Release or retain?

[GhostoftheBok]

On another note, have we had any indication of whether the club intend to try and bring Flanagan in on a free in the summer, or whether he's regarded as out of our range? Given his injury record and assault conviction, you'd think a number of clubs would avoid him.

What makes you think anybody can answer that at this stage ? I'd imagine even if the club knew they'd hardly be likely to broadcast anything that could alert other clubs to our intent. Anyway, he's on loan from Liverpool and a young England prospect so it looks like a "nobody knows" right now.

I don't necessarily think anyone can answer it. That's why I asked if there had been any indication of our intentions, rather than just asking whether we had an intention to sign him or not. "Nobody knows" is a perfectly sensible answer.

[GhostoftheBok]

I'd be very happy if we could recruit Flanagan, Burke and Robinson to the squad next season. They could all have potential profit in them, particularly the first two

Wouldn't Burke and Robinson command fees?

[Bruce Rioja]

I'd be very happy if we could recruit Flanagan, Burke and Robinson to the squad next season. They could all have potential profit in them, particularly the first two

Wouldn't Burke and Robinson command fees?

I'd have thought so. Robinson's just been called up to the US squad as well, hasn't he? Would love to keep the pair of them but I imagine it'll be a struggle on both fronts.

[Prufrock]

Burke will be playing against us for West Ham.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Burke's contracted until 2020, Robinson to 2019. Thinking about it, I don't think they'd be available on an automatic free anyway as they're both club-trained academy graduates – Jedi has been at Everton since he was 11, Burke at the Ammers since he was seven or eight. Doesn't mean the clubs wouldn't be allowed to release them to us for nothing, but you imagine it'd be a strange decision – particularly for Everton.

I think we're more likely to get Jedi's fellow Everton left-back Brendan Galloway, former England U21 (he's just turned 22 this week), 6ft1in, has played in various positions including centre-back. Their next big thing two years ago, he's been loaned out for the past two seasons to WBA and Sunderland and his career has stalled. He's got a year left on his contract but is looking for a new start – in January he wanted Everton to cancel his Mackems loan and send him back to his first club MK Dons, where he came through alongside Dele Alli – and I can imagine us giving him an option next season.

As for Flanagan (who can also play left-back, albeit not as convincingly as on the other side), I read in the Echo that he's on £28kpw under the contract he signed in March 2016. That contract is reported by the Echo to be to 2019, but I've also read that the final year is an option, and it would be no surprise at all if club and player were to part company this summer. As GotB notes, his options may be limited by his recent off-field actions, but football's ethics can be fluid (and he does seem genuinely contrite). A bigger question might be whether he'd take the wage slash (up to two-thirds off, if we're self-capped at £10kpw) to come to us, but that will also depend who else wants him.

[Dr Hotdog]

The only way I see Flanagan ever coming back in on loan.

[GhostoftheBok]

Everton have a few youth players who look to have potential, but haven't necessarily progressed in the last year or two. A loan from them would probably benefit the squad. However, what I am trying to look at is transfers in the light of Ken's comments about wanting to change the transfer policy to one where we bring in players who can then be sold on at a profit after being developed - or that's how I understood what he said. Clubs in our position have previously done well out of younger players who have failed to make the grade at the top level and been released by their clubs, or are available for minimal amounts. It's arguably more viable than looking don the leagues for players, as transfers fees have now risen even at lower levels to the point where half decent kids go for small fortunes.

[Harry Genshaw]

The premiership sides are overloaded with kids who'll never be given a chance other than the odd league cup game. That's where we need to be shopping.

If a youth player is released at the end of their contract, does any club taking them on have to pay the development fee?

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

The premiership sides are overloaded with kids who'll never be given a chance other than the odd league cup game. That's where we need to be shopping.

If a youth player is released at the end of their contract, does any club taking them on have to pay the development fee?

Agreed on the first.

On the second, I think (but don't quote me on it) that it's not the case if they're released, ie the club opts not to retain them, rather than if the player winds down his contract. If they offer him a contract and he refuses in order to go elsewhere, that's a different kind of thing - hostile takeover, if you will – and there may be rules in place to protect the first, usually smaller, club from being asset-stripped.

[Dr Hotdog]

The premiership sides are overloaded with kids who'll never be given a chance other than the odd league cup game. That's where we need to be shopping.

If a youth player is released at the end of their contract, does any club taking them on have to pay the development fee?

No fee for released players.

On the flip side to that argument, there's probably a lot to be said for a player who's started at a lower level and progressed year on year (Jamie Vardy, Rickie Lambert etc) rather than being fed from a silver spoon at the top-ranked academies in the country before being scrapped because something isn't right somewhere (Kevin Nolan is an example of this but he was told at 15, probably different to being told at 19-20-21). Most of it is about a player's mentality, and that's as hard a thing to guage as anything.

[GhostoftheBok]

I think it's a player by player thing. You could as easily say that a player dropped by a big club might feel he has something to prove. I don't actually think it's that simple, as you're always dealing with individuals and you have to make a call on an individual basis. If we are looking to build a Championship squad, though, we will likely have to look in both directions (and everywhere else) if we are to get anywhere. There's also an element of risk, though. Not every youth product who drops down a league is a Danny Drinkwater and not every lower league hopeful is a Jamie Vardy. We could easily end up with another squad full of duffers nobody wants.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I think it's a player by player thing. You could as easily say that a player dropped by a big club might feel he has something to prove. I don't actually think it's that simple, as you're always dealing with individuals and you have to make a call on an individual basis. If we are looking to build a Championship squad, though, we will likely have to look in both directions (and everywhere else) if we are to get anywhere. There's also an element of risk, though. Not every youth product who drops down a league is a Danny Drinkwater and not every lower league hopeful is a Jamie Vardy. We could easily end up with another squad full of duffers nobody wants.

...which is why I like the short-term contracts habitually handed out under this manager/chairman combo. It started out of necessity but could prove useful. No point forging your own ball and chain.

Transfers are always a risk. For every downwardly mobile Drinkwater there's a couple of dozen Wheatcrofts. For every elevated Vardy there'll be more than a few overpromoted Tom Eaveses. For every rescued SKD there's a Jardel. For every inspired Laville there's a meh Pisano. If there was a guaranteed system we wouldn't be the only one trying it.

[Prufrock]

Yep, got to trust the scouting I guess. Hit rate has been very good so far I'd say.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Yep, got to trust the scouting I guess. Hit rate has been very good so far I'd say.

Scouting is essential but it also requires the soft skills: sounding out managers as to personalities, knowing who needs the arse-kick and who needs the cuddle - and also knowing when to cut your losses. I get the distinct impression that Parkinson is our best individual man-manager since Allardyce, compared to the wildly contrasting but fairly one-size-fits-all styles of Lee, Coyle, Megson, Freedman and Lennon.

[GhostoftheBok]

I think it's a player by player thing. You could as easily say that a player dropped by a big club might feel he has something to prove. I don't actually think it's that simple, as you're always dealing with individuals and you have to make a call on an individual basis. If we are looking to build a Championship squad, though, we will likely have to look in both directions (and everywhere else) if we are to get anywhere. There's also an element of risk, though. Not every youth product who drops down a league is a Danny Drinkwater and not every lower league hopeful is a Jamie Vardy. We could easily end up with another squad full of duffers nobody wants.

...which is why I like the short-term contracts habitually handed out under this manager/chairman combo. It started out of necessity but could prove useful. No point forging your own ball and chain.

Transfers are always a risk. For every downwardly mobile Drinkwater there's a couple of dozen Wheatcrofts. For every elevated Vardy there'll be more than a few overpromoted Tom Eaveses. For every rescued SKD there's a Jardel. For every inspired Laville there's a meh Pisano. If there was a guaranteed system we wouldn't be the only one trying it.

There's the counter to that, though, which is that short contracts also lower player value. A player with 12 months to run is worth less than a player on a 3 year deal and if the model is to become a selling club, that's no use to us. You'll also only attract desperate, unwanted players on those kinds of deals and we've signed up plenty of crap under this new "policy" for that reason. Then, if you have a two-tier system where some players get special, long contracts and most are worrying about their futures year to year you can have issues with morale. We've seen that previously at Spurs and according to reports they've now got that issue at Arsenal.

It's a bit of a bugger. As you said, there's no golden bullet solution or everyone would be doing it.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

We could easily end up with another squad full of duffers nobody wants.

...which is why I like the short-term contracts habitually handed out under this manager/chairman combo. It started out of necessity but could prove useful. No point forging your own ball and chain.

There's the counter to that, though, which is that short contracts also lower player value. A player with 12 months to run is worth less than a player on a 3 year deal and if the model is to become a selling club, that's no use to us. You'll also only attract desperate, unwanted players on those kinds of deals and we've signed up plenty of crap under this new "policy" for that reason. Then, if you have a two-tier system where some players get special, long contracts and most are worrying about their futures year to year you can have issues with morale. We've seen that previously at Spurs and according to reports they've now got that issue at Arsenal.

It's a bit of a bugger. As you said, there's no golden bullet solution or everyone would be doing it.

Truedat. Two-tier or not, I think we have to have our best assets on longer contracts: Vela is (comparatively), and I'd be surprised if we weren't trying to tie Beevers and Ameobi to two-year deals.

Interesting to hear you say we've signed plenty of crap recently, not longer after Prufrock (whose opinion I also value) has called Parky's hit-rate very good. I make it that Parky(/Ken) has made 33 signings, and this is how I'd spilt them up. (I tried to do a straightforward hits-and-misses without the fence-sitting middle ground, but it would be jumping to judgement on some while others have been neither here nor there.)

HITS (12)
Sammy Ameobi
Mark Beevers
Karl Henry
Adam Le Fondre
Filipe Morais
Andrew Taylor
Mark Little
Ben Alnwick
Mark Howard
Antonee Robinson
Jem Karacan
Jon Flanagan

MEH (6)
Chinedu Obasi
Jan Kirchhoff
Tom Thorpe
Will Buckley
James Henry
Reece Burke

MISSES (15)
Stephen Darby
Jamie Proctor
Aaron Wilbraham
Chris Taylor
Craig Noone
Josh Cullen
Viv Solomon-Otabor
Tyler Walker
Harry Charsley
Keshi Anderson
Lewis Buxton
Reece Wabara
Chris Long
Adam Armstrong
Zach Clough

That last name may seem deliberately provocative, but as a loan signing he hasn't worked yet: in the last six games he's been unused in four, and got six minutes in another. Some of the positions are slightly arbitrary and obviously open to change – a month ago I'd have had Buckley and Burke in "misses". And it's worth noting that 10 of the 15 misses are loanees...

[Lost Leopard Spot]

How can Zach Clough be a Miss when he's deliberately not been played? You need another, fourth, category: Abused.

[BWFC_Insane]

How can Zach Clough be a Miss when he's deliberately not been played? You need another, fourth, category: Abused.

He wasn't played at Forest either.

Under different managers too.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

For the record, I like Zach a lot and think he could be very useful on the left of our 4-2-3-1. But once I start making emotional exceptions and creating extra categories, there'd be dozens of 'em: "Promising", "Mystifying", "Worth a go", "Bumbling", "Loan equivalent of a 1.55am nightclub pull" etc.

[Prufrock]

Darby, Proctor and Taylor (C) are the only ones that make me wince.

Rest I can either see why we took the punt or think they were worth a go but didn't work out. Wilbraham, shite as he is was a desperate bid to get a body through the door. Buxton looked really good until his back fell out.

Sammy, Beevers, Fil, Henry and Taylor have been belting signings. Particularly given he's had f*ck all money.