| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K 12:05 - Jun 16 with 3027 views | SaintsNews |
https://www.fansnetwork.co.uk/
If you want to remove this post from the board index, just click the hide post icon below. To hide all our news posts click the ignore user icon under the avatar. |  | | |  |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 12:26 - Jun 16 with 2961 views | Ifonly |
Ross Stewart on £20k shows again the stupidity of not signing that extension well in advance of the end of the season. Either in the PL or Championship he would have been a good value addition to the squad. No wonder he wants to look elsewhere.
How much to get anything like his quality now? If £30k gets you the quality of Charlie Taylor and Jelert (never mind McCarthy and Aribo), then how much for a quality centre forward? I can't see us paying up for anything like Stewart's quality, even if they were available.
It was a major cock up to let him go, but sadly water under the bridge now. | | | |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 12:33 - Jun 16 with 2927 views | SaintNick |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 12:26 - Jun 16 by Ifonly |
Ross Stewart on £20k shows again the stupidity of not signing that extension well in advance of the end of the season. Either in the PL or Championship he would have been a good value addition to the squad. No wonder he wants to look elsewhere.
How much to get anything like his quality now? If £30k gets you the quality of Charlie Taylor and Jelert (never mind McCarthy and Aribo), then how much for a quality centre forward? I can't see us paying up for anything like Stewart's quality, even if they were available.
It was a major cock up to let him go, but sadly water under the bridge now. |
As I have just put on another thread
"So im told Stewart is looking for a last big pay day, with his injury record any potential employer will not be able to get insurance on him.
Usually clubs will insure a player, so that if he suffers a long term injury his wages and treatment will be covered and if it's career ending the club will also get a lump sum pay out.
After spending the best part of 2 1/2- 3 years out with recurring injuries he is now uninsurable, Saints werent willing to offer him more than the one year extension deal that was in the contract.
That is why his agents are trying to get him out of that on the last game technicality.
He is looking for a longer term deal, but may find it hard to get it, however with a club not having to pay a transfer deal he may find someone willing to take a punt with a higher than usual signing on fee for him and a weekly wage heavily weighted on a pay as you play basis.
The general feeling I got was that the club have weighed up the risks and did not want to go longer than a year for a player who will turn 30 next month and who we would be saddled with if we were to get promotion.
They feel that they can find someone better given all the options and issues |  |
| Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime |
| |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 12:56 - Jun 16 with 2861 views | Ifonly |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 12:33 - Jun 16 by SaintNick |
As I have just put on another thread
"So im told Stewart is looking for a last big pay day, with his injury record any potential employer will not be able to get insurance on him.
Usually clubs will insure a player, so that if he suffers a long term injury his wages and treatment will be covered and if it's career ending the club will also get a lump sum pay out.
After spending the best part of 2 1/2- 3 years out with recurring injuries he is now uninsurable, Saints werent willing to offer him more than the one year extension deal that was in the contract.
That is why his agents are trying to get him out of that on the last game technicality.
He is looking for a longer term deal, but may find it hard to get it, however with a club not having to pay a transfer deal he may find someone willing to take a punt with a higher than usual signing on fee for him and a weekly wage heavily weighted on a pay as you play basis.
The general feeling I got was that the club have weighed up the risks and did not want to go longer than a year for a player who will turn 30 next month and who we would be saddled with if we were to get promotion.
They feel that they can find someone better given all the options and issues |
The insurance thing is a bit of an irrelevance really. Clubs need to insure players on long term contracts from career ending injuries, but in RS's case it's irrelevant. Let's say we signed the 1 year extension that we could have done, without insurance, and he immediately got injured and didn't play a single game. That would cost us £1m. In the context of things, and the potential gains, £1m is a rounding error.
But it's highly unlikely that he wouldn't play at all. His injuries are almost all hamstring injuries, which we appear to have worked out how to manage and just need rest to cure. He doesn't have ligament issues like say Phil Jones did, which are far more serious.
We should have acted on the 1 year extension and taken a small risk on the insurance.
Lets see if the club come up with someone better. I think another Damion Downs is far more likely, or even a return of Damion Downs himself. | | | |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 14:41 - Jun 16 with 2707 views | SaintNick |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 12:56 - Jun 16 by Ifonly |
The insurance thing is a bit of an irrelevance really. Clubs need to insure players on long term contracts from career ending injuries, but in RS's case it's irrelevant. Let's say we signed the 1 year extension that we could have done, without insurance, and he immediately got injured and didn't play a single game. That would cost us £1m. In the context of things, and the potential gains, £1m is a rounding error.
But it's highly unlikely that he wouldn't play at all. His injuries are almost all hamstring injuries, which we appear to have worked out how to manage and just need rest to cure. He doesn't have ligament issues like say Phil Jones did, which are far more serious.
We should have acted on the 1 year extension and taken a small risk on the insurance.
Lets see if the club come up with someone better. I think another Damion Downs is far more likely, or even a return of Damion Downs himself. |
Thi was Saints stance, but as I said his people used the lophole about when the last game was to get him as a free agent, so they can negotiate a longer term deal.
They want to basically start an auction for his services.
We would have taken the punt on the 1 year deal but not longer for two reasons.
1. The risk of being left with him barely playing for two years if injured
2. If we had been promoted then we probably would have wanted to replace him for a Premier League campaign as he would have turned 31 | |
| Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime |
| |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 15:21 - Jun 16 with 2673 views | Ifonly |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 14:41 - Jun 16 by SaintNick |
Thi was Saints stance, but as I said his people used the lophole about when the last game was to get him as a free agent, so they can negotiate a longer term deal.
They want to basically start an auction for his services.
We would have taken the punt on the 1 year deal but not longer for two reasons.
1. The risk of being left with him barely playing for two years if injured
2. If we had been promoted then we probably would have wanted to replace him for a Premier League campaign as he would have turned 31 |
Why should we care about anything that happens after 1 year? The club would have had the option to extend for 1 year (anything else would be highly unusual), so that's what we should have done - and done it months ago. The discussion about a longer contract only came up after we allowed the current contract to lapse. That meant we were in to a new negotiation.
I completely understand that he would want longer, as any player over 30 does, but that's not our problem - or it wouldn't have been if we'd acted in time. If we'd acted in time we'd just be extending an existing contract, not negotiating something new.
I also understand why he would want to go. He should be able to get a deal worth more than £20k pw on a one year deal, if that's the longest deal he's being offered, so it makes sense for him. This might be his last contract so I completely understand he would want to make the most of his time left as a player. You criticised him before for being disloyal, but I think that's unfair. The club should have been loyal to him and signed him up when they had the chance. | | | |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 16:07 - Jun 16 with 2579 views | davidargyll |
Cannot understand why everyone is wetting themselves about Ross Stewart.
He wasn't a bad player but he was no world beater either.
I would be amazed if Spors and co didn’t realise what they were doing as his contract was running down and any accusation that they hadn’t read the small print is probably rubbish.
All players are a simple case of mathematics:
Initial cost amortised over contract length plus running costs (ie wages) = X.
A forward would be expected to score a minimum of 10 goals a season at a rate of say £1/2m per goal (and more like £2m per goal in the PL) = Y
If Y exceeds X = NIRVANA, plus you also have a likely profit when you sell.
If X exceeds Y (substantially as in the case of D Downes) = DISASTER plus his sell-on value is well down on what you paid for him.
In Stewart’s case for last season X = c£4m and Y = c£4.5m. So marginally beneficial in 25/26.
But for the first two years at SMS Y was zero.ie he was all cost and no goals.
So net/net, over the full term of his contract WE ARE WELL DOWN.
So any extension of his contract would be questionable maths at best given his injury history and would be very risky.
I regret to say we are well rid of him. | | | |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 16:46 - Jun 16 with 2521 views | Ifonly |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 16:07 - Jun 16 by davidargyll |
Cannot understand why everyone is wetting themselves about Ross Stewart.
He wasn't a bad player but he was no world beater either.
I would be amazed if Spors and co didn’t realise what they were doing as his contract was running down and any accusation that they hadn’t read the small print is probably rubbish.
All players are a simple case of mathematics:
Initial cost amortised over contract length plus running costs (ie wages) = X.
A forward would be expected to score a minimum of 10 goals a season at a rate of say £1/2m per goal (and more like £2m per goal in the PL) = Y
If Y exceeds X = NIRVANA, plus you also have a likely profit when you sell.
If X exceeds Y (substantially as in the case of D Downes) = DISASTER plus his sell-on value is well down on what you paid for him.
In Stewart’s case for last season X = c£4m and Y = c£4.5m. So marginally beneficial in 25/26.
But for the first two years at SMS Y was zero.ie he was all cost and no goals.
So net/net, over the full term of his contract WE ARE WELL DOWN.
So any extension of his contract would be questionable maths at best given his injury history and would be very risky.
I regret to say we are well rid of him. |
Wetting themselves? Hardly, but on your 'piss' poor analysis:
1. His transfer fee is irrelevant to any decision about a contract extension. That is what is known as a "sunk cost". It's now just history. The only thing that matters is whether the extension would have been good value for money. At £20k pw wages, the answer = yes. Your cost/benefit analysis is irrelevant to any decision about what to do in summer 2026.
2. The total cost of his contract extension would be less than £1.3m. If we sign an equivalent replacement, we'll end up paying nearly that just in agent's fees, let alone transfer fee, wages and bonuses. There's no comparison on the cost.
3. His injury record since signing is only relevant if it tells us what his availability would be next year. What happened before 2026 is largely irrelevant because we used to try and play him for 2 full games in a week and were surprised when his hamstring pinged. They've learnt how to get the best out of him now, as this season showed.
4. If you think that a forward can be judged on goals alone then I don't know what to say, other than that you are very wrong. | | | |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 17:31 - Jun 16 with 2481 views | davidargyll |
Thank you for describing my analysis so eloquently.
All i can say is that I am glad you are not deciding who we are offering contracts to.
But lets not trade insults, just agree to differ. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 20:42 - Jun 16 with 2303 views | SaintNick |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 15:21 - Jun 16 by Ifonly |
Why should we care about anything that happens after 1 year? The club would have had the option to extend for 1 year (anything else would be highly unusual), so that's what we should have done - and done it months ago. The discussion about a longer contract only came up after we allowed the current contract to lapse. That meant we were in to a new negotiation.
I completely understand that he would want longer, as any player over 30 does, but that's not our problem - or it wouldn't have been if we'd acted in time. If we'd acted in time we'd just be extending an existing contract, not negotiating something new.
I also understand why he would want to go. He should be able to get a deal worth more than £20k pw on a one year deal, if that's the longest deal he's being offered, so it makes sense for him. This might be his last contract so I completely understand he would want to make the most of his time left as a player. You criticised him before for being disloyal, but I think that's unfair. The club should have been loyal to him and signed him up when they had the chance. |
They couldnt sign him up when they had the chance as they did not know what League they would be in next season, they had to wait till they knew this as how much he was paid would depend on this.
The club were caught out by a technicality of the last game suddenly being the semi final 2nd leg a week earlier and therefore outside the 5 day clause, when up to that point they were 3 days before the last game ie the final at Wembley.
It was completely out of there control | |
| Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime |
| |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 21:45 - Jun 16 with 2222 views | Ifonly |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 20:42 - Jun 16 by SaintNick |
They couldnt sign him up when they had the chance as they did not know what League they would be in next season, they had to wait till they knew this as how much he was paid would depend on this.
The club were caught out by a technicality of the last game suddenly being the semi final 2nd leg a week earlier and therefore outside the 5 day clause, when up to that point they were 3 days before the last game ie the final at Wembley.
It was completely out of there control |
So what if his wage rate depended on the league we were in? Every player gets paid more in the PL. The club will have known in April that he would be useful to them in either league.
In the PL he might not have been a first choice, but to have him as a squad player and an option off the bench would have been perfect. How much would his wages have gone up by if we were in the PL? Even if his wages went up by 50%, you've still got a bargain of a centre forward at £30k pw (the same rate we've been paying Charlie Taylor and Jelert to be squad players in the Championship!). He'd have cost nothing to sign and would have avoided the need to sign an additional PL player who'd have been a problem if we got relegated.
They knew all of this in April and should have acted then. The club allowed themselves to be caught out by a technicality due to bad planning. Any business that leaves themselves a window of just a few days to do something is asking for trouble because unexpected events happen all the time. | | | |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 22:21 - Jun 16 with 2178 views | SaintNick |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 21:45 - Jun 16 by Ifonly |
So what if his wage rate depended on the league we were in? Every player gets paid more in the PL. The club will have known in April that he would be useful to them in either league.
In the PL he might not have been a first choice, but to have him as a squad player and an option off the bench would have been perfect. How much would his wages have gone up by if we were in the PL? Even if his wages went up by 50%, you've still got a bargain of a centre forward at £30k pw (the same rate we've been paying Charlie Taylor and Jelert to be squad players in the Championship!). He'd have cost nothing to sign and would have avoided the need to sign an additional PL player who'd have been a problem if we got relegated.
They knew all of this in April and should have acted then. The club allowed themselves to be caught out by a technicality due to bad planning. Any business that leaves themselves a window of just a few days to do something is asking for trouble because unexpected events happen all the time. |
Firstly there is the issue as to whether they would have wanted to actually activate the contract extension if we were back in the Premier League, Adam Armstrong & Che Adams scored decent totals when we were promoted last time, but didn't get many in the Premier League.
Yes we wanted him in the Championship, but were probably aiming higher back in the Premier.
Secondly we had to wait before we knew what division we would be in, before we could activate the clause, it had to be done within 5 days of the final game, not 5 days before it, only after
You say the club should have acted in April, but they couldn't, this was not a technicality due to bad planning, the Spygate issua happened in May not April.
When we played Preston it was no longer the last game, so again we couldnt act.
Yes unexpected events happen all the time, but no one could have foreseen the events for Saints last month.
The 5 day clause is fairly standard in that if it isn't activated it gives the player a chance to put himself on the market quickly, in truth most of these deals are clear cut, based on a seasons performance so 5 days is not asking for trouble, it gives both parties a chance to make plans for the next season early doors.
It is very easy to blame the club, but it isnt the contract or clause that has caused the issue, the only reason is because we got kicked out for spying | |
| Satisfying The Bloodlust Of The Masses In Peacetime |
| |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 23:36 - Jun 16 with 2131 views | Ifonly |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 22:21 - Jun 16 by SaintNick |
Firstly there is the issue as to whether they would have wanted to actually activate the contract extension if we were back in the Premier League, Adam Armstrong & Che Adams scored decent totals when we were promoted last time, but didn't get many in the Premier League.
Yes we wanted him in the Championship, but were probably aiming higher back in the Premier.
Secondly we had to wait before we knew what division we would be in, before we could activate the clause, it had to be done within 5 days of the final game, not 5 days before it, only after
You say the club should have acted in April, but they couldn't, this was not a technicality due to bad planning, the Spygate issua happened in May not April.
When we played Preston it was no longer the last game, so again we couldnt act.
Yes unexpected events happen all the time, but no one could have foreseen the events for Saints last month.
The 5 day clause is fairly standard in that if it isn't activated it gives the player a chance to put himself on the market quickly, in truth most of these deals are clear cut, based on a seasons performance so 5 days is not asking for trouble, it gives both parties a chance to make plans for the next season early doors.
It is very easy to blame the club, but it isnt the contract or clause that has caused the issue, the only reason is because we got kicked out for spying |
"it had to be done within 5 days of the final game"
I bet that's not true. I bet that was the deadline, not the first date it could be signed. It makes sense that no more than 5 days would be allowed to elapse from the final game so that the player can make plans, as you say. But it makes no sense at all to stop the extension being signed any time before the final game. There would be no point in that at all. It would be crazy contract wording that benefitted no one, so it wouldn't have been in the contract.
So, it would have been within the contract terms to agree the extension in April, and that's what should have happened. Stewart is a better player than Arma, Adams, Archer, Diaz, Onuachu and other players we've had in the PL. He would would have been a great squad player for the PL and about half the going rate of wages for a mid level PL striker. So really cheap in wages and we'd avoid a transfer fee altogether. It was a no brainer.
Not sorting it out in plenty of time always leaves the possibility that something weird will happen... as it did in this case. Saying it couldn't be foreseen misses the point. That's what a contingency is for, it's a buffer against unforeseen events. Trying to do everything right up against the deadline is always going to go wrong at some stage. | | | |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 23:47 - Jun 16 with 2114 views | Butty101 |
| Southampton's Released List Trims Wage Bill By £200K on 22:21 - Jun 16 by SaintNick |
Firstly there is the issue as to whether they would have wanted to actually activate the contract extension if we were back in the Premier League, Adam Armstrong & Che Adams scored decent totals when we were promoted last time, but didn't get many in the Premier League.
Yes we wanted him in the Championship, but were probably aiming higher back in the Premier.
Secondly we had to wait before we knew what division we would be in, before we could activate the clause, it had to be done within 5 days of the final game, not 5 days before it, only after
You say the club should have acted in April, but they couldn't, this was not a technicality due to bad planning, the Spygate issua happened in May not April.
When we played Preston it was no longer the last game, so again we couldnt act.
Yes unexpected events happen all the time, but no one could have foreseen the events for Saints last month.
The 5 day clause is fairly standard in that if it isn't activated it gives the player a chance to put himself on the market quickly, in truth most of these deals are clear cut, based on a seasons performance so 5 days is not asking for trouble, it gives both parties a chance to make plans for the next season early doors.
It is very easy to blame the club, but it isnt the contract or clause that has caused the issue, the only reason is because we got kicked out for spying |
The club had a 6 month window to activate the contract extension according to Adam Blackmore. The club decided to leave it to the last minute, which was daft. Had we gone up and didn’t fancy him in the premiership, he could have been loaned out. It’s a shame as he played his part in the unbeaten run and proved in the cup he could score against the best. |  |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.