Jump to content

Chelsea to bid £4m for Luke Shaw?


saintchris23

Recommended Posts

but we are not those clubs...we are a lower half prem club right now. no matter what our ambitions are for the next 10 years

 

But surely the foundation for mixing it up with Man City in 2, 5, 10 years or whatever is to retain our best young talent. If we are to fall at the first hurdle and sell then you must concede it's not a very convincing start. We hear about "doing it the Southampton Way" - if he goes then I will fail to see much difference from the "the Southampton Way" now and the "the Southampton Way" i've always known.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But surely the foundation for mixing it up with Man City in 2, 5, 10 years or whatever is to retain our best young talent. If we are to fall at the first hurdle and sell then you must concede it's not a very convincing start. We hear about "doing it the Southampton Way" - if he goes then I will fail to see much difference from the "the Southampton Way" now and the "the Southampton Way" i've always known.

well, no matter what you think, it won't make anything set in stone will it.

we sold OxO but lallana signed on...

 

we could sell shaw but JWP may well stay forever...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well, no matter what you think, it won't make anything set in stone will it.

we sold OxO but lallana signed on...

 

we could sell shaw but JWP may well stay forever...

 

Oxo is better than Lallana. No disrespect to Lallana but he's not that good and does not have the potential to be a star player at the top level. He's a good player, i'm not intending to knock him before anyone has a hissy fit, but Chamberlain is in a different league. Make no mistake if Lallana had been considered a must have player he would have been snapped up too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oxo is better than Lallana. No disrespect to Lallana but he's not that good and does not have the potential to be a star player at the top level. He's a good player, i'm not intending to knock him before anyone has a hissy fit, but Chamberlain is in a different league. Make no mistake if Lallana had been considered a must have player he would have been snapped up too.

indeed..but I'm sure last summer, lallana could have gotten a move to the premier league..maybe not with arsenal but with someone and easily double his wages.

 

it was by no means thought of, regardless of what we hear that we would have gone up last season...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

indeed..but I'm sure last summer, lallana could have gotten a move to the premier league..maybe not with arsenal but with someone and easily double his wages.

 

it was by no means thought of, regardless of what we hear that we would have gone up last season...

 

I'm sure he could have signed for Sunderland, Norwich, Stoke etc, but the reality is that we were top of the league and these clubs don't have much clout against us in such a position. It was hardly a major coup to retain him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure he could have signed for Sunderland, Norwich, Stoke etc, but the reality is that we were top of the league and these clubs don't have much clout against us in such a position. It was hardly a major coup to retain him.

we were not top of the league 1 year ago..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

we were not top of the league 1 year ago..

 

But turning down peanuts from our cash rich base wasn't a big deal. When it comes to fending off the big boys it's a different game, but if we are to push on and start living up to the spin we now have the perfect opportunity to put words into action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But turning down peanuts from our cash rich base wasn't a big deal. When it comes to fending off the big boys it's a different game, but if we are to push on and start living up to the spin we now have the perfect opportunity to put words into action.

 

When we are chasing Man City, retention won't be a problem*

 

 

*Actually, that is when the problem will be at it's worst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would set a precedent. It would clearly show that a) We are club that desires to cash in on our youngsters b) We are a club without the vision that makes youngsters want to stay.

 

Both of these failures would clearly imply that we are not a club that is looking to mix it up at the top of the Premier League.

 

Complete and utter bo llox ans usual (you just cant resist looking for any hole to pi ss in if it means being able to undermine the club) - there is already a precedent which is known to everone one with a fricken brain who has a fricken brain - that ultimately all the power lies with the player, agent,family. If he wants to go, he goes and no matter what ambition, aspiration we may have, will make feck all difference.

 

We are in a position where we can offer decent and fair contracts to 17 year olds. Sure we will not offer stupid money, but we do NOT need to sell, so it wont come down to money from our side - will be all about what the player wants to do. This does not undermine our desire or ambition, just makes it harder, and anyone with a brain knows that this aspiration to hang on to best talent is not easy, given the culture of youth that 'want it now', but it does not invalidate it at all.

 

You want to take this in the direction of ****ing on the club (NC) again - will you ever give it up?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. That's a flip out, and then some.

 

Yeah. There is only so much pedantry and negativity you can post on a fans forum before people get fed up. Two thousand forum users and six or eight posters manage to screw the life out of every thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah. There is only so much pedantry and negativity you can post on a fans forum before people get fed up. Two thousand forum users and six or eight posters manage to screw the life out of every thread.

 

For posting realistic views. I see, so what you want to see is unrealistic happy clappy nonsense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

£4m for shaw puts the Butland fee into perspective. People are saying £4m is derisory yet on the other hand saying we'd be mad to pay £6m for Butland. You can't have it both ways.

Precisely.

 

In my eyes both cases show how absolutely mental the transfer market has gone in this country, particularly for younger English players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He has. It's a shame when people have to revert to aggression and personal attacks etc etc

 

Some people don't have the intellect to discuss things properly. I think we need to give Frank some leeway here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Calm down dears!

 

There is no evidence that Saints want to sell him and I'm sure we are doing all we can legally/finanacially/vision-thing-ly to keep him - what we won't do is pay unproven teenagers 30k/week - and quite rightly so, that type of silly-money is beyond us at the moment (and only available to two or three others).

 

If the player wants to go (for any number of reasons, and many of which may well not be in his long-term interest) then ultimately there is sweet Fanny Adams that the club can do about it. These are human beings operating in the rawest of free markets, not slaves or tied labourers.

 

If he did want to go (and there is no evidence he does) then on past performance we can reliably expect NC to get top dollar for him, maybe 6m-7m based on the figures reported so far. We could then use this money to buy an established premier league standard left back and use the change to fund the ongoing costs of the Academy.

 

I'm not sure a single case 'proves' anything either way but we can conclusively say that we are continuing to produce some top talent in the academy and long may that continue. All clubs are selling clubs, get over it, console yourself with the fact that Saints are a very good selling club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some people don't have the intellect to discuss things properly. I think we need to give Frank some leeway here.

 

You really are funny. For someone with such great intellect, you dont get irony do you... I may bore many with longwinded trivia, but your 17K posts could be summed up in in 1 'I dont like NC and what he is doing, or believe in his ambition'. There you go, I've edited your 17k for you. So instead of polluting these boards with your trolling and pi ss take, why not stick to the UI board where you can giggle like a naughgty schoolgirl, in the few moments when you can retrieve your nose from the collective rings of those with a similar opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Precisely.

 

In my eyes both cases show how absolutely mental the transfer market has gone in this country, particularly for younger English players.

 

Yes and no. Yes English players are overvalued but if Butland is worth £6m, £4m is sensible - indeed, Shaw is probably worth more.

Its about potential upside -and the market clearly values defenders/fullbacks more than GKs, so assuming Shaw and Butland both realise their potential, Shaw would ultimately attract a higher fee, a point missed by some fo dins and bulbs on here, but one any smart chairman would factor in...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Calm down dears!

 

Absolutely right. This thread was plodding along just fine until a couple of people got too angry about the genuine opinions of fellow posters.

 

If the player wants to go (for any number of reasons, and many of which may well not be in his long-term interest) then ultimately there is sweet Fanny Adams that the club can do about it. These are human beings operating in the rawest of free markets, not slaves or tied labourers.

While that's true to some extent, if Shaw were to decide to go it would be a significant kick in the teeth for our oft-stated ambition of producing and keeping young talent.

 

I'm not sure a single case 'proves' anything either way but we can conclusively say that we are continuing to produce some top talent in the academy and long may that continue. All clubs are selling clubs, get over it, console yourself with the fact that Saints are a very good selling club.

Of course it doesn't prove anything either way, it would be wrong to suggest that our academy is in meltdown if he leaves, and equally wrong to say that we'll never have players poached again if he decides to stay.

 

It would just set something of a precedent and send out a sign that, even though we're back in the Premier League and have decent financing behind us, our ability to keep hold of young talent when the big clubs come calling is seemingly no better (or worse) than it ever was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really are funny. For someone with such great intellect' date=' you dont get irony do you... I may bore many with longwinded trivia, but your 17K posts could be summed up in in 1 'I dont like NC and what he is doing, or believe in his ambition'. There you go, I've edited your 17k for you. So instead of polluting these boards with your trolling and pi ss take, why not stick to the UI board where you can giggle like a naughgty schoolgirl, in the few moments when you can retrieve your nose from the collective rings of those with a similar opinion.[/quote']

 

I want to believe in the ambition Frank, but we are now at the level where words don't cut it any more. Keeping Shaw is a perfect test to see whether the words do indeed mean anything. I hope they do and I hope we do hold onto our bright young players. Now please calm down and play nicely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

that is the problem...butland is NOT worth £6m right now...which would make him the around the 10th most expensive keeper of all time on earth

 

I don't think so

 

Thats not how markets work, though. Prices reflect not just what somebody is currently worth but also what they will be worth in the future (and that's alot with a youngster even after you adjust for the risk they dont go off the rails).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats not how markets work, though. Prices reflect not just what somebody is currently worth but also what they will be worth in the future.

I know that is how markets work.

it like saints all of a sudden saying Shaw is now work £50m.......does not mean he is

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No. I post what I think. I dont post to get a reaction. Huge difference.

 

I am posting what i think, but the issue for you and Frank is that you don't agree with it. Franks reaction is to have a paddy. That's very mature isn't it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes and no. Yes English players are overvalued but if Butland is worth £6m, £4m is sensible - indeed, Shaw is probably worth more.

Its about potential upside -and the market clearly values defenders/fullbacks more than GKs, so assuming Shaw and Butland both realise their potential, Shaw would ultimately attract a higher fee, a point missed by some fo dins and bulbs on here, but one any smart chairman would factor in...

 

They're worth that money only if they go on and fulfill the potential. There's absolutely no guarantee of that; particularly for Luke Shaw who hasn't yet played a league game and still has a lot of growing and development to go through. Look at the two lads who were poached from Leeds by Chelsea, Tom Taiwo and Michael Woods. Chelsea paid £5M for them back in 2006. Both have played for their England age groups. Yet they were last seen playing football for Carlisle and Yeovil. The expensive risk didn't pay off; they didn't develop further as it was hoped they might.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It would just set something of a precedent and send out a sign that, even though we're back in the Premier League and have decent financing behind us, our ability to keep hold of young talent when the big clubs come calling is seemingly no better (or worse) than it ever was.

 

Thats the whole point, it does not set any precedent. It will alswys be MORE difficult to hold on as a club that has just been promoted and has yet to achieve any prem progress - its chicken and egg for sure, we want to hold on to progress within a more realistic budget, yet need to achieve that progress to make it easier to hold on to the best talent. In the past, money has been a factor, but the players ultimately have the the biggest influence.

 

Talent wanting to go now is more likely than talent wanting to go if we were pushing for a top 6 spot - that is obvious, and I am not sure how this can be considered to be undermining the ideals and aspirations that club has - its the assumption that the difficulty of a newly promoted side holding onto talent that may want such a short cut to success, and who hold all the power, is somehow indicative of both a flawed ideal or flawed management at SFC that is wrong... and was being used once again to take this thread off he latest trolling venture by the usual suspects.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're worth that money only if they go on and fulfill the potential. There's absolutely no guarantee of that; particularly for Luke Shaw who hasn't yet played a league game and still has a lot of growing and development to go through. Look at the two lads who were poached from Leeds by Chelsea, Tom Taiwo and Michael Woods. Chelsea paid £5M for them back in 2006. Both have played for their England age groups. Yet they were last seen playing football for Carlisle and Yeovil. The expensive risk didn't pay off; they didn't develop further as it was hoped they might.

 

That's an interesting point. If Arsene Wenger had shown interest in Shaw perhaps it'd tell us more of his potential given his brilliant track record for picking out talent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talent wanting to go now is more likely than talent wanting to go if we were pushing for a top 6 spot - that is obvious' date=' and I am not sure how this can be considered to be undermining the ideals and aspirations that club has - its the assumption that the difficulty of a newly promoted side holding onto talent that may want such a short cut to success, and who hold all the power, is somehow indicative of both a flawed ideal or flawed management at SFC that is wrong... and was being used once again to take this thread off he latest trolling venture by the usual suspects.[/quote']

 

I've done my best to decipher what you're trying to say, so please excuse me if i'm wrong, but you seem to be saying that it's easier for a championship club to hold onto players than a Premier League club. Is this correct (yes or no will suffice to prevent confusion)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're worth that money only if they go on and fulfill the potential. There's absolutely no guarantee of that; particularly for Luke Shaw who hasn't yet played a league game and still has a lot of growing and development to go through. Look at the two lads who were poached from Leeds by Chelsea, Tom Taiwo and Michael Woods. Chelsea paid £5M for them back in 2006. Both have played for their England age groups. Yet they were last seen playing football for Carlisle and Yeovil. The expensive risk didn't pay off; they didn't develop further as it was hoped they might.

 

Totally agree, though you can also find examples of players who commanded eye-watering fees but have gone on to exceed their potential -Bale, Ronaldo etc. I have no doubt that Shaw's value will jump again (quite irrationally) as soon as he plays a competitive game or two (regardless of his performance) and I guess Chelsea are (rationally) trying to preempt that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am posting what i think, but the issue for you and Frank is that you don't agree with it. Franks reaction is to have a paddy. That's very mature isn't it.

 

Actually I dont have a problem with you because getting sucked into the stupid game a few times aside, you do mostly post what you think - albeit that a lot of what you think is a bit weird - but thats a separate issue. Turkish, Kraken, Sour Mash, Hypochondriac and a couple of others are perfectly capable of trashing any thread and do with monotonous regularity. Yeah we know its possible to destroy the threads and discussion points, its easy, there lots of techniques for it. Fact is hundreds choose not to pi ss on the bonfire whilst just a few cant stop themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thats the whole point' date=' it does not set any precedent. It will alswys be MORE difficult to hold on as a club that has just been promoted and has yet to achieve any prem progress - its chicken and egg for sure, we want to hold on to progress within a more realistic budget, yet need to achieve that progress to make it easier to hold on to the best talent. In the past, money has been a factor, but the players ultimately have the the biggest influence.[/quote']

FC, we're going to disagree here. I believe it does set a precedent. As I've previously said it doesn't spell the end of the academy by any means; but (if Shaw leaves, which I actually don't believe he will) it would carry on a trend that we as a club have had and will continue to have sincere difficulty in hangin on to our young players when the big clubs come calling. There have been plenty on here arguing that back in the PL and with Liebherr money behind us that would not be the case, at least to a much lesser degree than before. That even if young players wanted to leave we would have much more success keeping them until their early to mid 20s. I have consistently argued against that rationale (whether we are a PL side or pushing for a top 6 spot, I believe it makes little difference when the top clubs come calling) and I continue to believe it.

 

Talent wanting to go now is more likely than talent wanting to go if we were pushing for a top 6 spot - that is obvious' date=' and I am not sure how this can be considered to be undermining the ideals and aspirations that club has - its the assumption that the difficulty of a newly promoted side holding onto talent that may want such a short cut to success, and who hold all the power, is somehow indicative of both a flawed ideal or flawed management at SFC that is wrong... and was being used once again to take this thread off he latest trolling venture by the usual suspects.[/quote']

You're again twisting what is being said (or at least by me). I didn't say it would undermine anything. But (again, only if Shaw leaves) it is a poor example to leave behind, when we are embarking on a supposed new era, we have decent funding behind us, new training ground etc etc.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually I dont have a problem with you because getting sucked into the stupid game a few times aside, you do mostly post what you think - albeit that a lot of what you think is a bit weird - but thats a separate issue. Turkish, Kraken, Sour Mash, Hypochondriac and a couple of others are perfectly capable of trashing any thread and do with monotonous regularity. Yeah we know its possible to destroy the threads and discussion points, its easy, there lots of techniques for it. Fact is hundreds choose not to pi ss on the bonfire whilst just a few cant stop themselves.

 

Have you ever seen coverage in the house of commons? Our whole democracy is based on such debating tactics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you ever seen coverage in the house of commons? Our whole democracy is based on such debating tactics.

 

I know. Its a shambles where little worthwhile get done and no-one learns anything.

Edited by buctootim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually I dont have a problem with you because getting sucked into the stupid game a few times aside, you do mostly post what you think - albeit that a lot of what you think is a bit weird - but thats a separate issue. Turkish, Kraken, Sour Mash, Hypochondriac and a couple of others are perfectly capable of trashing any thread and do with monotonous regularity. Yeah we know its possible to destroy the threads and discussion points, its easy, there lots of techniques for it. Fact is hundreds choose not to pi ss on the bonfire whilst just a few cant stop themselves.

What have you provided to this thread other than moaning about others ruining it? There's some reasonable discussion going on if you choose to notice it and partake in it. What irony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...