Chelsea to bid £4m for Luke Shaw?

[shurlock]

Yep, exactly, that is entirely my point. I've been saying this for some time and have consistently been shouted down on it, with various posters claiming that that days of AOC, Theo etc leaving so early are behind us and we now have a much better chance of keeping players until their early twenties and beyond, even if the big clubs come calling. I simply don't believe that to be the case.

 

Disagree- the whole way we dealt with the sale of AOC and pushed Arsenal to the brink, extracting a decent price for him speaks volumes to our commitment to keep hold of our best youngsters. There is no way Lowe would have or been able to play the same game because the first instinct would have been to sell and let Arsenal call our bluff.

While we ultimately lost the fight the keep to AOC, you're wrong if you dont think there has been some change -and that bodes well for future as we negotiate from an increasing position of strength (prem league status etc).

Edited 3 July, 2012 by shurlock

[The Kraken]

Disagree- the whole way we dealt with the sale of AOC and pushed Arsenal to the brink, extracting a decent price for him speaks volumes to our desire to keep hold of our best youngsters. There is no way Lowe would have played the same game because the first instinct would have been to sell and let Arsenal call our bluff.

While we ultimately lost the fight the keep to AOC, you're wrong if you dont think there has been some change.

Sorry but I disagree entirely. Lowe got (at the time) great prices for Theo and Bale. And Theo was only under pre-contract so it was potentially an ever tougher sell, to get a deal worth at the time up to £12M was "eye-popping" to coin a current phrase. I'll criticise Lowe for plenty; for extracting a decent price for a player, no way, he was extremely good in that regard. Add in the likes of Bridge, Dean Richards, Kevin Davies and he had a decent record at getting top dollar for players.

Edited 3 July, 2012 by The Kraken

[Doctoroncall]

wouldn't we be just back to roughly where we were when Bridge ****ed off to Chelsea (worse perhaps as Bridge supported Saints unlike Shaw, apparently)?

 

No idea why people think things will be different this time round. There is a pecking order and we are no where near the top. The only way you can prevent the very best players leaving is be right at the top. If Arsenal can't keep hold on to a player what chance have we got?

 

I think things have moved on in a few ways; the infrastructure to the training ground and academy with the hugh financial investment there needs to be some sort of return. The management organisation with a clear line from academy to first team and the culture/environment of the club where I'd say players want to be. So I'd say the club is doing all it can to make players stay bar offering a huge salary and champions league football.

[shurlock]

Sorry but I disagree entirely. Lowe got (at the time) great prices for Theo and Bale. And Theo was only under pre-contract so it potentially an ever tougher sell, to get a deal worth at the time up to £12M was "eye-popping" to coin a current phrase. I'll criticise Lowe for plenty; for extracting a decent price for a player, no way, he was extremely good in that regard.

 

NC and the club were genuinely disappointed to see Oxo go in a way that Lowe never was over sales. It was rarely a case of take or leave it with Lowe and there is no way the sale of Oxo would have been protracted as long under him because his instinct would have been to sell rather than fight to keep a player.

You're missing something if you can't see that cultural difference, even if I accept that Lowe fought the club's corner and got a decent price for several transfers.

[Window Cleaner]

4 million ??? just about enough to buy them Tommy Forecast methinks

[The Kraken]

NC and the club were genuinely disappointed to see Oxo go in a way that Lowe never was over sales. It was rarely a case of take or leave it with Lowe and there is no way the sale of Oxo would have been protracted as long under him because his instinct would have been to sell rather than fight to keep a player.

You're missing something if you can't see that cultural difference, even if I accept that Lowe fought the club's corner and got a decent price for several transfers.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/a/arsenal/4614538.stm

 

Southampton chairman Rupert Lowe told the club's website: "We are bitterly disappointed. The purpose of developing the best Academy in the country is not to sell scholars to larger clubs.

 

"We have done everything to keep Theo at Southampton. But his family and advisors are determined that he leave this club and go to Arsenal.

[Wes Tender]

The main difference between now and the Lowe era is that we do not need to sell if we don't want to. There is no boardroom pressure either to raise funds for the payment of dividends. OK, we can't keep a player who wants to move, but that also applies to even the very big name clubs too. But once contracted to us, we can at least get a decent price, or if we don't, tell the prospective buyer that we're not interested. If there is a situation like the one we are now in with Luke Shaw that three top glory clubs are after him, then the price is going to be massively inflated if he is to go to one of them. The other difference is that as a Premiership club, there is a strong case that could be made that rather than warm a bench with one of those clubs as such a youngster, he might do better to increase his value much further by playing first team football against those clubs for a year or two, also getting far more enjoyment for himself simultaneously.

[The Kraken]

The main difference between now and the Lowe era is that we do not need to sell if we don't want to. There is no boardroom pressure either to raise funds for the payment of dividends.

Yes, very true.

 

OK, we can't keep a player who wants to move, but that also applies to even the very big name clubs too. But once contracted to us, we can at least get a decent price, or if we don't, tell the prospective buyer that we're not interested. If there is a situation like the one we are now in with Luke Shaw that three top glory clubs are after him, then the price is going to be massively inflated if he is to go to one of them.

Also true.

 

The other difference is that as a Premiership club, there is a strong case that could be made that rather than warm a bench with one of those clubs as such a youngster, he might do better to increase his value much further by playing first team football against those clubs for a year or two, also getting far more enjoyment for himself simultaneously.

I think this is yet to be seen; my first thought is that I don't think I agree, and if so (as you suggest) only be for an extra year or two at the very most (and not seeing top class players stay with us until 22, 23, 24).

[Frank's cousin]

I think this is yet to be seen; my first thought is that I don't think I agree, and if so (as you suggest) only be for an extra year or two at the very most (and not seeing top class players stay with us until 22, 23, 24).

 

Guess we cant really generalise though as players develop at different speeds - the pressure will always be greatest on those such as Walcott and Oxo, as it was very clear that their potential was huge and from 16 onwards

 

There is the middle ground though, with decent players such as Bridge for example, who also developed into international class, yet a little slower so that we had the benefit - if we can be in a situation where we get 4 or 5 of that type over a 3 year period and maybe, just maybe hold onto one exceptional player for an extra season, we could be in a position to do something really good... yes we would end up like Leverkusen, with a decent season, potentially followed by a mass exodus of payers having demonstrated class at a higher level, but if we can get 2 or 3 seasons out of good young players, then I would be happy with that. Alays going to be a shame to see them leave, but much rather that than a policy of older Journeymen signings on huge wages, or end of career former internationals that might look good on the back of a shirt, but are only here for a few extra quid.

[shurlock]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/teams/a/arsenal/4614538.stm

 

Southampton chairman Rupert Lowe told the club's website: "We are bitterly disappointed. The purpose of developing the best Academy in the country is not to sell scholars to larger clubs.

 

"We have done everything to keep Theo at Southampton. But his family and advisors are determined that he leave this club and go to Arsenal.

 

Ultimately, family/advisors ruled the day -and nobody whether Ferguson or Wenger is powerful to stop that kind of influence.

 

But placing Lowe's behaviour in the proper context of his overall transfer activity -rather than picking isolated examples- the difference is night and day. Under Lowe, its more than likely that Lallana would have been sold or indeed that Oxo would have been sold earlier (and for less money). Its also unlikely Lowe would have sanctioned the purchase of a player like Rodriguez for his preference, if he did stretch the budget, was for low-risk, proven players.

Not blaming the guy - his hands were tied largely by the structure and finances of the club. But the club, even if it remains at the mercy of the bigger clubs, is now in a very different position and its amazing to deny that.

[Thedelldays]

at the end of the day, if any of our players are wanted by Man United. and Fergie actively chases them...then it is bye bye...

[The Kraken]

Ultimately, family/advisors ruled the day -and nobody whether Ferguson or Wenger is powerful to stop that kind of influence.

 

But placing Lowe's behaviour in the proper context of his overall transfer activity -rather than picking isolated examples- the difference is night and day. Under Lowe, its more than likely that Lallana would have been sold or indeed that Oxo would have been sold earlier (and for less money). Its also unlikely Lowe would have sanctioned the purchase of a player like Rodriguez for his preference, if he did stretch the budget, was for low-risk, proven players.

Not blaming the guy - his hands were tied largely by the structure and finances of the club. But the club, even if it remains at the mercy of the bigger clubs, is now in a very different position and its amazing to deny that.

 

The only part I agree with that is the part about sanctioning the purchase of someone like J-Rod. We will doubtless open the purse strings much more than we've ever done, even taking into account how the transfer market has rocketed in recent years. But if you take the likes of Bridge, Richards, Walcott etc, they all pretty much put in a transfer request to leave, so it wasn't just a choice to sell them. We are now more of a position where we seemingly don't have to sell, which is an advantage. But I don't agree woth your night and day analogy. In any case, it matters not.

[CB Fry]

Ultimately, family/advisors ruled the day -and nobody whether Ferguson or Wenger is powerful to stop that kind of influence.

 

But placing Lowe's behaviour in the proper context of his overall transfer activity -rather than picking isolated examples- the difference is night and day. Under Lowe, its more than likely that Lallana would have been sold or indeed that Oxo would have been sold earlier (and for less money). Its also unlikely Lowe would have sanctioned the purchase of a player like Rodriguez for his preference, if he did stretch the budget, was for low-risk, proven players.

Not blaming the guy - his hands were tied largely by the structure and finances of the club. But the club, even if it remains at the mercy of the bigger clubs, is now in a very different position and its amazing to deny that.

 

 

Lowe could have sold Lallana but gave him a long term contract instead.

 

Have absolutely no idea how much earlier Alex O-C could have been sold. He was sold at the earliest possible/realistic opportunity.

 

I struggle to think of any player sold for a big fee by Lowe that didn't push for the move themselves. Maybe Kevin Davies but that was mental money and the right call.

 

Lowe debates. You cannae beat em....!

Edited 3 July, 2012 by CB Fry

[Wes Tender]

The only part I agree with that is the part about sanctioning the purchase of someone like J-Rod. We will doubtless open the purse strings much more than we've ever done, even taking into account how the transfer market has rocketed in recent years. But if you take the likes of Bridge, Richards, Walcott etc, they all pretty much put in a transfer request to leave, so it wasn't just a choice to sell them. We are now more of a position where we seemingly don't have to sell, which is an advantage. But I don't agree woth your night and day analogy. In any case, it matters not.

 

We are happily in this position, so instead of being known to be a selling club, (which every club is, to a lesser or greater degree) we can at the very least forge a reputation for ourselves of producing a succession of youngsters with great potential, but whom we are only willing to sell on for silly money if it is our preference to keep them. If there is the demand for those players and if we don't need to sell, we have the whip-hand in any negotiations that are forced on us by the players' desire to have their heads turned by the opportunity to play for glory teams. I agree with you that it would be nearly impossible to pursuade them to stay beyond 22 or so, but there is increasingly a case that can be made out when they are 16/17/18, that their value might well be increased by them putting themselves in the Premiership shop window playing first team football for us, rather than bench-warming for the glory teams. At that age, they might themselves also prefer to remain more local with their families and friends too in familiar surroundings, rather than uprooting themselves, finding out that their chances of shining amongst the stars of the big name teams are much more remote for at least a couple of years of development.

[The Kraken]

We are happily in this position, so instead of being known to be a selling club, (which every club is, to a lesser or greater degree) we can at the very least forge a reputation for ourselves of producing a succession of youngsters with great potential, but whom we are only willing to sell on for silly money if it is our preference to keep them. If there is the demand for those players and if we don't need to sell, we have the whip-hand in any negotiations that are forced on us by the players' desire to have their heads turned by the opportunity to play for glory teams. I agree with you that it would be nearly impossible to pursuade them to stay beyond 22 or so, but there is increasingly a case that can be made out when they are 16/17/18, that their value might well be increased by them putting themselves in the Premiership shop window playing first team football for us, rather than bench-warming for the glory teams. At that age, they might themselves also prefer to remain more local with their families and friends too in familiar surroundings, rather than uprooting themselves, finding out that their chances of shining amongst the stars of the big name teams are much more remote for at least a couple of years of development.

 

The potential problem with that, of course, is that previously a lot of our young stars haven't been local; they've upped sticks to be here in the first place. Chamberlain was the closest from Pompey, but Theo and Bale in particular lodged here as they came from Newbury and Wales respectively. Shaw originally comes from Kingston upon Thames, so a move to Chelsea would effectively mean a move home for him. Its not quite that simple when our scouting network goes as far as it does and, with the new Academy regulations, can go even further in future.

[Wes Tender]

The potential problem with that, of course, is that previously a lot of our young stars haven't been local; they've upped sticks to be here in the first place. Chamberlain was the closest from Pompey, but Theo and Bale in particular lodged here as they came from Newbury and Wales respectively. Shaw originally comes from Kingston upon Thames, so a move to Chelsea would effectively mean a move home for him. Its not quite that simple when our scouting network goes as far as it does and, with the new Academy regulations, can go even further in future.

 

Fair points. But they will have formed deep relationships with the other academy players over several years and arguably these are formative years when these relationships are more important to them. I suspect that Bale, Walcott and Chamberlain will keep in touch with each other throughout their careers and beyond, much as University friends do. The additional factor against us, is whether they used to follow their home town clubs as kids and therefore harboured an ambition to play for them one day. One has to hope though that their parents/advisors recognise that they have thrived at our academy, have local friendships with their colleagues and that there is the probability that they would be an even more valuable commodity after a couple of seasons of first team football with us, than they would be as a reserve team/bench-warmer with the glory team.

[The Kraken]

Fair points. But they will have formed deep relationships with the other academy players over several years and arguably these are formative years when these relationships are more important to them. I suspect that Bale, Walcott and Chamberlain will keep in touch with each other throughout their careers and beyond, much as University friends do. The additional factor against us, is whether they used to follow their home town clubs as kids and therefore harboured an ambition to play for them one day. One has to hope though that their parents/advisors recognise that they have thrived at our academy, have local friendships with their colleagues and that there is the probability that they would be an even more valuable commodity after a couple of seasons of first team football with us, than they would be as a reserve team/bench-warmer with the glory team.

Yep, that's all true. But to be fair, as it has been in years past so not really much difference to now.

 

I think we agree that once the big clubs come calling and the player wants to leave, there's relatively little we can do except hold out for the best price. I probably agree with you that there's now slightly more chance that we may be able to hold out for a longer time once that happens, maybe for a season or so (though in the case of AOC, our most recent departure and under this management, I don't believe us playing in the PL would have made any difference to how quickly he would have wanted to leave, it just might have taken him slightly longer to break into the first team in the first place).

 

I've said before, I think we'll definitely be a bit less succeptible to losing players to the likes of Sunderland, Villa, Everton etc. Though not completely of course, money talks in this game and you can't guarantee anything where players are concerned. If we can promote the idea of academy players staying for longer then its a great thing, though obviously top young players will gravitate towards the very top clubs, so its a massively tough sell for a club like us however well we establish ourselves.

[Neil]

Lowe was always chomping at the bit to sell our best players, and never played hardball in the negotiations.

 

At least if we sell good players now it is reluctantly, and only after holding out for the best price.

[Thedelldays]

Lowe was always chomping at the bit to sell our best players, and never played hardball in the negotiations.

 

At least if we sell good players now it is reluctantly, and only after holding out for the best price.

are you joking...?

[BlakeySFC]

Lowe was always chomping at the bit to sell our best players, and never played hardball in the negotiations.

 

At least if we sell good players now it is reluctantly, and only after holding out for the best price.

 

Lowe was well up for selling James Beattie to Palace in 2004. It's all in Simon Jordan's book, basically he rings up Lowe going £1.5m, Lowe goes OK.

 

Lowe changes his mind, says £2m, Jordan says ok. Lowe changes his mind, says £2.5m, Jordan says ok. Lowe Changes his mind says £3m and he's yours, Jordan says ok. Lowe changes his mind, says £3.5m, Jordan says f_uck off.

 

Worrying that Lowe was prepared to sell one of our best players at that time for a measly fee of £3.5million!!

[SW11_Saint]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/jul/02/chelsea-offer-southampton-luke-shaw

 

Will be very interesting to see who we react to these sort of bids now. Doesn't make real sense from any angle - he has a much better chance of first team football with us, and we're not so strapped for cash that we need to sell. Stick with the Saints kiddo.

[Frank's cousin]

Lowe was well up for selling James Beattie to Palace in 2004. It's all in Simon Jordan's book, basically he rings up Lowe going £1.5m, Lowe goes OK.

 

Lowe changes his mind, says £2m, Jordan says ok. Lowe changes his mind, says £2.5m, Jordan says ok. Lowe Changes his mind says £3m and he's yours, Jordan says ok. Lowe changes his mind, says £3.5m, Jordan says f_uck off.

 

Worrying that Lowe was prepared to sell one of our best players at that time for a measly fee of £3.5million!!

 

Given the amount Beatts went for - I suspect this is Jordan not quite remembering it as it was - remember in 2003 he was the top English prem sriker with 23... I suspect it was more like 1.5, Lowe says feck off, 2m Feck off,...3.5 feck off until at 3.5 Jordan was over his budget. I know its popular to believe Lowe was utterly pants but if you think he would sell Beatts for 3.5 mil let alone 1.5 I suspect you are letting your distaste for Lowe cloud your judgement...

[CB Fry]

Lowe was well up for selling James Beattie to Palace in 2004. It's all in Simon Jordan's book, basically he rings up Lowe going £1.5m, Lowe goes OK.

 

Lowe changes his mind, says £2m, Jordan says ok. Lowe changes his mind, says £2.5m, Jordan says ok. Lowe Changes his mind says £3m and he's yours, Jordan says ok. Lowe changes his mind, says £3.5m, Jordan says f_uck off.

 

Worrying that Lowe was prepared to sell one of our best players at that time for a measly fee of £3.5million!!

 

 

 

I've not read the book but the previous thread in that book had Hoddle as the one who was "well up" for selling Beattie. Lowe less so. Be interesting to see quotes otherwise.

 

And correct me if I'm wrong but if a manager wants a player out should the chairman overrule it? Because you'd have provably slate Lowe for that too.

 

And, anyway, lets be clear - we did not sell Beattie for £3m, did we?

 

I don't mind people slating Lowe but having a pop at his ability to get a great deal on outgoing transfers is just ridiculous. Slating him for transfers that didn't even happen is pretty harsh too.

[Thedelldays]

I've not read it but the previous thread in that book had Hoddle as the one who was "well up" for selling Beattie. Lowe clearly less so.

 

And correct me if I'm wrong but if a manager wants a player out should the chairman overrule it? Becausr you'd have provably slate Lowe for that too.

 

And, lets be clear - we did not sell Beattie for £3m, did we?

 

I don't mind people slating Lowe but having a pop at his ability to get a great deal on outgoing transfers is just ridiculous.

dean richards was another cracker

[Faz]

He may have great potential, but whereas we could all see ox demonstrating his potential against fully grown men, we haven't yet seen that with Shaw.

 

If he wants to go, he'll go. It doesn't mean the end of the world, nor that the aspirations we have a re null and void. We'll move on, and hopefully up.

[BlakeySFC]

I've not read the book but the previous thread in that book had Hoddle as the one who was "well up" for selling Beattie. Lowe less so. Be interesting to see quotes otherwise.

 

And correct me if I'm wrong but if a manager wants a player out should the chairman overrule it? Because you'd have provably slate Lowe for that too.

 

And, anyway, lets be clear - we did not sell Beattie for £3m, did we?

 

I don't mind people slating Lowe but having a pop at his ability to get a great deal on outgoing transfers is just ridiculous. Slating him for transfers that didn't even happen is pretty harsh too.

 

Yeh Hoddle wanted him out more than Lowe, and did negotiate it upto £3.5million but I have to wonder if Jordan hadn't got annoyed with Lowe's constant meandering whether we would've let Beats go for £3.5-£4million.

[aintforever]

All the comparisons with Lowe are pointless, the only major difference is now we are owned by billionaires and not on the perpetual financial tightrope we were before. Cortese can rip up the faxes and chuck them in the bin all day long, if Lowe was in charge now he could do the same.

[saintchris23]

He may have great potential, but whereas we could all see ox demonstrating his potential against fully grown men, we haven't yet seen that with Shaw.

 

If he wants to go, he'll go. It doesn't mean the end of the world, nor that the aspirations we have a re null and void. We'll move on, and hopefully up.

 

Bang on.

[miserableoldgit]

Lowe was always chomping at the bit to sell our best players, and never played hardball in the negotiations.

 

At least if we sell good players now it is reluctantly, and only after holding out for the best price.

Walcott? Richards?

[PhilippineSaint]

Not really Luke Shaw related,

But anybody notice how Fergie got a Strop on yesterday because Juventus allegedly tapped up Paul Pogba and then signed him, which is what he did to secure his signing in the first place and what Chelsea are trying to do with Luke

[Cricketphilly]

They have Bertrand as understudy to Cole, can't see the thinking behind this.

[farawaysaint]

United linked in the Manchester press

 

http://www.click-manchester.com/sport/manchester-united/1216863-manchester-united-rival-manchester-city-and-chelsea-for-southampton-starlet-shaw.html?

[The Kraken]

They have Bertrand as understudy to Cole, can't see the thinking behind this.

Ashley Cole is 31 now. Shaw is not ready for league football yet but could be in the next 2 or 3 years. By that time Cole will be 33/34 and on the way down.

[jam]

Lowe was well up for selling James Beattie to Palace in 2004. It's all in Simon Jordan's book, basically he rings up Lowe going £1.5m, Lowe goes OK.

 

Lowe changes his mind, says £2m, Jordan says ok. Lowe changes his mind, says £2.5m, Jordan says ok. Lowe Changes his mind says £3m and he's yours, Jordan says ok. Lowe changes his mind, says £3.5m, Jordan says f_uck off.

 

Worrying that Lowe was prepared to sell one of our best players at that time for a measly fee of £3.5million!!

 

As you yourself state that Lowe changed his mind at £1.5m, £2m and £2.5m, why are you so certain that Lowe wasn't going to do the same at £3.5m?

 

If anything your story suggests that Lowe wasn't that up for selling BT at all...

 

And BT wasn't that well regarded at the time - he'd had a good run under Jones but Hoddle clearly didn't rate him. Are you suggesting that Lowe should have been telling Hoddle who he should have been picking?

[Matthew Le God]

I think Simon Jordan's book says when they they couldn't get James Beattie they resigned Dougie Freedman. That didn't happen in 2004, it happened in 2000, before Beattie's worth was particularly high.

[Chez]

Are you really comparing the lack of ambition, resources and investment under Rupert Lowe when Bridge left, to how we are today?

 

you've missed my point. My response was to Kracken saying that `if Prowse and Shaw left at 22/23 for a big club then we would have advanced'. Should that happen, and seeing as Bridge left at the age of 23, then our ability to keep our top talent will not have advanced really, would it?

 

Whether we can keep the really top players longer into their careers has yet to be seen. We are obviously going in the right direction, but don't kid yourself that if we have another Bridge/Theo/Bale/AOC in our midst that the big boys won't take him from us no matter what our ambition is.

 

I'm not comparing Lowe with Cortese, I'm saying their are bigger clubs than us and always will be.

Edited 4 July, 2012 by Chez

[buctootim]

you've missed my point completely. My response was to Kracken saying that if Prowse and Shaw left at 22/23 for a big club then we would have advanced. Seeing as Bridge left at the age of 23 then our ability of keeping top talent will not have advanced would it? Whether we can keep the really top player longer into their careers is to be seen. We are obviously going in the right direction, but don't kid yourself that if we have another Bridge/Theo/Bale/AOC in our midst that the big boys won't take him from us no matter what our ambition is.

 

It was never my intention to compare Lowe with Cortese. Too totally different situations.

 

tbf Bridge isnt a good example of what any other player who wants to advance his career would do. He has a habit of staying too long everywhere.

[Chez]

tbf Bridge isnt a good example of what any other player who wants to advance his career would do. He has a habit of staying too long everywhere.

 

bridge is the perfect example of how money talks. He was a Saints fan, his whole family are Saints fans, we were in the Prem, he was on the cusp of England recognition, our side were FA cup finalists and top 8, yet despite all that he moved as soon as the Russian money came calling it. That is the pull of a big club with big money. He furthered his career. How was he to know Cole would be signed a year or so later? You don't turn down the move because you are worried you might lose your form or place. You take the move.

Edited 4 July, 2012 by Chez

[buctootim]

bridge is the perfect example of how money talks.

 

We agree on that. He's also a good example of why you shouldnt let your career moves be dictated solely by money.

[The Kraken]

I think Simon Jordan's book says when they they couldn't get James Beattie they resigned Dougie Freedman. That didn't happen in 2004, it happened in 2000, before Beattie's worth was particularly high.

Simon Jordan caught out talking b0ll0cks? Blow me down....

[BlakeySFC]

I think Simon Jordan's book says when they they couldn't get James Beattie they resigned Dougie Freedman. That didn't happen in 2004, it happened in 2000, before Beattie's worth was particularly high.

 

Yeh I think I'm getting mixed up on dates. It was while Hoddle was in charge, so must've been the 2000-01 season.

 

As you yourself state that Lowe changed his mind at £1.5m, £2m and £2.5m, why are you so certain that Lowe wasn't going to do the same at £3.5m?

 

If anything your story suggests that Lowe wasn't that up for selling BT at all...

 

And BT wasn't that well regarded at the time - he'd had a good run under Jones but Hoddle clearly didn't rate him. Are you suggesting that Lowe should have been telling Hoddle who he should have been picking?

 

Yeh Lowe probably would've changed his mind again, and kept putting the price upto something he deemed 'worthy' but we'll never know.

 

This is the exact quote from the book: 'Attempted to sign James Beattie from Southampton, accepted an offer for £1.5m, but then Southampton chairman Rupert Lowe got involved. He wanted £2m. I told him that we had already agreed a price with Hoddle and Lowe told me that Glenn had changed his mind...so I offered £2m, but then Lowe wanted £2.5m so I made that offer. He hiked it up to £3m, and once again I offered what he asked for and then he came back with £3.5m. That was it as far as I was concerned'

[The Kraken]

Yeh Lowe probably would've changed his mind again, and kept putting the price upto something he deemed 'worthy' but we'll never know.

 

This is the exact quote from the book: 'Attempted to sign James Beattie from Southampton, accepted an offer for £1.5m, but then Southampton chairman Rupert Lowe got involved. He wanted £2m. I told him that we had already agreed a price with Hoddle and Lowe told me that Glenn had changed his mind...so I offered £2m, but then Lowe wanted £2.5m so I made that offer. He hiked it up to £3m, and once again I offered what he asked for and then he came back with £3.5m. That was it as far as I was concerned'

Fair play to Lowe for that. He had a great record for extracting top prices for players we sold, amongst his other more obvious faults.

[JPTCount]

can't see this happening tbh, aoc was in a different position, he'd played a season of league 1 and had the opportunity to break into the first team with cesc leaving and only other youngsters to compete against. his dad was also pushing for the move. Shaw will be 3rd choice behind Cole and Bertrand, the first being one of the best left backs in the world atm.

 

tbh id take a swap deal for mata tho.

[Charlie Wayman]

can't see this happening tbh, aoc was in a different position, he'd played a season of league 1 and had the opportunity to break into the first team with cesc leaving and only other youngsters to compete against. his dad was also pushing for the move. Shaw will be 3rd choice behind Cole and Bertrand, the first being one of the best left backs in the world atm.

 

tbh id take a swap deal for mata tho.

 

A swap deal for Terry, Cole & Lampard + £3.5m might be tempting as an alternative to F OFF! Only joking, F.O.C.!

[krissyboy31]

17 today, so presumably his professional contract kicks in!

[buctootim]

17 today, so presumably his professional contract kicks in!

 

...

Edited 12 July, 2012 by buctootim
not funny

[dubai_phil]

He may have great potential, but whereas we could all see ox demonstrating his potential against fully grown men, we haven't yet seen that with Shaw.

 

If he wants to go, he'll go. It doesn't mean the end of the world, nor that the aspirations we have a re null and void. We'll move on, and hopefully up.

 

Agree totally with this.

 

Also I do believe that the "squad mentality" and "the journey continues" vision places us in a slightly different position when it comes to trying to keep the kids. If he goes he will have to be Bale esque to get into a Chelsea/Man U team quickly, meanwhile we would have another 4mil to steal the next great prospect from a lower league side.

 

The selling pitch to the kids is different now, it won't keep all of them, but it MAY keep more of them

[derry]

It is odd that any kid would go to Chelsea with their abysmal record for bringing through players from their youth set up. Only Terry is or was the only breakthrough in the last ten years to tie down a first team place.

[saintbob40]

Terry was at West Ham until he was 15 so even that is tenous.

[Saint Garrett]

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/transfer-news/arsenal-plot-raid-on-southampton-for-teenage-1183333

 

Arsenal back in for him...although not a very detailed article.