Yankuba Minteh (now playing for Brighton & Hove Albion)

[SEMTEX]

Does anyone disagree with that sentiment like? The game has been broken on many fronts for a long time. 
 

But we’re actually playing the broken game for a change, rather than letting some other fuck (Chelsea) get there first, so it’s rather encouraging. 
 

Hopefully some day soon the old blokes in charge pull their fingers out and do something good for the game, but I’m not holding my breath. 

[Menace]

I completely disagree with it. It's the right approach, if he turns out to be a world beater we have a first team starter, it it doesn't work out we'll make a minimal loss. It's a win / win. Elite clubs have been doing it for ages so why shouldn't we.

[BonesJones]

 

 

Cba to look if it's been posted.

[ponsaelius]

Like I say, I didn't say we shouldn't do it. It's definitely a sensible transfer policy for the club - particularly with FFP and where we are right now in terms of infrastructure. Just don't think it's particularly great for football and certainly don't think it's good for young players when they're bought up en masse at this age profile and farmed around on loan as primarily a money making scheme with the off chance they might actually be good enough to play for you.

 

Loan your own academy players out, sure. Sign young players for the first team picture, great. But the cynical nature of the buy and immediately loan out 18-21 bracket is a shitty example of modern football business.

 

 

 

Edited June 12, 2023 by ponsaelius

[The Bonk]

6 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

Like I say, I didn't say we shouldn't do it. It's definitely a sensible transfer policy for the club - particularly with FFP and where we are right now in terms of infrastructure. Just don't think it's particularly great for football and certainly don't think it's good for young players when they're bought up en masse at this age profile and farmed around on loan as primarily a money making scheme with the off chance they might actually be good enough to play for you.

 

Loan your own academy players out, sure. Sign young players for the first team picture, great. But the cynical nature of the buy and immediately loan out 18-21 bracket is a shitty example of modern football business.

 

 

 

 

 

We buy a prospect and he goes to the champions of Holland. I'm failing to see any negative here? 

[Viana]

31 minutes ago, SEMTEX said:

Does anyone disagree with that sentiment like? The game has been broken on many fronts for a long time. 
 

But we’re actually playing the broken game for a change, rather than letting some other fuck (Chelsea) get there first, so it’s rather encouraging. 
 

Hopefully some day soon the old blokes in charge pull their fingers out and do something good for the game, but I’m not holding my breath. 

I'd argue the first proper crack was Abramovich. 

 

He drastically inflated prices and forced the arms race to be the best in the league. There was nothing strategic about his growth. He just kept putting money in. Fuck consequences. Now that's just a crack, that's where you can start to implement rules to stop dodgy characters coming in, or spending with little sustainability. The league didn't do that because they had the best show in town. The consequence of those actions allowed Man City to be bought by Shinawatra and then sold to a middle eastern royal/politican with deep deep pockets. There is always a bigger fish.

 

Once that worked out for City you knew more would see the potential and possibility to do it. The league was already sectioned into have and have nots before Man City, and the difference with them is they've gone about trying to source ways to make it sustainable with a multi-club model. They've also industrialized the scouting process to where they rarely, if ever, have flops anymore. Gone are the days of Eliaquim Mangala for 42m.

 

It's Brighton on a far bigger scale. The difference, however, is that the money is from a far away land that most people don't know about. They tried to apply the rules to Man City after the fact, and unsurprisingly, men with lots of money used lawyers to find loopholes. 

 

I don't know if there's a hard reset for football to be quite frank. My issue is only that it seems most journalists object to this stuff when it's tied to success. Mike Ashley plastering shite on the stadium was fine, but Sela putting money into the club (at market rate) is seen as a travesty. Either both are or neither are. They'll also happily show up for a media kick about at Old Trafford then wonder why people don't take them seriously. They live in the grey. 

[Viana]

13 minutes ago, ponsaelius said:

Like I say, I didn't say we shouldn't do it. It's definitely a sensible transfer policy for the club - particularly with FFP and where we are right now in terms of infrastructure. Just don't think it's particularly great for football and certainly don't think it's good for young players when they're bought up en masse at this age profile and farmed around on loan as primarily a money making scheme with the off chance they might actually be good enough to play for you.

 

Loan your own academy players out, sure. Sign young players for the first team picture, great. But the cynical nature of the buy and immediately loan out 18-21 bracket is a shitty example of modern football business.

 

 

 

 

It's bad for football and bad for the player, but as long as Moises Caicedo costs 70m you'll see teams taking 10 punts on a 7m player in the hope he's that guy. I think the thing is, we've always done this. Go back to Aaron Spear, Ben Tozer. The difference is the arms reach further than before. They cost more money, the prospects are more elite. 

[Geordie Ahmed]

The loan regulations in terms of the limits could help with player hoarding however it doesn't include U21 players, which is perhaps where UEFA need to look at 

[Conjo]

2 hours ago, SEMTEX said:

Does anyone disagree with that sentiment like? The game has been broken on many fronts for a long time. 
 

But we’re actually playing the broken game for a change, rather than letting some other fuck (Chelsea) get there first, so it’s rather encouraging. 
 

Hopefully some day soon the old blokes in charge pull their fingers out and do something good for the game, but I’m not holding my breath. 

 

Pretty much this. Love that we take the same advantages as other. Would love if it was regulated so neither we or anyone else could do it.

[The College Dropout]

2 hours ago, Viana said:

It's bad for football and bad for the player, but as long as Moises Caicedo costs 70m you'll see teams taking 10 punts on a 7m player in the hope he's that guy. I think the thing is, we've always done this. Go back to Aaron Spear, Ben Tozer. The difference is the arms reach further than before. They cost more money, the prospects are more elite. 

Nah previously we signed young players with a view that they would become first team players. 
 

I don’t follow Brightons transfers closely but I believe they also sign players with a view of becoming first team regulars.  Or at least becoming a regular for one of Bloom’s clubs. 
 

It looks like we are doing what City and Chelsea have done. Sign players for FFP circumvention.  Sign them cheap and young, loan them out, sell for a profit.  
 

From a business perspective I understand it. I do the same in FM and it’s pretty fun. But IRL it’s plastic and lame but that’s the modern game.  

[McDog]

4 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Nah previously we signed young players with a view that they would become first team players. 
 

I don’t follow Brightons transfers closely but I believe they also sign players with a view of becoming first team regulars.  Or at least becoming a regular for one of Bloom’s clubs. 
 

It looks like we are doing what City and Chelsea have done. Sign players for FFP circumvention.  Sign them cheap and young, loan them out, sell for a profit.  
 

From a business perspective I understand it. I do the same in FM and it’s pretty fun. But IRL it’s plastic and lame but that’s the modern game.  

 

 

It's 100% not circumventing FFP. It's profit and loss and this team had nothing to sell while most teams do. Newcastle can only spend which is a big problem.

 

 

 

 

 

[r0cafella]

Ultimately, any changes will only make things worse for us so I’ve got no issues with us using this practice. 
 

I think @ponsaeliuspoints are more moral in nature and I can’t help but agree on that basis. 

[The College Dropout]

15 minutes ago, McDog said:

 

 

It's 100% not circumventing FFP. It's profit and loss and this team had nothing to sell while most teams do. Newcastle can only spend which is a big problem.

 

 

 

 

 

It is to some degree. Chelsea pay these players high wages too. They signed KDB for 7m on a 5.5 year deal and sold him 2.5 years later for 18m. That’s an FFP profit of 14-15m. 

[McDog]

Just now, The College Dropout said:

It is to some degree. Chelsea pay these players high wages too. They signed KDB for 7m on a 5.5 year deal and sold him 2.5 years later for 18m. That’s an FFP profit of 14-15m. 

 

 

Right, profit. That's what it's all about. I understand others saying it's bad for the game but as much as I love English football, it's always been about who generates the most cash. It's tough. I'm a yank who won't come in here and tell you what you as a league should or should not do. I respect it for what it is and if change happens for the better, I'm all for it.

[Viana]

53 minutes ago, The College Dropout said:

Nah previously we signed young players with a view that they would become first team players. 
 

I don’t follow Brightons transfers closely but I believe they also sign players with a view of becoming first team regulars.  Or at least becoming a regular for one of Bloom’s clubs. 
 

It looks like we are doing what City and Chelsea have done. Sign players for FFP circumvention.  Sign them cheap and young, loan them out, sell for a profit.  
 

From a business perspective I understand it. I do the same in FM and it’s pretty fun. But IRL it’s plastic and lame but that’s the modern game.  

I don't know if I'd say we're Chelsea or Man City. I think we're closer to Brighton.

 

I mean if we're talking about the type of system Pons is outlining you're better highlighting Udinese or Benfica. Even then, the idea it 'circumvents FFP' is a misnomer because you can't keep losing money on these guys. They aren't tax write-offs.

 

 

Edited June 13, 2023 by Viana

[madras]

1 hour ago, Viana said:

I don't know if I'd say we're Chelsea or Man City. I think we're closer to Brighton.

 

I mean if we're talking about the type of system Pons is outlining you're better highlighting Udinese or Benfica. Even then, the idea it 'circumvents FFP' is a misnomer because you can't keep losing money on these guys. They aren't tax write-offs.

 

 

 

Aren't the systems basically the same ? Identify young players, develop them with an eye to the first team but where they differ is that Man City and Chelsea are better placed to keep them if they make it with EVERY club looking to sell for decent profit due to circumstances (worrybof losing players for free, restrictions of squad size, not sure player will reach required level etc).

 

In the past some clubs didn't focus on development so much, choosing to pick off other clubs, not so much now.

 

 

Edited June 13, 2023 by madras

[Emotic]

4 hours ago, BonesJones said:

 

 

Cba to look if it's been posted.

Articulate, motivated and gave thanks to the people who have helped in along the way. I hope he does very well and tears up the Dutch league for us. 

[Doctor Zaius]

Hopefully he gets plenty of opportunities. My first thought was its quite a step up going from 17 games in the Danish league to the Dutch title holders.

[McCormick]

Cool loan on paper but I doubt he gets much game time. I’m sure Feyenoord have their own youth prospects that they’d give preference to over some kid on loan they have little chance of buying.

[Menace]

Delighted with the loan btw, he must have something about him cause Feyenoord are a very attacking/high press team and I doubt we'd have sent him there just to be a squad filler. Imagine in a few years when we have our own version of Mitoma/Enciso/Ferguson etc - can't wait man.

 

Ashworth was one of our greatest hires.

[JP]

Pot 1 champs league for a loan, brilliant move all round.

 

[ponsaelius]

1 hour ago, McCormick said:

Cool loan on paper but I doubt he gets much game time. I’m sure Feyenoord have their own youth prospects that they’d give preference to over some kid on loan they have little chance of buying.

 

Yeah I think he's possibly been pitched too highly as well. Feyenoord don't have a B team in the Eerste either if he was on the periphery.

[gbandit]

So you’re telling me Hearts might have a chance in January?

[Ste]

Potential for a possible partnership between the two clubs? See how we go with this player then look to send more highly rated youngsters in the future?

[The College Dropout]

9 hours ago, Viana said:

I don't know if I'd say we're Chelsea or Man City. I think we're closer to Brighton.

 

I mean if we're talking about the type of system Pons is outlining you're better highlighting Udinese or Benfica. Even then, the idea it 'circumvents FFP' is a misnomer because you can't keep losing money on these guys. They aren't tax write-offs.

 

 

 

Disagree. 
 

Brighton sign players and have a clear path way for them to get into the first team squad. That’s in large part the appeal. They don’t sign multiple players for the same position.  Chelsea and City sign these players for economic and FFP reasons.  Little care is given if they make it to the first team as long as the players is economically viable.  
 

circumvent May be the wrong word but it certainly helps to ‘game’ FFP. Even if it’s not an actual profit it can be a FFP profit due to amortisation.  

11 hours ago, madras said:

Aren't the systems basically the same ? Identify young players, develop them with an eye to the first team but where they differ is that Man City and Chelsea are better placed to keep them if they make it with EVERY club looking to sell for decent profit due to circumstances (worrybof losing players for free, restrictions of squad size, not sure player will reach required level etc).

 

In the past some clubs didn't focus on development so much, choosing to pick off other clubs, not so much now.

 

 

 

They are only the same in terms getting in high potential young players.  It’s a very different experience as a player or fan. 
 

As a player you sign for Chelsea at 14-18. You may win the Youth Cup.  Go on loan a few times. If all goes well most likely be sold by the time you’re 23 for a lot of money.  Not because you’re not good enough - it’s just that there’s no pathway for you into the first team.  KDB, Lukaku, Ake all came from Chelsea and played in the CL final.  City do less of the stockpiling signings at 18+ but they do it at youth level. 
 

At Brighton the experience is different.  The USP is that there will be pathways to regular first team football. 

 

One thing I like about Arsenal, Liverpool and Man U is that the fans get to enjoy youth products and young signings. The connection to a Saka or Rashford or Trent is crazy as a fan.  Love to see it. If a youth product doesn’t play in the first team it’s because the management just don’t think he’s good enough. 
 

 

Part of the plasticity of City is all the youngsters that just don’t care about City and are angling to leave as soon as they can.  Sancho, Lavia, Edozie etc. The ones that stay like Cole Palmer are beginning to waste their careers. I’d rather be a little less successful than City but actual have players from the academy or young signings actually play and represent us. We might have too. 
 

 

Anyways that’s the game these days. I’ll be following this lad and I hope he comes back to be an important player for us.