Do We Have A Sell On Clause....... | Vital Football

Do We Have A Sell On Clause.......

redderthanred

Vital Reserves Team
It seems a long time ago now so forgive me if I've forgotten
but do we have a sell on clause on Jamaal Lascelles?

Seems like Chelsea are sniffing around and if it happens I
would think there could be a hefty fee involved.


 
In these times and with his stock rising he will not go for less that £40mil. I doubt very much there is a sell on clause, Fawaz negotiated the same.
 
Even if he went for £40m (which I doubt)

It's only the profit of that, so it's based on £35m of that.

Let's say a 15% sell on.

That gives us £5.25m

That is about the cost of Murphy over a 5 year contract. It's loose change in the current climate really. You might just be able to get two decent L2 prospects for that, if you are lucky. You wouldn't get any change for most good L1 players.

Handy to have, but if Fawaz fooked up again it's not going to be game changing money anyway
 
Pope John XXIII - 23/2/2018 09:50

Even if he went for £40m (which I doubt)

It's only the profit of that, so it's based on £35m of that.

Let's say a 15% sell on.

That gives us £5.25m

That is about the cost of Murphy over a 5 year contract. It's loose change in the current climate really. You might just be able to get two decent L2 prospects for that, if you are lucky. You wouldn't get any change for most good L1 players.

Handy to have, but if Fawaz fooked up again it's not going to be game changing money anyway


Yes, but how many crocked hasbeen free transfer or loanees in their 30s, on the way down without any real desire to continue playing the game apart from picking up their paycheque can it get us?

 
ZedRed - 23/2/2018 09:58

Pope John XXIII - 23/2/2018 09:50

Even if he went for £40m (which I doubt)

It's only the profit of that, so it's based on £35m of that.

Let's say a 15% sell on.

That gives us £5.25m

That is about the cost of Murphy over a 5 year contract. It's loose change in the current climate really. You might just be able to get two decent L2 prospects for that, if you are lucky. You wouldn't get any change for most good L1 players.

Handy to have, but if Fawaz fooked up again it's not going to be game changing money anyway


Yes, but how many crocked hasbeen free transfer or loanees in their 30s, on the way down without any real desire to continue playing the game apart from picking up their paycheque can it get us?

I already said: one
 
It's interesting that people question signings of Murphy's age or question why Forest needed another ACM in Dowell (when it was obvious Forest needed experience, goals and 'someone' to replace the ACM roles vacated by Lansbury, Cohen and Reid.)

Without Murphy's and Dowell's goals, Forest would be in deep, deep trouble.

SA.
 
Strawberry Avenger - 23/2/2018 12:13

It's interesting that people question signings of Murphy's age or question why Forest needed another ACM in Dowell (when it was obvious Forest needed experience, goals and 'someone' to replace the ACM roles vacated by Lansbury, Cohen and Reid.)
Without Murphy's and Dowell's goals, Forest would be in deep, deep trouble.

SA.

Exactly. With some claiming them as "evidence" that Warbz summer spree was a failure. Some go a far as labelling Dowell as a coward. Usual short sighted madness.
 
Forest were nosediving/falling like a stone under 'been found out' Warburton, young players wilting under the pressure of the Championship just as the young guns did under Hart.

Many Academy players have been introduced quickly and played too many games because Forest didn't have the quality experienced players to guide their development.

The signings of Watson, Colback, Geddy, Tomlin and Pants will prove pivotal. Four of those five managed the game time very well over the last two matches. They're all on the mature side. But you need that in a good Championship side. I'm sure the signings of Lolley, the CH and LB will also prove shrewd signings. Lolley on one side compliments Cash on the other. Both offer energy. (Lolley's energy replaces Cohen's? Something Forest have needed. A player to just run and keep on running...)

Didn't Watson, Colback, Murphy, Geddy feature in Promotion winning sides? They're winners. They offer leadership. Something Forest simply didn't have under Warburton. Once Murphy got injured the game was up. Forest looked rudderless. And that's what you get when you don't do your transfer business along the spine of a side with battle hardened or mature players of quality who have done it or can do it. I can see why Warburton has his transfer window critics. He had more time to assess his squad than Karanka and do something about it. In that regard, Karanka's transfer business feels far more influential and, in my view, will prove to be so in the longer term.

In Watson, you can tell finally have a real Captain. He's been massively influential in the last two games. As have the others. Offering 'game management', 'keeping going' if you fall behind and grinding the opposition down and far more vocal.

If Forest get two seasons out of those players and even have a promotion push then they've proven shrewd acquisitions. Doing it with a young squad of Academy kids is football romanticism. Forest were never going to storm the top 6 and stay there. Karanka has done in one window what Warburton needed another window or so to achieve.

Karanka has had no pre-season but had quickly assessed Forest's short comings (and they weren't just 2-4 young players from completion...it seems...) and has been brutal and swift in addressing it. (A Chicago Typewriter post Preston...or maybe verging on shock paddles to revive a corpse of a squad, in truth. So much dead wood...) The rest is gelling and training pitch stuff. He'll just about have enough time to turn the ship around. Even under Billy MK I, turning the ship around took a bit of time. Remember the Dextor goal vs Bristol? Perhaps Tomlin's goal is a sign that Forest are turning in the right direction.

Karanka's won promotion from the Champion and Warburton hasn't.

I don't like Warnock. However, he has an innate understanding of football in the Championship.
...first he stabilised the ship at Cardiff avoiding relegation and now 2nd and challenging for Promotion?

SA.
 
Bremen Tree - 23/2/2018 12:22

Strawberry Avenger - 23/2/2018 12:13

It's interesting that people question signings of Murphy's age or question why Forest needed another ACM in Dowell (when it was obvious Forest needed experience, goals and 'someone' to replace the ACM roles vacated by Lansbury, Cohen and Reid.)
Without Murphy's and Dowell's goals, Forest would be in deep, deep trouble.

SA.

Exactly. With some claiming them as "evidence" that Warbz summer spree was a failure. Some go a far as labelling Dowell as a coward. Usual short sighted madness.

I don't think Warburton's time here was a failure, either in football or the transfer window. Some transfers work, some don't. Even Brian Clough knew that. I liked Warburton's football philosophy and was happy with the idea of the transfer window he had. But Karanka has nailed the areas (bar striker...) that he didn't address e.g. CH, CM and a Keeper which proved to be his undoing (I'm sure he tried for a CH and a Keeper...but he didn't, crucially, get them...) and funnily enough, Karanka managed to get two keepers, a CH, a LB and a battery of much needed strength and quality along the spine of the side. Forest fans could see it. And Karanka managed to do it without blowing two million on a RB when that area was reasonably well covered.

Forest are coming out the tail end of FFP...and a take over. I can see why Brit went and why Murphy came in...complimented by Cummings. (Forest fans always say, 'Why don't we go for a good young striker... It could have worked, it didn't. Cummings or Brereton? The latter is 18, he's young. Forest fans want Academy strikers/prospects. But he's not scoring the goals. There you have two young prospects that don't score and you're suddenly putting your hopes on Murphy. He was part of a successful Newcy side and plays for his national side. Yet some Forest fans felt hard done to. We've be more hard done to without his goals.

Ironically, Ollie Watkins went to Brentford. Maybe he was the 'one.' Warburton and Forest missed a trick there. He reminds me a little of Colllymore running at defences...)

Karanka's transfer window was a stand out window, historically, for Forest. No coincidence he replaced almost an entire team. Ten players. Without massive transfer fees, certainly not £4 million for two players..?

The shake out had been a long time coming. How can you have players from 8 different managers on your books? Who is their loyalty to? Will they play for another manager on the 'revolving' Forest door? In that regard, after Preston, Karanka realised his head would be next for the chop and that Forest's squad was paper thin in terms of players allied for the project. Drastic surgery... No surprise to me that he 'Caponed' 8 players out and made it clear who was boss and whether players want to be here, step up or step out. 'Bout time.

You can see why 'bad apples' or cynicism creeps in. Cummings looked a good signing. But as soon as he got the chance to play for Rangers he was off. They don't all work out. But Lolley drops down from the Premier to play for Forest. You either buy into a manager, a club, a team or a project or you don't. A lot of the characters Karanka has brought are experienced, won stuff, dropped down a division for the cause or are seasoned pros who are battlers.

Forest didn't have Brit's goals this time. I'm sure Karanka probably tried to bring in a striker e.g. Rhodes? (?) But the ten he brought in will prove to be more pivotal as Forest were weak in just about every part of the field...with no depth of quality to shuffle the deck of cards.

Many young players maybe aren't equipped for a rugged and robust Championship season. Even the physical Worrall has looked a little battle worn and shell shocked at times (i.e. covering for Mancienne...who has enough on looking after his own game never mind being a Captain which he never is...) It didn't work for Hart. Why would it for Warburton? When Murphy lost form/got injured then the team struggled without that leadership. No surprise.

The Championship. You need to be a tough athlete who can play a bit. It's a physical league. And unless you have the budget to Man City your way out of it, I don't see an Academy group coasting the league. They'll get 'old manned.'

Karanka spotted that experience isn't enough if you have bad apples in the camp who are after 'the last pay check' or easy money. Bad Apples can be young and immature or old and cynical.

The current crop of imports have bought into Karanka's project by cancelling their contracts with their current clubs where they could have sat, not played and took the money. That suggests they want to play. eg. Watson. eg. Lolley who dropped down a division to play for Forest.

Players like that I want wearing the Forest badge. Doesn't matter if they're mid twenties or 32 if they have something to offer.

SA.
 
Pope John XXIII - 23/2/2018 09:50

Even if he went for £40m (which I doubt)

It's only the profit of that, so it's based on £35m of that.

Let's say a 15% sell on.

That gives us £5.25m

That is about the cost of Murphy over a 5 year contract. It's loose change in the current climate really. You might just be able to get two decent L2 prospects for that, if you are lucky. You wouldn't get any change for most good L1 players.

Handy to have, but if Fawaz fooked up again it's not going to be game changing money anyway

Dimissive fantasist nonesense.

When, if ever, was the last time a L1 player went for that kind of money, 5,2M? The highest this season was half that figure.

Who was the last L2 players that cost 2,6M? The highest this season was 1,8M.

Any money that is received via a sell on claus is money in the bank and cannot be looked down upon. I thought a teacher would understand the benefits of a little extra cash.

 
Strawberry Avenger - 23/2/2018 12:13

It's interesting that people question signings of Murphy's age or question why Forest needed another ACM in Dowell (when it was obvious Forest needed experience, goals and 'someone' to replace the ACM roles vacated by Lansbury, Cohen and Reid.)

Without Murphy's and Dowell's goals, Forest would be in deep, deep trouble.

SA.

Firstly, it's not the player so much as the money I personally had a problem with.

Murphy is a good player and great pro. But his age reduces the chance of him justifying the outlay considerably because there are so many risks involved at that age.

The average player of his age and position is well into decline and he has been struggling.

I don't recall anyone being against the signing of Dowell at any point either.

But of course, the alternative to Murphy in the summer wasn't 'no one'.

Yes, we would be in trouble without his goals.

But equally we might have signed someone who wouldn't be injured for two month and unable to score for three.

Brentford signed Oliver Watkins for probably a smaller outlay and he has as many goals, slightly more games but also far more potential to improve and sell on value
 
Bremen Tree - 23/2/2018 12:36

Pope John XXIII - 23/2/2018 09:50

Even if he went for £40m (which I doubt)

It's only the profit of that, so it's based on £35m of that.

Let's say a 15% sell on.

That gives us £5.25m

That is about the cost of Murphy over a 5 year contract. It's loose change in the current climate really. You might just be able to get two decent L2 prospects for that, if you are lucky. You wouldn't get any change for most good L1 players.

Handy to have, but if Fawaz fooked up again it's not going to be game changing money anyway

Dimissive fantasist nonesense.

When, if ever, was the last time a L1 player went for that kind of money, 5,2M? The highest this season was half that figure.

Who was the last L2 players that cost 2,6M? The highest this season was 1,8M.

Any money that is received via a sell on claus is money in the bank and cannot be looked down upon. I thought a teacher would understand the benefits of a little extra cash.

Britt from league 1 Peterborough was £5.5m to us. Agree it isn't the going rate but it soon will be.
 
Will.NFFC - 23/2/2018 13:01

Bremen Tree - 23/2/2018 12:36

Pope John XXIII - 23/2/2018 09:50

Even if he went for £40m (which I doubt)

It's only the profit of that, so it's based on £35m of that.

Let's say a 15% sell on.

That gives us £5.25m

That is about the cost of Murphy over a 5 year contract. It's loose change in the current climate really. You might just be able to get two decent L2 prospects for that, if you are lucky. You wouldn't get any change for most good L1 players.

Handy to have, but if Fawaz fooked up again it's not going to be game changing money anyway

Dimissive fantasist nonesense.

When, if ever, was the last time a L1 player went for that kind of money, 5,2M? The highest this season was half that figure.

Who was the last L2 players that cost 2,6M? The highest this season was 1,8M.

Any money that is received via a sell on claus is money in the bank and cannot be looked down upon. I thought a teacher would understand the benefits of a little extra cash.

Britt from league 1 Peterborough was £5.5m to us. Agree it isn't the going rate but it soon will be.

Cheers. :35: I forgot about that nugget. How we miss his goals.
 
Pope John XXIII - 23/2/2018 09:50

Even if he went for £40m (which I doubt)

It's only the profit of that, so it's based on £35m of that.

Let's say a 15% sell on.

That gives us £5.25m

That is about the cost of Murphy over a 5 year contract. It's loose change in the current climate really. You might just be able to get two decent L2 prospects for that, if you are lucky. You wouldn't get any change for most good L1 players.

Handy to have, but if Fawaz fooked up again it's not going to be game changing money anyway


Yeah why bother getting money for doing absolutely nothing at all it’s not like we couldn’t invest that money in the academy or cleaning up the ground or hiring some back room people or you know use it towards FFP.

You really are a clown of the highest order but I assume as usual you’ve only had this opinion to cause an argument so you can get a raging 2 incher over the pages & pages of arguments you’ve caused but are the victim of.
 
Bremen Tree - 23/2/2018 12:36

Pope John XXIII - 23/2/2018 09:50

Even if he went for £40m (which I doubt)

It's only the profit of that, so it's based on £35m of that.

Let's say a 15% sell on.

That gives us £5.25m

That is about the cost of Murphy over a 5 year contract. It's loose change in the current climate really. You might just be able to get two decent L2 prospects for that, if you are lucky. You wouldn't get any change for most good L1 players.

Handy to have, but if Fawaz fooked up again it's not going to be game changing money anyway

Dimissive fantasist nonesense.

When, if ever, was the last time a L1 player went for that kind of money, 5,2M? The highest this season was half that figure.

Who was the last L2 players that cost 2,6M? The highest this season was 1,8M.

Any money that is received via a sell on claus is money in the bank and cannot be looked down upon. I thought a teacher would understand the benefits of a little extra cash.

We were rejected with a near 2m package for a Luton fullback this summer.

Wake up. That's where it is going.
4 years ago we spent £5.5m on a good L1 striker and in the same window another good L1 player (Wilson) went for £4.5m. That will be 4 years ago in the next window.

A year before that Wolves wanted nearly as much for Sakho from us.

I have no idea why you think the job I do has any relevance to a discussion on transfer fee inflation- a bit pathetic really
 
If Forest had managed to add the experience along the spine under Warburton maybe he'd still have a job. However, Reading (who play a similar to and beat Warburton's system) who were in the Championship play off finals(?) are struggling.

Is the Championship the anti-football league?

I don't take any joy in Warnock's Cardiff being 2nd or their 'old manning' Warburton's Forest.

Get the feeling that under Karanka, Forest will be no pushovers and will make teams work harder for that 'sucker punch.'

SA.
 
Woanz - 23/2/2018 13:08

Pope John XXIII - 23/2/2018 09:50

Even if he went for £40m (which I doubt)

It's only the profit of that, so it's based on £35m of that.

Let's say a 15% sell on.

That gives us £5.25m

That is about the cost of Murphy over a 5 year contract. It's loose change in the current climate really. You might just be able to get two decent L2 prospects for that, if you are lucky. You wouldn't get any change for most good L1 players.

Handy to have, but if Fawaz fooked up again it's not going to be game changing money anyway


Yeah why bother getting money for doing absolutely nothing at all it’s not like we couldn’t invest that money in the academy or cleaning up the ground or hiring some back room people or you know use it towards FFP.

You really are a clown of the highest order but I assume as usual you’ve only had this opinion to cause an argument so you can get a raging 2 incher over the pages & pages of arguments you’ve caused but are the victim of.

Can't even begin to imagine why that post has illicited such an aggressive reaction from you or why YOU are trying to provoke an argument from it.

Of course all free money is welcome and I never said we should turn it down.

I was just making a simple point that transfer inflation has reached levels where sell on fees aren't as amazing as they used to be.

It would take someone being sold on for Gareth Bale money to be able to make a real decisive difference to a championship club's season. Even that would only ring maybe £10m, which is not an extraordinary spend for a SBC club any more unfortunately.

But by all means over react, respond with abuse and then try to claim it's my fault
 
Pope John XXIII - 23/2/2018 13:10

Bremen Tree - 23/2/2018 12:36

Pope John XXIII - 23/2/2018 09:50

Even if he went for £40m (which I doubt)

It's only the profit of that, so it's based on £35m of that.

Let's say a 15% sell on.

That gives us £5.25m

That is about the cost of Murphy over a 5 year contract. It's loose change in the current climate really. You might just be able to get two decent L2 prospects for that, if you are lucky. You wouldn't get any change for most good L1 players.

Handy to have, but if Fawaz fooked up again it's not going to be game changing money anyway

Dimissive fantasist nonesense.

When, if ever, was the last time a L1 player went for that kind of money, 5,2M? The highest this season was half that figure.

Who was the last L2 players that cost 2,6M? The highest this season was 1,8M.

Any money that is received via a sell on claus is money in the bank and cannot be looked down upon. I thought a teacher would understand the benefits of a little extra cash.

We were rejected with a near 2m package for a Luton fullback this summer.

Wake up. That's where it is going.
4 years ago we spent £5.5m on a good L1 striker and in the same window another good L1 player (Wilson) went for £4.5m. That will be 4 years ago in the next window.

A year before that Wolves wanted nearly as much for Sakho from us.

I have no idea why you think the job I do has any relevance to a discussion on transfer fee inflation- a bit pathetic really

As Will pointed out these transfer fees are not yet the norm. To try and paint this picture is fantasy. So the water may be boiling but it is not hot enough to emit a nice Sumatra aroma

Re: Job etc. I thought teachers would be in a good position to appreciate the benefits of any additional income, however small. As opposed to dismissing the benefits like you posted.