What Did We Achieve Today

[Gemmel]

This is not meant to be an over the top emotional post, but more a genuine question.

 

Many on here would have sold and moved on, but it really feels like we have achieved something tonight by keeping VVD and I am sure there are many Chairman and Directors of clubs our size raising a glass to us tonight.

 

Football is getting silly in terms of money, but little Southampton stood strong. Ironically so did liverpool....... but tomorrow could be a different story for them.

 

Did we win more than bragging rights, or am I just getting carried away.

[farawaysaint]

Largely a moral victory although it may mean players avtually will realise if they sign a 6 year contract we expect them to stick around a bit.

[SaintTex]

Largely a moral victory although it may mean players avtually will realise if they sign a 6 year contract we expect them to stick around a bit.

maybe VVD thought he was signing a 6 month contract.

[californiasaint]

At the moment absolutely nothing has been achieved outside of sticking to their word (which I suppose is an achievement in itself.)

 

Retaining VVD can only be considered an achievement if he plays to the best of his ability this season, improves the team, and is sold next summer at a high price of the team's choosing. A tall order, to be certain, but the board knew this when they made their decision not to deal the player.

 

Looking forward to VVD coming back in line (although today's loss to France did not help matters...)

[Jimmy_D]

Potentially we get to see a world class player in the team this season if he knuckles down and gets on with it, maybe even beyond that.

 

There are other more intangible benefits though.

Players hopefully realise that signing a long contract means they're signing it to play for Saints.

Keeping a player like VvD, appearing to knock back a world record fee, and humiliating Liverpool in the process, it starts to change the perception of Saints.

Out of the teams above us, Liverpool are possibly one of the weakest with that defence, with the potential for a terrible season, especially with Europe to possibly bog them down. If we're going to to get higher in the league, avoiding strengthening them is a decent start.

For me the big one is that teams might think twice before tapping our players up. The damage might have already been done with VvD himself, but if doing this means teams are reluctant to get burned again, that we know about interest in our players as it happens, and it's more difficult for them and the players themselves to go behind our back... that could be a huge benefit for us going forward.

[trousers]

 

Retaining VVD can only be considered an achievement if he plays to the best of his ability this season, improves the team, and is sold next summer at a high price of the team's choosing.

 

That's a fair 'small picture' point of view but, as Jimmy_D says, there are potentially consequential benefits if we look at the bigger picture.

[benjii]

Potentially we get to see a world class player in the team this season if he knuckles down and gets on with it, maybe even beyond that.

 

There are other more intangible benefits though.

Players hopefully realise that signing a long contract means they're signing it to play for Saints.

Keeping a player like VvD, appearing to knock back a world record fee, and humiliating Liverpool in the process, it starts to change the perception of Saints.

Out of the teams above us, Liverpool are possibly one of the weakest with that defence, with the potential for a terrible season, especially with Europe to possibly bog them down. If we're going to to get higher in the league, avoiding strengthening them is a decent start.

For me the big one is that teams might think twice before tapping our players up. The damage might have already been done with VvD himself, but if doing this means teams are reluctant to get burned again, that we know about interest in our players as it happens, and it's more difficult for them and the players themselves to go behind our back... that could be a huge benefit for us going forward.

 

Think Arsenal have got the "big team, done ****" award pretty much in the bag.

[angelman]

we achieved the same as Leicester, Arsenal, Liverpool, West Ham and Ross Barkley.

 

Barkley being a little different, obviously being a player rather than a club, but he refused to be pushed out by his employer and seems to have stuck to his contract terms and stayed at Everton rather than be forced to go to Chelsea over his preference of Spurs, just because Chelsea would stump up the ridiculous fee. Mahrez, Sanhez, Coutinho, Sakho and vD are all being kept to their contracts by their clubs, although Coutinho still has today to go to Barca.

[Greenridge]

This is not meant to be an over the top emotional post, but more a genuine question.

 

Many on here would have sold and moved on, but it really feels like we have achieved something tonight by keeping VVD and I am sure there are many Chairman and Directors of clubs our size raising a glass to us tonight.

 

We didn't actually receive any offers for him did we?

[northam soul]

We didn't actually receive any offers for him did we?

 

This is the crux of it, as apparently no bid was made for VD so not sure we actually needed to stand that firm other than issue a few he is not for sale statements.

[trousers]

We didn't actually receive any offers for him did we?

Possibly not, but that could have been down to the hard-nosed approach that our board adopted throughout the window, so, whether we received offers or not, it could be argued our board played a blinder.

[foxy9143]

Possibly not, but that could have been down to the hard-nosed approach that our board adopted throughout the window, so, whether we received offers or not, it could be argued our board played a blinder.

 

I don't know how these things work but I suspect the 'formal offer' bit is irrelevant. It is likely that any potential buying club will have sounded out Southampton in a preliminary discussion and checked out whether a formal offer was likely to be considered. The fact that it is leaking out that there have been 'no formal offers' is perhaps as much to save the face of clubs like Chelsea and Arsenal who probably made an informal approach to Les Reed and were told either what the minimum bid to be considered was, or else that no bid would be considered. At least that way their fans don't get upset because they couldn't even get a player from 'little Southampton'.

 

It is pretty obvious that many clubs would have wanted Van Dyke so they would clearly have put feelers out to explore whether he would be for sale.

 

Anyway, I add my warm congratulations to the board, and particularly Ralph who often gets maligned on here, but a few weeks ago he did an interview saying we are keeping all our top players...and we have. Perhaps next time he does an interview we'll be slightly less cynical.

[mrfahaji]

Obviously it's great that van Dijk is still here, and also great that he isn't at Liverpool, but for me the most satisfying thing about him still being at Southampton today is all those reporters, ex-footballers and tweeters who either claimed to be ITK or talked about the transfer like it was some sort of god-given right or inevitability.

 

I haven't wanted to assert one way or another whether he would leave, just hoped it wouldn't happen. Now I'd like to personally 'reach out' to all those smug idiots and ask them why they felt the need to be so cretinous for the past couple of months. HA BL00DY HA. It's just a shame that this episode won't permanently ruin their credibility, they'll just carry on regardless and start spouting sh1t about the next topic.

[Gingeletiss]

Obviously it's great that van Dijk is still here, and also great that he isn't at Liverpool, but for me the most satisfying thing about him still being at Southampton today is all those reporters, ex-footballers and tweeters who either claimed to be ITK or talked about the transfer like it was some sort of god-given right or inevitability.

 

I haven't wanted to assert one way or another whether he would leave, just hoped it wouldn't happen. Now I'd like to personally 'reach out' to all those smug idiots and ask them why they felt the need to be so cretinous for the past couple of months. HA BL00DY HA. It's just a shame that this episode won't permanently ruin their credibility, they'll just carry on regardless and start spouting sh1t about the next topic.

 

Well said this man.

[suewhistle]

I haven't wanted to assert one way or another whether he would leave, just hoped it wouldn't happen.

 

Agree with your post and not being privy to any information other than that bandied about so liberally by the media and some on here, wasn't in a position to decide or make any pronouncement. I drink a lot of tea but that doesn't mean I believe the readings in the bottom of the cup.

 

I think Foxy's point is also a good one. I'm sure there is always informal contact: no point getting the lawyers in and beavering away on the detail if the player won't even countenance the move for whatever reason: family stability, kids in school, playing time, career progression.

Edited 1 September, 2017 by suewhistle
quote mark

[saint si]

Without wishing to throw a negative - what are the repercussions for players we want to sign in future? Will they join Saints if they don't believe we will give them the career stepping stone? Will they also avoid signing long contracts? My gut feel is it probably won't hurt us too much, especially for players we "unearth", but maybe if we are competing with Leicester, West Ham, Stoke etc for a player, they might choose to go elsewhere?

[SKD]

Next summer is a big one.

 

It's likely that we could lose 3 of our back 4 - Hopefully Les gets replacements lined up early.

[alpine_saint]

In the mid-term it simply means contracts will never be agreed by player and agent longer then 3 years.

[S-Clarke]

In the mid-term it simply means contracts will never be agreed by player and agent longer then 3 years.

 

Apart from Hoedt, Lemina and Bedranek.

[alpine_saint]

Apart from Hoedt, Lemina and Bedranek.

 

I said in the mid-term, FFS. Those contracts are already signed. Agents will soon clue-up.

[S-Clarke]

I said in the mid-term, FFS. Those contracts are already signed. Agents will soon clue-up.

 

I'd have thought Hoedts agent would have already been pretty clued up, seeing as he was signed a week ago. It was pretty obvious VVD wasn't being allowed to leave way before Lemina and Hoedt arrived.

[foxy9143]

In the mid-term it simply means contracts will never be agreed by player and agent longer then 3 years.

 

But that didn't stop Hoedt signing a contract for 5 years.

 

When he joined us we had already made it publicly very clear that Virgil was not going to be sold and his agent would have been well aware of that, yet he was still happy to sign a long deal.

[Born In The 80s]

Doesn't sound like Liverpool even came in for him since we accused them of tapping-up... Saints received no bids for Van Dijk in the last day from anyone and nothing from Liverpool in weeks.

 

If the rumours of bids for 70-80m were true, I don't believe for a minute that we wouldn't have accepted.

[Bit of a plonker]

Think it showed that selling clubs have the power as a result of the new TV deal and revenue from that. Potentially putting a block on player power and meaning that fees in general become ridiculously high (Neymar, Lukaku, Mbappe, Dembele). I am in favour of power moving to the clubs, about time too. Agree that also means there will potentially be repurcussions in terms of length of contracts being signed in future, I think agents will wise up to that shortly and possibly advise against 5 or 6 year deals. Also helps them with player churn, if they can get a nice fee every couple of seasons rather than every 3 seasons or so.

 

On the flip side, it will make it more difficult for smaller clubs like Saints to strengthen significantly in future, and will probably result in the bigger clubs getting further ahead of the next best. To improve our strike force, for example, we will need to be looking at spending £30-40m on a good player who could take us on a step, which sounds ridiculous to me.

 

So yes, overall positive and shows we cannot be pushed around, along with the other clubs who have done the same thing. Slightly wary for what this means in future.

[DuncanRG]

We didn't actually receive any offers for him did we?

 

You don't really believe no one wanted him.

[mrfahaji]

I said in the mid-term, FFS. Those contracts are already signed. Agents will soon clue-up.

 

I'm not sure it will matter too much when they first join. Signing a 4 or 5 year contract means that the club will have to think about selling you after 2 or 3 years. What may change is players who have already been at the club for a year or two, having played well during that time, extending their contracts for a long period, if at all.

[benjii]

Without wishing to throw a negative - what are the repercussions for players we want to sign in future? Will they join Saints if they don't believe we will give them the career stepping stone? Will they also avoid signing long contracts? My gut feel is it probably won't hurt us too much, especially for players we "unearth", but maybe if we are competing with Leicester, West Ham, Stoke etc for a player, they might choose to go elsewhere?

 

No. They will still sign an initial 4 years or so and if they want to leave after 2 or 3 years then they will need to not sign an extension. Even if players will only sign a 3 year-or-so initial contract, with the marketing inflating then even if we sell them after 2 years we should still get a good return.

 

If Virgil refused an extension he would have 3 years left now and we would definitely be looking to move him on next summer to avoid his value decreasing as he approaches his final year.

 

The idea we are unilaterally curtailing players' opportunities at top clubs is fundamentally inaccurate. They need to understand that if they sign a contract for higher wages and longer term security without a release clause then they might have to honour it. If they don't want to do that, they don't have to. Most of the players we sign are from "lesser" leagues and there's no guarantee they will be a success in the PL. Most of them aren't so arrogant as not to appreciate that and so they will still want the financial comfort blanket of a reasonably long initial contract.

[simo]

We made a 79m quid statement!

[The9]

Without wishing to throw a negative - what are the repercussions for players we want to sign in future? Will they join Saints if they don't believe we will give them the career stepping stone? Will they also avoid signing long contracts? My gut feel is it probably won't hurt us too much, especially for players we "unearth", but maybe if we are competing with Leicester, West Ham, Stoke etc for a player, they might choose to go elsewhere?

 

No implications, we'll still be signing players who want to showcase themselves and get a big move, they'll just have to accept that we'll sell them when it suits us. There are enough players out there that we'll still get the type we want and if anything it'll sift out the ones with attitudes we don't want anyway. How we re-integrate is really the key to this - and we've done it before with Schneiderlin and Wanyama.

 

The main threat to our model is all of the other teams becoming competent at transfers too, which isn't showing any sign of happening outside Spurs, who still cave in occasionally (Sissoko is their Osvaldo). Everton seem to be moving into the gap between Spurs and us, which is a bit of a concern, but megamoney teams have their own ineffeciencies.

 

Stoke will sign anyone with a Champions League medal irrespective of team needs

West Ham will sign anyone and do so much in the press that they get hijacked by bigger money clubs.

Swansea seem to have a limited pool of ex-players they get back when desperate - though Clement gives them a few more options as Sanches proves (and he'd be perfect for us in a couple of years if Bayern doesn't work out).

West Brom are pretty decent at recruiting players to meet their needs but they don't do what Saints do so very little overlap in targets.

Liverpool don't have the foresight to put players in and develop them, preferring to let others develop them first and then pay hugely over the odds of what they could have got them for if they'd scouted earlier and committed to development themselves.

Chelsea are completely inefficient in their use of stockpiled players and none of them last long in the first team.

Man City just sign the kind of players no-one else can afford and hope they work as a team.

[Batman]

No implications, we'll still be signing players who want to showcase themselves and get a big move, they'll just have to accept that we'll sell them when it suits us. There are enough players out there that we'll still get the type we want and if anything it'll sift out the ones with attitudes we don't want anyway. How we re-integrate is really the key to this - and we've done it before with Schneiderlin and Wanyama.

 

The main threat to our model is all of the other teams becoming competent at transfers too, which isn't showing any sign of happening outside Spurs, who still cave in occasionally (Sissoko is their Osvaldo). Everton seem to be moving into the gap between Spurs and us, which is a bit of a concern, but megamoney teams have their own ineffeciencies.

 

Stoke will sign anyone with a Champions League medal irrespective of team needs

West Ham will sign anyone and do so much in the press that they get hijacked by bigger money clubs.

Swansea seem to have a limited pool of ex-players they get back when desperate - though Clement gives them a few more options as Sanches proves (and he'd be perfect for us in a couple of years if Bayern doesn't work out).

West Brom are pretty decent at recruiting players to meet their needs but they don't do what Saints do so very little overlap in targets.

Liverpool don't have the foresight to put players in and develop them, preferring to let others develop them first and then pay hugely over the odds of what they could have got them for if they'd scouted earlier and committed to development themselves.

Chelsea are completely inefficient in their use of stockpiled players and none of them last long in the first team.

Man City just sign the kind of players no-one else can afford and hope they work as a team.

 

you make out that we have some sort of superior, unique transfer policy!!

[The9]

you make out that we have some sort of superior, unique transfer policy!!

 

Huge net profit over the past 7 years whilst escaping League One, establishing ourselves in the top half of the Premier League, improving the squad depth and recently delivering consistent top half and European-challenging seasons and then compare it to everyone else outside the megabucks top 6.

 

The only teams you can argue have done better than us are Leicester due to their one-off season (finished below us last season when supposedly we were "poor") and Everton last season - when they spent hugely, and both are yet to show they can finish above us with a league campaign and Europe in the same season. Meanwhile we've finished above Liverpool and Chelsea and within 3 points of Man U twice in the past three seasons.

 

We're competent and focused whilst operating within our means, and most aren't.

[Batman]

love the way you dismiss swansea....after they actually won a trophy whilst climbing up from a lower level and still there. At the same time, able to bring in their own star players.

[The9]

love the way you dismiss swansea....after they actually won a trophy whilst climbing up from a lower level and still there. At the same time, able to bring in their own star players.

 

Fairly sure we'd have beaten Bradford in the EFL Cup Final in any of the past 7 seasons had we been fortunate enough to have played them at that stage too.

 

They've finished above us once in the 5 years we've been back in the Premier League, and that was the first season we were back up - they were an absolute shambles last season in terms of board direction, transfers and management until they finally got it right putting Clement in charge of the team.

 

Basically proving my point, when they were at their best and we were still building a squad they were better than us, since then we've overtaken them and we don't have the bumps in the road that other teams get without very obvious an unavoidable external factors (eg a European season).

[Batman]

Fairly sure we'd have beaten Bradford in the EFL Cup Final in any of the past 7 seasons had we been fortunate enough to have played them at that stage too.

 

They've finished above us once in the 5 years we've been back in the Premier League, and that was the first season we were back up - they were an absolute shambles last season in terms of board direction, transfers and management until they finally got it right putting Clement in charge of the team.

 

Basically proving my point, when they were at their best and we were still building a squad they were better than us, since then we've overtaken them and we don't have the bumps in the road that other teams get without very obvious an unavoidable external factors (eg a European season).

 

but we didnt get to that final did we....would we have beaten that chelsea side to get there?

 

to dismiss them and their way of business is laughable when suggesting we are 'the best' or what ever it was you are suggesting.

[saintwbu]

People seem to think long contracts are only in the best interests of the club. There are many cases where players reject a transfer because the contract on offer isn't long enough, plenty of players like the comfort of knowing that they're secure for 4-5 years earning the money they are offered, rather than at risk of injury or poor form leaving them club-less. The Van Dijk scenario will not make players wary of signing for us.

[Psycrow]

What we achieved, not just today but for the whole summer, was to break the pattern of being the club that sells all its stars every year. In reality, that was just for 3 summers, but the rhetoric in the media was "Saints do this every single year". This breaks that pattern. Next summer, while we might have to sell VVD, it won't be a case of reading news stories of "How many players are Saints going to sell to bigger clubs this year", it will be "Will Saints sell anybody?".

 

That's important. It changes the image of the club. I think, rather than putting players off from joining us, it will entice players to come. Players can sign for the club knowing all the best players around them won't be sold the following summer and we can sell a vision of actually achieving something in the long term.

[ALWAYS_SFC]

Fairly sure we'd have beaten Bradford in the EFL Cup Final in any of the past 7 seasons had we been fortunate enough to have played them at that stage too.

 

They've finished above us once in the 5 years we've been back in the Premier League, and that was the first season we were back up - they were an absolute shambles last season in terms of board direction, transfers and management until they finally got it right putting Clement in charge of the team.

 

Basically proving my point, when they were at their best and we were still building a squad they were better than us, since then we've overtaken them and we don't have the bumps in the road that other teams get without very obvious an unavoidable external factors (eg a European season).

 

Why do you bother trying to have a sensible discussion with him as its futile, he will dismiss anything praising SFC actions and trumpet everyone else ... i can never understand his anti SFC stance

whilst claiming to be a fan...

 

Fwiw i agree with your comments

[The9]

Btw if you want to compare Europa League seasons with Swansea, they were also out of Europa League before Xmas, were out of the FA Cup by mid-February (played the same number of FA Cup games as Saints did last season) and also came 8th. But they lost in their first EFL Cup game that season, whilst we lost in the Final.

 

That was also their BEST League finish since 1982, and our worst League position of the past 3 seasons.

[Batman]

Btw if you want to compare Europa League seasons with Swansea, they were also out of Europa League before Xmas, were out of the FA Cup by mid-February (played the same number of FA Cup games as Saints did last season) and also came 8th. But they lost in their first EFL Cup game that season, whilst we lost in the Final.

 

That was also their BEST League finish since 1982, and our worst League position of the past 3 seasons.

 

basically....we both achieved f-all in europe. Both lose our best players, both have stayed up and at times done well in the league..

difference, they have a major trophy to their name in recent years.

 

but, dismiss them all you want.

 

 

we have done well, better than others but do not be so arrogant to say we are the best bar leicester and even caveat that with a 'one off season' remark...

[The9]

but we didnt get to that final did we....would we have beaten that chelsea side to get there?

 

to dismiss them and their way of business is laughable when suggesting we are 'the best' or what ever it was you are suggesting.

 

You're the one making the comparison. Would they have beaten Man U last season?

 

It's not laughable, we're verifiably better at it than them by every measure except that one League Cup win, especially recent league finishes, which are a much better illustration of the long term than the randomness involved in Cups.

[The9]

Why do you bother trying to have a sensible discussion with him as its futile, he will dismiss anything praising SFC actions and trumpet everyone else ... i can never understand his anti SFC stance

whilst claiming to be a fan...

 

Fwiw i agree with your comments

 

You're right, of course. I shouldn't feed the troll.

[Batman]

You're the one making the comparison. Would they have beaten Man U last season?

 

It's not laughable, we're verifiably better at it than them by every measure except that one League Cup win, especially recent league finishes, which are a much better illustration of the long term than the randomness involved in Cups.

 

maybe not...neither did we, despite united being terrible on the day.

Edited 1 September, 2017 by Batman

[The9]

basically....we both achieved f-all in europe. Both lose our best players, both have stayed up and at times done well in the league..

difference, they have a major trophy to their name in recent years.

but, dismiss them all you want.

we have done well, better than others but do not be so arrogant to say we are the best bar leicester and even caveat that with a 'one off season' remark...

 

Swansea haven't finished above us since 2013 (when Fulham and Norwich were also better than us). We are clearly better than them at this.

 

Come back about this if Leicester finish above us in the next three seasons, yeah? We've finished above them twice and they've finished above us once since they got back to the Premier League.

[Batman]

Swansea haven't finished above us since 2013 (when Fulham and Norwich were also better than us). We are clearly better than them at this.

 

Come back about this if Leicester finish above us in the next three seasons, yeah? We've finished above them twice and they've finished above us once since they got back to the Premier League.

 

I would gladly finish below leicester for 5 years if we won the premier league 1 season and got to the 1/4 finals of the CL the next

instead, lets hold up finishing 'best of the rest' for 1 season and a failure to get out of a Europa League group as a way of patting ourselves on the back as the best in the league on the transfer front

Edited 1 September, 2017 by Batman

[The9]

maybe not...neither did we, despite united being terrible on the day.

 

I would say probably not, as Man U beat them and drew with them in the two games in the League last season (which also happens to be what we did against them). All this shows is that Swansea had luck that we didn't in each of our one cup finals in the past 6 seasons.

[The9]

I would gladly finish below leicester for 5 years if we won the premier league 1 season and got to the 1/4 finals of the CL the next

 

Absolutely, which is why I said they've been more successful than us in the short term. But it's not a measure of enduring transfer success or club management over a longer period. They captured lightning in a bottle and did everything they could with it. But they immediately reverted to their previous level the season after, because they didn't have the infrastructure to maintain it.

 

At the moment that if they even qualify for Europe again in the next 5 years or reach a major Cup Final they'll be delighted, and I think we're more likely to do that than they are. They're probably just as likely to get relegated, which we're also not - assuming things stay as they are of course, who knows what Mr Gao has planned for us?

[The9]

Anyway, this is completely off-topic...

[verlaine1979]

Absolutely, which is why I said they've been more successful than us in the short term. But it's not a measure of enduring transfer success or club management over a longer period. They captured lightning in a bottle and did everything they could with it. But they immediately reverted to their previous level the season after, because they didn't have the infrastructure to maintain it.

 

At the moment that if they even qualify for Europe again in the next 5 years or reach a major Cup Final they'll be delighted, and I think we're more likely to do that than they are. They're probably just as likely to get relegated, which we're also not - assuming things stay as they are of course, who knows what Mr Gao has planned for us?

 

Why get carried away over the fine margins of last season? We lost our last game, and it was essentially out of our hands whether we finished 8th or 14th. Would you fundamentally revise your opinion of the club's strategy if a couple of goals hadn't been scored on in the last twenty-odd minutes of the season and we'd wound up dropping 6 places?

[The9]

Why get carried away over the fine margins of last season? We lost our last game, and it was essentially out of our hands whether we finished 8th or 14th. Would you fundamentally revise your opinion of the club's strategy if a couple of goals hadn't been scored on in the last twenty-odd minutes of the season and we'd wound up dropping 6 places?

 

I tend to try and take a long view of this stuff and the whole "well managed" argument is based on four to ten year comparisons, so no, I wouldn't be revising my opinion much. There's a range of where everyone is likely to sit and Leicester was an outlier in 2016 and nearer their average either side. Our recent seasons suggest we're nearer 60 points than 45, and our recent finishing stats suggest we can't possibly be consistently that bad at finishing for another season.

[The9]

Why get carried away over the fine margins of last season? We lost our last game, and it was essentially out of our hands whether we finished 8th or 14th. Would you fundamentally revise your opinion of the club's strategy if a couple of goals hadn't been scored on in the last twenty-odd minutes of the season and we'd wound up dropping 6 places?

 

Though to get it back to the point, having the best centre backs we can will help offset our poxy finishing nicely, which hopefully will be one of the main reasons we've decided to keep Van Dijk.