Apparently we rejected a 6 million quid bid for Onuah

Here is the place to talk about all things city and football!

Re: Apparently we rejected a 6 million quid bid for Onuah

Postby john@staustell » Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:39 pm

CitizenYank wrote:God the legalize for the Homegrown Rule takes more time to ponder through than to roll one out.


I think the 'law of unintended consequences' will put an end to this nonsense within the year.
“I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly.”
User avatar
john@staustell
Roberto Mancini's Scarf
 
Posts: 20299
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:35 am
Location: St Austell
Supporter of: City

Re: Apparently we rejected a 6 million quid bid for Onuah

Postby ronk » Fri Aug 06, 2010 3:11 pm

john@staustell wrote:
CitizenYank wrote:God the legalize for the Homegrown Rule takes more time to ponder through than to roll one out.


I think the 'law of unintended consequences' will put an end to this nonsense within the year.


It might get tinkered with but I expect it being here to stay. For it to really take any effect could take years. Remember that the people who really want this is the owners. This is an important measure for reducing wage bills. As contracts start coming up for renewal nothing will do more to push down wages as directors of football who can simply hire someone else. When squads might hoard players, there's a different approach, but when SOMEONE has to go to make other signings then fringe players have to compete with each other for jobs.

The premier league is about to be capped at 500 players + U21s. That's not really any smaller than it already is in terms of number of players being used (498 different players started games in 2008). Some squads may end up with more space, but some teams will be offloading, and when someone gets bought, someone else is likely to get sold/loaned. The trick for smaller clubs should be to cut back their squad so they have some space and start looking for loan deals. Fringe players will be forced out because the decision has to be made early.

One potential issue is the massive difference in potential games (in the same length season). If they'd been clever there'd been some slight (token) system of bigger squads. In time they might reduce squads to 24 for teams not in Europe and 26 for teams still in Europe at Christmas.
“Do onto others — then run!”
B. Hill
User avatar
ronk
Shaun Goater's 103 Goals
 
Posts: 7501
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 12:23 am
Location: Dublin

Re: Apparently we rejected a 6 million quid bid for Onuah

Postby john@staustell » Fri Aug 06, 2010 4:00 pm

ronk wrote:
john@staustell wrote:
CitizenYank wrote:God the legalize for the Homegrown Rule takes more time to ponder through than to roll one out.


I think the 'law of unintended consequences' will put an end to this nonsense within the year.


It might get tinkered with but I expect it being here to stay. For it to really take any effect could take years. Remember that the people who really want this is the owners. This is an important measure for reducing wage bills. As contracts start coming up for renewal nothing will do more to push down wages as directors of football who can simply hire someone else. When squads might hoard players, there's a different approach, but when SOMEONE has to go to make other signings then fringe players have to compete with each other for jobs.

The premier league is about to be capped at 500 players + U21s. That's not really any smaller than it already is in terms of number of players being used (498 different players started games in 2008). Some squads may end up with more space, but some teams will be offloading, and when someone gets bought, someone else is likely to get sold/loaned. The trick for smaller clubs should be to cut back their squad so they have some space and start looking for loan deals. Fringe players will be forced out because the decision has to be made early.

One potential issue is the massive difference in potential games (in the same length season). If they'd been clever there'd been some slight (token) system of bigger squads. In time they might reduce squads to 24 for teams not in Europe and 26 for teams still in Europe at Christmas.


Good point Ronky. I realised it would lead to player unemployment (down the line). But I hadn't thought much beyond the party line of 'improving England youth', which it clearly aint going to do with all the academies full of foreign kids.

Wage/squad reducer it is then.
“I may be drunk, Miss, but in the morning I will be sober and you will still be ugly.”
User avatar
john@staustell
Roberto Mancini's Scarf
 
Posts: 20299
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 9:35 am
Location: St Austell
Supporter of: City

Re: Apparently we rejected a 6 million quid bid for Onuah

Postby ronk » Fri Aug 06, 2010 4:45 pm

You're out the door the season you turn 22 if you're not in the team.

The big gainers will be talented young goalies who are good enough to be 3rd choice at a big club but are still not 21. They free up a squad place. We'll probably see a huge number (maybe even all) of talented young goalies from around the world spending a year or two in the squads of big teams. But once they're 21 they're no use so they return to their own country.
“Do onto others — then run!”
B. Hill
User avatar
ronk
Shaun Goater's 103 Goals
 
Posts: 7501
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 12:23 am
Location: Dublin

Previous

Return to The Maine Football forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AFKAE, BlueinBosnia, Bluemoon4610, blues-clues, gmercer1, Google [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], Nigels Tackle, Scatman and 327 guests