pushed them and now look set to land over double that.

does it matter? does anybody care now that we're challenging for promotion under a different manager and CEO? probably not. but still I felt very strongly on this back in the day and I personally think this is as strong evidence you can have that could have got more money for him. - view external link

[Rattea]

Do you think the club would be in the position it is now if it wasnt for the fantastic work done by the previous CEO and managment.

Do I need to point out the CEO got recognised by the richest club in the country and maybe world???

How do you know that was the amount and we didnt get double???

[swaledale]

Of course we could have got more for Commons, but we panicked afraid we would lose him for free.

Of course if the fantastic CEO (slick glick) had been any use, we would have settled his contract in the summer and sold then in any case.

P Rat you arent talking baout the guy who made a poor appointment of a non league manager, ran the club on the cheap treading water for over 4 years and then ****ed off to a club which operates at odds with his stated philosophy on running football clubs are you?

The current CEO and management team seem to be streets ahead in making a club like Derby successful but then maybe 4th in the championship, 11 pts clear of 7th place and having a quality coaching staff in place is beyond your understanding?

[Bear DCFC]

Rat:This is Rapid's thread. Surely you should answer his questions before asking your own?

Rapid:300k does sound very low, but we don't know it was that for certain. Do I care any more? Not really.

Swale: Go back to bed

[blackandwhite56]

Do you think the club would be in the position it is now if it wasnt for the fantastic work done by the previous CEO and managment.

Do I need to point out the CEO got recognised by the richest club in the country and maybe world???

How do you know that was the amount and we didnt get double???

So fantastic a performance by CEO and Manager that we never got Commons on a longer contract well before it only had a few months to run. We did do this with several others of much less talent who Clough did not badmouth in public.
(Unlike what he did to Commons when he was scoring 14 goals in half a season and was our best performer.) You have to draw the conclusion that they just wanted rid of him regardless of the price.
Tying players up on longer contracts doesn't mean they can't be sold.
Celtic got a bargain given what Commons has done for them and what he is still doing.

[Rattea]

You are making assumptions tho. Many previous assumptions on here have been proven wrong!

I was told at the time by a source close to commons that he had no intention of signing as he hadnt at Stoke and Florest previously.

The other point to consider like the club said publically when Green left is they could get better for less money. Would have one player under the finacial restictions have been worth breaking the bank for? And the following summer the club did bring in a number of popular players!



Would Rapid be happier if we had gambled and got nothing in the summer for him?

[Rapid]

Rat:This is Rapid's thread. Surely you should answer his questions before asking your own?

brilliant work bear.

rat the point I'm making is pretty clear. it isn't a dig at the previous manager, CEO or any of the work they did beforehand. as you read posts so thoroughly you should know that I was a supporter of the previous regime, so perhaps a good start would be not to twist this thread into one that supports your agenda again. you've already got a thread of your own doing just that so lets stick to the point at hand.

commons was one of the top scorers in the league at the time from in behind the striker. he was clearly not going to sign a new contract, that much is clear. the point I'm making and I'll spell it out is that we could have got more than the £300k that was reported.

we all know you poor argument of saying reported fees are unreliable. well there are a wide range of sources that quoted £300k. it doesn't mean tha

[Rattea]

I appreciate your point isnt a dig but I am trying to establish a baseline of truth.

There is so much if's and buts flying about.

There are also other factors such as thing like how much is a player worth. I read a great article a while back and will see if I can find it. Its about a lot depends on the selling club.

Now think of us at the time and now having to wheel and deal with a budget. Commons would have been costing a pretty packet and a legacy from Jewell. If you add saved wages and any incoming fee up ... say using your figures A£300k and maybe A£300k wages until the end of his contract saved. Plus any retained signing fee which is common then you may have been looking at around A£700k plus saved or in the bank.

On the other hand if we had kept him, using the same fictionary scenareo, we may have had to pay him A£400k plus an extra month as you do with players at the end of a contract. We would have been a further out of pocket.


The differential would have been A£700

[Rapid]

sorry rat but I disagree. a lot of what you said if fair but irrelevant imho. as you like to point out a player is worth what someone is willing to pay. I believe they were willing to pay more. we'll never know if that's true or not so there is no right and wrong to this debate.

what's my evidence? well like I said they bid a nominal amount 5 days before deadline day. again - look at the Griffiths situation and see the parallels.

like a good poker game you have to know when to hold um and when to fold um. we did the equivalent of slow playing a full house, checking rather than raising. we won a small pot but I could have been bigger if we were willing to gamble.

[Rattea]

I think its the same market factors everywhere. Not just how much someone is prepared to pay but how much the other needs to sell. and that is my point.

I bought something off the club 2 years ago a little bit different. I paid slightly over the odds for it against what it was. Someone got wind what I had and offered me double, tripple and finally four times what I had paid. I said no and they said how much and I said no amount I want it to keep. They backed off and agreed yes if it wanted it that much they saw my point.

So if I was hard up and desperate for cash would I have held out? No I would have snapped their hand off at double or tripple but I dont. Does that make the actual value of this item more than it really is?


Would your opinion change if Wolves hold out and they lose him for nothing?