Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Albion] Sima









Gabbiano

Well-known member
Dec 18, 2017
1,320
Spank the Manc
At 27 a buyer is longer buying potential. Agree with the other financial benefits / asian markets etc but I just can't see it being a whopper. Plus contracts kinda mean nothing these days if a player wants to go. Double plus he might need to put in a few good performances again soon. Who am I to say though? It's just a feeling.
At 27 you're buying proven quality. That's worth more than potential.

27 is around when purchase price peaks, top clubs are buying players at that age who can slot straight in and hit the ground running. You get 3-4 years of that player at their very best for that price.

Long player contracts are there to protect the selling club, it certainly played a role with Caicedo, and he wanted to go.
 


GloryDays

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2011
1,664
Leyton, E10.
Why regardless of contract? Signing players up to longer contracts is a big factor in protecting their financial value to the club.

Mitoma is 2.5 years younger than Trossard, just signed a new contract, and not trying to push himself out of the club. Trossard was running down his contract, and causing a stink within the club. We will definitely be aiming to get quite a bit more cash for Mitoma than we did Trossard if we were to sell in the summer.
I just think if a player really wants to go it'll happen. We're not gonna Sancho the guy. As fans we only hear the basic facts. 5 years, release clauses etc. Take the Mac Allister situ as an example. Signed a new contract, proceeded to go on to win the WC but we sold him to Liverpool for what many considered a low fee, without a bidding war.

Many fans felt £50m out of pocket there. For whatever reason (fatigue, boredom) Mitoma is blowing cold a bit more this season. Doesn't look like £50-70m of player to me.
 


GloryDays

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2011
1,664
Leyton, E10.
At 27 you're buying proven quality. That's worth more than potential.

27 is around when purchase price peaks, top clubs are buying players at that age who can slot straight in and hit the ground running. You get 3-4 years of that player at their very best for that price.

Long player contracts are there to protect the selling club, it certainly played a role with Caicedo, and he wanted to go.
I agree. Mitoma's the best player in the world if you only watch Match of the Day. He is a great player, magical feet. £40m would still be good money.

Edit - Totally agree with Caicedo comment too. I think it's just a case by case thing for the club. It became clear Caicedo's mgmt team are mercenary scum so we took it for what it was worth. Mitoma stayed in J-League to finish his studies etc. Two very different personalities which may be treated differently by the club when an opportunity to cash out comes along.
 




b.w.2.

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2004
5,182
At 27 a buyer is longer buying potential. Agree with the other financial benefits / asian markets etc but I just can't see it being a whopper. Plus contracts kinda mean nothing these days if a player wants to go. Double plus he might need to put in a few good performances again soon. Who am I to say though? It's just a feeling.
The contract clearly makes a difference.
 


b.w.2.

Well-known member
Jan 8, 2004
5,182
I just think if a player really wants to go it'll happen. We're not gonna Sancho the guy. As fans we only hear the basic facts. 5 years, release clauses etc. Take the Mac Allister situ as an example. Signed a new contract, proceeded to go on to win the WC but we sold him to Liverpool for what many considered a low fee, without a bidding war.

Many fans felt £50m out of pocket there. For whatever reason (fatigue, boredom) Mitoma is blowing cold a bit more this season. Doesn't look like £50-70m of player to me.
The new contract enabled the lower value move for Ally
 


GloryDays

Well-known member
Jul 5, 2011
1,664
Leyton, E10.
The contract clearly makes a difference.
Of course, it stops someone leaving for free. What difference it makes in hard cash is literally anyones guess, which is what we're doing. Lol.

Look, if we get £100m for the guy we're all delighted. If we "only" get £40m don't be surprised.
 








Joey Jo Jo Jr. Shabadoo

Waxing chumps like candles since ‘75
Oct 4, 2003
11,264
The new contract enabled the lower value move for Ally
No it didn't, without the new contract we'd have got significantly less for him because he'd have only had a year on his previous deal. We'd have also ran the risk of losing him for nothing if he decided to run the deal down. This was a compromise to protect the club from that eventuality but still went a long way to protecting our asking price. No way would we have got a deal worth up to £57 million for Alexis if he only had 1 year left on his contract.
 
Last edited:






The Fits

Well-known member
Jun 29, 2020
9,698
Man City signed Kovecic this summer. If you think a big club wouldn’t sign Mitoma at 27 for big
money you’re nuts.
 


Hugo Rune

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Feb 23, 2012
21,929
Brighton
Man City signed Kovecic this summer. If you think a big club wouldn’t sign Mitoma at 27 for big
money you’re nuts.
It’ll potentially be Man City if their alleged FFP cheating punishment is delayed enough. Pep has talked about him before.
 




BluesRockDJ

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2020
1,148
I just think if a player really wants to go it'll happen. We're not gonna Sancho the guy. As fans we only hear the basic facts. 5 years, release clauses etc. Take the Mac Allister situ as an example. Signed a new contract, proceeded to go on to win the WC but we sold him to Liverpool for what many considered a low fee, without a bidding war.

Many fans felt £50m out of pocket there. For whatever reason (fatigue, boredom) Mitoma is blowing cold a bit more this season. Doesn't look like £50-70m of player to me.
As I understood, the club, to their detriment , put a measly £35 m release clause in the new contract ?
 




JetsetJimbo

Well-known member
Jun 13, 2011
979
I noticed a little while back that some of the papers had switched to reporting Mac's fee as 55m instead of 35m. Not sure if that means the add-ons have been triggered already, but everyone was saying at the time that they were going to be very easy to trigger.
 


Not Andy Naylor

Well-known member
Dec 12, 2007
8,816
Seven Dials
Right. But no one knew that publicly when he signed the contract, or was it common knowledge he could go for a lower fee?
I have it on good authority that the lower fee clause in the new contract was known to nobody outside the club *at the time it was negotiated* and Ally Mac's people.
 








Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here