What's new

Player watch: Christian Eriksen

Havre

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2019
829
1,065
You're being pretty selective there. The whole quote says:

"In an ideal world no decent player would leave on a free but it's not an ideal world is it? We paid buttons for Eriksen and have received several times his weight in gold back. There's very little to complain about if he goes on a free.

I haven't at any time said I want Eriksen to go on a free or that I'm happy we won't get anything for him. I've just accepted the fact that he holds all the cards and that he clearly planned it that way in order to have complete freedom over his own life. There's nothing the Club can do about that.

Selective? I didn´t say I disagree with your whole post. I disagree with that one sentence.

Of course there are things the club could have done. Everything from telling him 1 year ago he wouldn´t play unless he signed a new deal etc. Not suggesting they should have done so, but clearly there are things that "could have been done". CP managed to get Zaha signed. AV managed to get Grealish signed etc. it is possible to convince players - to either sign or leave.

I too accept what is happening, but I´m not pretending it won´t have consequences (as seemingly many are on here).

My opinion is that you have to be ruthless in such situations. I see many disagree with me - which obviously is fine - kind of the point of a message board like this. Maybe it is because I´m a hockey fan as well. In the NHL, with no transfer fees, you cannot give away value for nothing. If a player is not signing you rather trade him for a worse player just to keep some value instead of letting someone walk for free (of course some still walk for free there as well, but the emphasis is different). I guess it is a positive thing when fans think 30-40-50m is peanuts. Says a lot about how far the club has come at least.
 

doctor stefan Freud

the tired tread of sad biology
Sep 2, 2013
15,170
72,169
If Eriksen in the squad for the season:

Enhances our chances of getting in the top four

Enables us to make another decent run in the Champions League

Supports the integration of our new signings

Is instrumental to us playing effective, entertaining football

Gives us a greater chance of domestic silverware because of quality rotation options

Promotes the club globally because of the above

I’d say we’ve had a very good return on his services and good luck to him. I’d prefer him to sign a new contract but that’s highly unlikely. However, a motivated Eriksen unimpaired by a depleted squad for another season is worth so much currently. If he’d been sold at the weekend, the mood around the club would have been disastrous. Now we have a really competitive squad and a year to plan for life without him
 
Last edited:

buckley

Well-Known Member
Sep 15, 2012
2,595
6,073
Well get used to this Bosman thing as its going to happen more and to all clubs . We already suffered with Cambell ; Liverpool with Mc Manaman ; Arsenal with Ramsey and this is just the beginning and I believe that all clubs paying large transfers will in the future expect players who want big wages will have clubs trying new unseen ways of keeping players .
If not the game is dead and it will be impossible to build with confidence long term . The way forward may be in trying to get the best worldwide youth players as Chelsea have been doing . AT least that way you are not losing. your prize assets for nothing .
I can also see this trend making transfers cheaper as clubs will not be wanting to make massive transfers with no chance of getting your money back . In general players are greedy buggers and will go for the big bucks .
I don't believe this is the case with Eriksen its just that where he wants to go does not want him and its a real conundrum.
 

Indisguise

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2012
7,996
23,386
Selective? I didn´t say I disagree with your whole post. I disagree with that one sentence.

Of course there are things the club could have done. Everything from telling him 1 year ago he wouldn´t play unless he signed a new deal etc. Not suggesting they should have done so, but clearly there are things that "could have been done". CP managed to get Zaha signed. AV managed to get Grealish signed etc. it is possible to convince players - to either sign or leave.

I too accept what is happening, but I´m not pretending it won´t have consequences (as seemingly many are on here).

My opinion is that you have to be ruthless in such situations. I see many disagree with me - which obviously is fine - kind of the point of a message board like this. Maybe it is because I´m a hockey fan as well. In the NHL, with no transfer fees, you cannot give away value for nothing. If a player is not signing you rather trade him for a worse player just to keep some value instead of letting someone walk for free (of course some still walk for free there as well, but the emphasis is different). I guess it is a positive thing when fans think 30-40-50m is peanuts. Says a lot about how far the club has come at least.
So how would you deal with a player who won't sign a new contract, isn't money-oriented and essentially did the same thing at his last club? What exactly do you mean by "ruthless"?
 

Havre

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2019
829
1,065
So how would you deal with a player who won't sign a new contract, isn't money-oriented and essentially did the same thing at his last club? What exactly do you mean by "ruthless"?

I would have told him after the season to either accept being sold or not to play this season.

I believe in such a situation he would have accepted being sold. He might not be money oriented, but would he accept spending a year not playing? If he had then clearly there is nothing we could have done.

As long as Pochettino says it doesn´t matter if he signs or not he will only sign if he plays poorly and realises no-one wants him. If I were to guess he will now leave regardless - even for a smaller club than us.
 

Indisguise

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2012
7,996
23,386
I would have told him after the season to either accept being sold or not to play this season.

I believe in such a situation he would have accepted being sold. He might not be money oriented, but would he accept spending a year not playing? If he had then clearly there is nothing we could have done.

As long as Pochettino says it doesn´t matter if he signs or not he will only sign if he plays poorly and realises no-one wants him. If I were to guess he will now leave regardless - even for a smaller club than us.
Well, we could do that but we'd essentially be cutting of our own noses to spite our faces. We may well have lost to Arsenal without him and who knows how many more games to come. I think his value to the team for the next few months is worth more than what we'd get for him now. I also wouldn't want to treat him like that on principle because he's been great for the Club and we ought to be grateful for what he's done on a salary that has cost us umpteen millions less than if we had renegotiated his contract. For those reasons, I reckon we're just about even with Eriksen if he leaves on a free.
 

Havre

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2019
829
1,065
Well, we could do that but we'd essentially be cutting of our own noses to spite our faces. We may well have lost to Arsenal without him and who knows how many more games to come. I think his value to the team for the next few months is worth more than what we'd get for him now. I also wouldn't want to treat him like that on principle because he's been great for the Club and we ought to be grateful for what he's done on a salary that has cost us umpteen millions less than if we had renegotiated his contract. For those reasons, I reckon we're just about even with Eriksen if he leaves on a free.

We would have what? Haha.

Anyway apart from the silly analogy I find that part your stand perfectly reasonable. Obviously I disagree as I always value the long term more than the short term. We may have won if Lucas had played instead. We may have had Dybala if we have had 40m extra to get him out of the image right thing etc.

I, as a fan, am willing to take short term hits (e.g. selling Eriksen) for potential long term success (spending the Eriksen money on a player that might not be as good as Eriksen today, but will contribute more than Eriksen come next season). Obviously Eriksen´s potential contributions this season would be part of the equation. Some make it out like Eriksen is the difference between CL and no CL - so therefore it is worth the money not selling him. I find that rather silly. Yes. Eriksen playing will increase the probability of us reaching the CL next season, but it is not either or. How much he increases the probability will obviously differ significantly between people - and you can´t find an objectively correct answer to that. For me we are talking single digit difference. That is not to underestimate Eriksen. I have often argued he is our most important player, but football is a team game after all. And it is not like Eriksen is world class 24/7 throughout a season. He has never been that kind of player.

I also believe if Eriksen becomes the trend most, if not all, will agree with me. A club cannot be competitive at the highest level if that club ends up with several "Eriksens". Not suggesting we are there yet, but that is one of the principles I´m basing my stand on.
 

SpursSince1980

Well-Known Member
Jan 23, 2011
4,732
14,445
I can see more players doing this in the Premier League. The asking price for players is so high now and teams in England can afford to turn down big money. Players are having to run their contracts down if they want to move which is kind of how it should work anyway. You can't really blame a player for honouring the contract they signed rather than sign a contract they dont intend to see out. I just want him to perform to his best ability because that's what we're paying him for. If he helps us qualify for another CL and maybe a trophy maybe it's worth losing him for free.
Basically moving toward more of a free agency model - akin to some of the US professional leagues (NFL, NBA, MLB, etc). There are no such things as 'transfers' in those leagues. You have free agents, or teams make trades.
It's certainly something you can see happening with how inflated transfer fees have become. It's not sustainable. And you can understand players feeling frustrated if they can't move on 'cos they've been valued out of reach.
Additionally, I also wouldn't be surprised if players started to sign shorter contracts, with opt-out options. Giving them more control over their future.
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Jul 24, 2005
30,536
46,628
I would have told him after the season to either accept being sold or not to play this season.

I believe in such a situation he would have accepted being sold. He might not be money oriented, but would he accept spending a year not playing? If he had then clearly there is nothing we could have done.

As long as Pochettino says it doesn´t matter if he signs or not he will only sign if he plays poorly and realises no-one wants him. If I were to guess he will now leave regardless - even for a smaller club than us.

We'd have to do the same for Toby and Jan then. We could have three of our first team players not playing for the entire season. It would hurt us just as much as them.
 

Scissors&Tape

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2018
259
1,007
Discipling an employee not for their performance, but to coerce them into signing a contract, would be so illegal under US law I figured there had to be a UK counterpart. If Spurs adopted a policy of benching players in their final year of a contract (a contract that Spurs agreed to, mind you) I think there would be a pretty good case for a breach of the term of mutual trust and confidence implied in all UK employment contracts.
 

Pistols At Dawn

Well-Known Member
Jan 8, 2019
2,119
4,531
If *I* ran the zoo, and I knew Eriksen was out at the end of the season on a free and there was nothing I could do about it (which seems like the case now), I'd play him EVERY GAME and wring every last drop of value out of him while I could.

He will HAVE to perform at a high level, since he's putting himself in the shop window and cutting out the middle man. Now he's both product and seller. Pressure's on him.
 

TwanYid

Well-Known Member
Aug 1, 2013
1,223
3,484
If *I* ran the zoo, and I knew Eriksen was out at the end of the season on a free and there was nothing I could do about it (which seems like the case now), I'd play him EVERY GAME and wring every last drop of value out of him while I could.

He will HAVE to perform at a high level, since he's putting himself in the shop window and cutting out the middle man. Now he's both product and seller. Pressure's on him.

...Until he signs a pre-contract w/whomever (Juventus, Madrid, Barca, etc.) in January and then proceeds to spend the next 5 months making sure he doesn't get hurt under any circumstance. You think the guy shirks tackles now; just wait'll he has money riding on him coming nowhere near, say, the Ryan Shawcrosses of the world. The guy'll play like an even bigger pussy than he already is as soon as there're millions of Pounds contingent upon his remaining fit.
 

Havre

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2019
829
1,065
We'd have to do the same for Toby and Jan then. We could have three of our first team players not playing for the entire season. It would hurt us just as much as them.

Well. Vertonghen is our decision so I wouldn’t have sold him because we haven’t offered him a contract.

Alderweireld we should have sold. You know that pain you are talking about is coming. So we have to make that adjustment at some point anyway. Right now it feels like many are just closing their eyes praying none of it will happen if we just postpone it.

We could have had 70m or something to try to replace them. One year from now we will have 0m having to replace them.
 

allatsea

Well-Known Member
Aug 31, 2012
8,866
16,054
Well. Vertonghen is our decision so I wouldn’t have sold him because we haven’t offered him a contract.

Alderweireld we should have sold. You know that pain you are talking about is coming. So we have to make that adjustment at some point anyway. Right now it feels like many are just closing their eyes praying none of it will happen if we just postpone it.

We could have had 70m or something to try to replace them. One year from now we will have 0m having to replace them.
Do the players get any say in your world ? If the player refuses to be transferred there is nothing short of being very childish and banishing them to the youth that we can do.
 

Havre

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2019
829
1,065
Do the players get any say in your world ? If the player refuses to be transferred there is nothing short of being very childish and banishing them to the youth that we can do.

Do you read posts before you reply?

Already explained what I would have done.

Nothing childish about prioritising players that are long term committed to the team. If you got to choose between Eriksen and Lo Celso and you believe Eriksen is 2% better than Lo Celso - you play Lo Celso. Nothing childish or unfair about it.
 

tiger666

Large Member
Jan 4, 2005
27,978
82,214
Do the players get any say in your world ? If the player refuses to be transferred there is nothing short of being very childish and banishing them to the youth that we can do.

I'm not even sure you could do that. You can't punish a player when they've done nothing wrong. I'd imagine the players union would be all over it.
 

Derp

Well-Known Member
Dec 4, 2014
303
507
I would have told him after the season to either accept being sold or not to play this season.

Yeah that would be good for morale. But Eriksen would just have waited it out or signed with Man Utd. They were the only club in for him.
 

Havre

Well-Known Member
Aug 8, 2019
829
1,065
Yeah that would be good for morale. But Eriksen would just have waited it out or signed with Man Utd. They were the only club in for him.

And we would have gotten the money.

Not sure how it helps morale to have players around that clearly are looking to get out.

All the moaning from Pochettino about how the squad is unsettled etc.

So whatever we are doing right now seems to work splendidly.
 

nailsy

SC Supporter
Jul 24, 2005
30,536
46,628
Well. Vertonghen is our decision so I wouldn’t have sold him because we haven’t offered him a contract.

Alderweireld we should have sold. You know that pain you are talking about is coming. So we have to make that adjustment at some point anyway. Right now it feels like many are just closing their eyes praying none of it will happen if we just postpone it.

We could have had 70m or something to try to replace them. One year from now we will have 0m having to replace them.

But as mentioned above you can't sell a player without them agreeing to it. They have to sign a contract at the new club. Toby was available for £25m and he's still here because either no one was interested, or he made the decision to see out his contract. We've had no offers for Eriksen from club's he wants to join our he wouldn't be here. Threatening players with sitting on the bench or playing for the reserves doesn't always work either. If they call our bluff and say they're fine with getting paid to do nothing for a year then we have to fill the holes in the squad and replace them a season early. Would we have signed Ndomeble and Lo Celso this summer if we also needed to sign a CB and another midfielder as well? It's doubtful.

One thing that often gets overlooked in these situations is the strength of our academy. A lot of the time when a player leaves it creates a space for one of our youth players which will then result in their value rising. Looking back over the last five years we've generated over £50M by selling some of our ex-youth players. Promoting KWP to replace Trippier means that we have an extra £20M to spend on Toby/Eriksens replacements. Parrott replacing Jansen/Llorente gets us another £8M. Obviously in an ideal world you'd never lose a player for nothing, but developing our own players who cost us nothing certainly helps to offset the loses.
 
Last edited:
Top