Blessing in disguise?

[swaledale]

Martin's a poor example as he left for the same price we paid for him, nowt. Waghorn leaving is, as you say, probably down to us no longer being able to pay him what he wants.

I can't find it at the moment but I saw a list online a few months back of players we'd bought for a few million and who left us for nowt over recent seasons. There was 40 odd million in incoming transfers of players, all of whom left on a free.

My point, which you seem to be missing, is that, if we looked annually at the players we have, how they are doing, how they fit in with the style, value for money.......... and decided who was likely to still be wanted 3 years down the road and give them an extension on their contracts and try to unload the ones we don't want. That way players don't get to the situation where they have just one season left on their contracts and decide that they're happy to stay for that last season and then get to leave on a free and thereby negotiate higher signing on bonus for themselves. My suggestion was to stop allowing contracts to run down by doing something about it.

Question. Is my idea of annually running the rule over the squad and offering players we are likely to want to keep an extension and unloading those we are less enamoured with a good idea? It's one used at many Dutch clubs.

I would say that is what generally happens at clubs, but can be complicated if a team is having a poor season, as we were and a player wont sign an extension whilst relegation is a possibility. Or if a team is in with a chance of promotion and the club would not want to extend a players contract if that were the case, as they dont rate hm for the prem and need to offload players to bring others in.

Then of course there is the added complication of swapping managers every season, its highly likely that a new manager won't fancy some or indeed many of the players that had contracts extended under the previous manager!

Add in FFP, can't increase wages on an extended contract until another player leaves at the end of a season and its not quite as simple as you make it out to be.

I mean have Derby actually had a plan thats lasted for more than 6 months in the past 3 years?

[Ramshank72]

I would say that is what generally happens at clubs, but can be complicated if a team is having a poor season, as we were and a player wont sign an extension whilst relegation is a possibility. Or if a team is in with a chance of promotion and the club would not want to extend a players contract if that were the case, as they dont rate hm for the prem and need to offload players to bring others in.

Then of course there is the added complication of swapping managers every season, its highly likely that a new manager won't fancy some or indeed many of the players that had contracts extended under the previous manager!

Add in FFP, can't increase wages on an extended contract until another player leaves at the end of a season and its not quite as simple as you make it out to be.

I mean have Derby actually had a plan thats lasted for more than 6 months in the past 3 years?

Spot on, but I think Mel has had many long term plans, but got bored after 6 months and changed his mind!

[ramAnag]

Spot on, but I think Mel has had many long term plans, but got bored after 6 months and changed his mind!

Welcome Ramshank.

As you’ve described yourself as having been ‘lurking’ for a while you’ll know that I’ve been a long term supporter of Mel Morris.
That support will end if it emerges that he’s been ‘overseeing’ financial wrongdoing that sees DCFC heavily penalised...but as regards managers and long term plans I’m not sure he can be blamed for becoming ‘bored’.

We’ll never know the whole truth but of the (nine?) managers we’ve had during Morris’ tenure I can think of only Rowett who Mel may have become bored with.

Of the others...McClaren made himself unemployable at Derby. Clement and Pearson appear to be very flawed human beings (as their subsequent records elsewhere would suggest), there was nothing Morris could have done to keep Lampard, and Cocu was sabotaged from the off by the consequences of ‘Joinersgate’ and perhaps his failure to understand the requirements of the Championship.

[Ramshank72]

Thank you RamAnag.
Yes good point.
I never understood why he got rid of Maclaren the second time though. From Maclaren's comments quoted in the Pride book (excellent read btw), he seemed perplexed himself.