Cantwell. Surely there comes a time to draw the line on more

[chicken 2,624]

38 minutes ago, dylanisabaddog said:

As for Cantwell, he clearly wants to leave and who can blame him. He can easily double his wages elsewhere. I've been supporting Norwich for 54 years and remember as a child being baffled that we had sold Ron Davies and Hugh Curran. But I've grown up now and I understand it. 

Where has he expressed this? 

[Coneys Knee 953]

I think some fair points being raised here. A good thread at last with some reasoned discussion. There’s only one person trying their best to turn it into an argument which is refreshing. For me, Jim and Hank make some very valid points and don’t deserve to be belittle for them. 

I feel very annoyed at the prospect of losing Cantwell as well, especially at this stage, though I do fully expect it and do understand the reasons. Doesn’t stop me, however, wishing the club would show a little more resistance. I mean seriously, despite your reasoning, we are the only club I can think of that gets promoted and sells our best player then possibly our second best player at a time when we’re going to need every bit of quality we can get.

I also think that what worries people, me included, is that historically our re-investment from player sales hasn’t always been the most encouraging. Selling Buendia and then possibly Cantwell would be easier to take if we saw a couple of real statement signings coming the other way. But, time and again we tend to see us linked with a good signing only to see us fail due to finance or just our sheer attractiveness to the players we really need.

So yes, we will need to sell big players here and there but we shouldn’t concede to easily or too soon in my opinion and we need to get our signings in the bag before we sanction them where possible surely. 

[Declan 24]

4 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:And Todd and Max aren’t ‘bad eggs’. In fact, there’s been blatant interest for some time, and they’ve both stayed, but there comes a point where you can’t hold someone back further and at that point in the journey you then have a responsibility to get as much money as possible for them and respect their wishes. It’s absolutely no different to any other job.

Wait until they’ve put pen to paper elsewhere, then the narrative changes. I’m sure you’d agree Jonny Howson was a model footballer? Never appeared to be any issue with being at Norwich, closing in on two hundred games for the club…textbook professional.

Week he left? ‘Sporting Director Stuart Webber told the club’s official website: “Jonny, via his agent, made it very clear during my first week in the job he didn’t want to be here and wanted to move back to the north.’

[Jim Smith 2,317]

1 minute ago, Declan said:

Wait until they’ve put pen to paper elsewhere, then the narrative changes. I’m sure you’d agree Jonny Howson was a model footballer? Never appeared to be any issue with being at Norwich, closing in on two hundred games for the club…textbook professional.

Week he left? ‘Sporting Director Stuart Webber told the club’s official website: “Jonny, via his agent, made it very clear during my first week in the job he didn’t want to be here and wanted to move back to the north.’

Unusual for a players agent to suggest their player may be up for a move. With Howson however I never actually believed the narrative that he was disruptive or forced a move. 

[horsefly 4,300]

10 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

I don’t want to hear this “any fee will have to be a record fee” line. I want the club to say we are not selling any more of our top players in this window as we want to stay in this league.

Quick! get on to the Villa owners, they're about to make a terrible mistake!

[hogesar 9,671]

9 hours ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

I think Jim does raise a good point in that there should come a time amongst these player sales where we really do have to say no, particularly given we've seen little to no investment from the Buendia sale as yet. 

£33 mil for Buendia at the start of the window? Sure. 

£40 mil for Cantwell 4 weeks before the end of the window? We'll take it. 

£35 mil for Aarons 2 weeks before the end of the window? Alrighty then

£25 mil for Pukki on deadline day? Errrr **** it I guess?

We've bagged £130mil but lost nearly every key player from our team from last season and Farke / Webber have a huge job to bring in new players and get everything to work. 

So at what point would you draw the line? 

I think Jim clearly draws the line after the Buendia sale. 

I personally think we could make the Cantwell sale, IF Webber is totally confident in our replacement options, but it is a sale I would rather not see. 

You would obviously be happy with the Buendia and Cantwell sales, so would you be happy with more sales too? Aarons? Pukki? Krul? Etc etc

But that's the point, isn't it? We're only going to sell Cantwell if we believe we can reinvest successfully - unless you literally have zero respect for what Webbers achieved so far and think he's thick as sh*t.

[chicken 2,624]

3 hours ago, Jim Smith said:

Your first paragraph is what I have a problem with. That should not be the case when we are trying to build a team. An environment has been created where it is just expected/accepted that we eill allow players to go. 
 

I get that no bid has actually come in or that we don’t yet know if Cantwell will be sold but I want to hear the club issuing a hands off warning not Webber’s continual “well it will take a big fee” lines which make it clear to suitors that we will sell. 

The issue is Jim, that Cantwell has two years max left with us in terms of his contract.

We have already seen his valuation by the club go up because we have sold one player and the need to sell two isn't as great in addition to being further on in the transfer window.

If Cantwell is saying he won't sign a new contract we are caught in a conundrum. Next summer, with the option taken up, he'll be within the last 12 months of his contract. That puts the club in a very difficult situation. This is the last point, unless he signs a new contract, that we could get full value for him.

Next summer he will not be worth as much due to being in the final year of his contract. We also don't know - and boy, we'd all like to be able to say for certain that we'll be Prem - which league we'll be in. Again, his valuation will be impacted depending upon which league we are in.

Not only that, but throw into the equation the uncertainty around Covid still. If we get a new variant that throws everything into disarray again. Not to mention the global market for players is currently shrinking, France have lost the TV money, clubs in Spain and Italy are struggling financially - even Real Madrid and Barcelona, and are having to cut their wage bills and spending budgets. Though that doesn't seem to be impacting the EPL market at the moment, all of the Super League / false rescue package rubbish from last season does point towards change in financial security could be around the corner.

In other words, this could be the last window we get an opportunity to sell a player who ultimately won't sign a new contract for maximum value.

Now, the argument may well be that he is worth more to us staying up this season than the difference in money we'd lose over the next season.

However it isn't even that simple anymore. If his sale releases funds to buy 3-4 players, who will join on 3-4 year contracts, we arguably are securing more long term talent.

So the issue then becomes -
1) Keep Cantwell for one season and lose him for less money next season with the hope that he heavily contributes to us staying up and thus another season of premier league money which would mitigate the money we maybe lose in value on his sale.
2) Sell Cantwell now, reinvest the majority of the money into the squad, bringing in more quality across the park and ensuring that we have players that could also keep us up but also keep us there for seasons to come. Then have proceeds of another season to spend 100% on improving the squad.

It is far from straight forward, and if the club have good targets lined up, it becomes a very, very difficult one to call.

[horsefly 4,300]

Has any other "happy clapper" been receiving those strange phone calls from NCFC? They last about an hour and constantly repeat The Birdy Song while the barely audible mesmeric voice of Delia repeats over and over: "Blindly accept everything we say (or don't say even though Jim says we say it)", and, " You must be conditioned into accepting that selling is just how it has to be", and, "That Jim fella just keeps making up patronising rubbish; he thinks you, Webber, and Farke are incapable of using your own minds".

[hogesar 9,671]

There is a reality where despite Villa's lofty ambitions, big spend and multi-billionaire owners, they look unlikely to be able to keep hold of life-long fan and local hero Grealish.

That is football. I don't like it, I'd love to keep all our players and be able to strengthen sufficiently for a survival attempt.

As it happens, we don't need to sell. But if a crazy offer comes in, which turns Cantwells head AND is enough for Webber to believe he could overall strengthen the team then I'm not sure exactly what the problem is?

Unless, of course, @Jim Smith, @Dean Coneys boots and those don't entrust Webber to be able to make the signings required.

But if that's the case, it kind of takes a steaming dump on what they've been saying for the past 2 premier league campaigns of "We want new owners with money to see what Webber & Farke can do without an arm tied behind their back"

[Alex Moss 2,165]

8 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

With respect it is different to most other salaried jobs. They have signed fixed term contracts which they should honour and they are already earning enough money to set them up for life and playing at the highest level possible in English football. 

No, no, and just no!

It is not different to other jobs at all!

And just because a player is relatively well paid and could probably survive for life once retired from NCFC, it doesn’t mean they don’t have the right to make far MORE money elsewhere. As Todd clearly feels by not extending his contract. That is the same in any line of work, but I really shouldn’t have to be pointing out the damn obviousness of this!

And yes, I’m sure in the Cantwell case, as we know we could lose him for a pittance in literally a few months time, then it makes sense to try and extract as much money as possible for him in this particular case! I would be extremely annoyed with the club if they weren’t trying to do that, as every single penny counts, and as much as you live in this strange world that good players can’t be replaced, then we at least have to give ourselves a chance to buy such players with the money.

It’s clear you think all our best players are being forced out of the club by the club itself. You clearly have absolutely no grasp of reality with respect. Because guess what, just like you’re ambitious - players are too! Hence Todd not signing a new contract.

 

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

25 minutes ago, hogesar said:

But that's the point, isn't it? We're only going to sell Cantwell if we believe we can reinvest successfully - unless you literally have zero respect for what Webbers achieved so far and think he's thick as sh*t.

Yes totally agree, if you read my prior post on this same thread, I said I would accept the sale if Webber is confident we can get the replacements. So I fully accept this. 

But surely there would also come a point where Webber would also say, 'no more'? 4 weeks left in the window, with Buendia and Cantwell revenues still to spend.  Do you think he would be happy selling Aarons, Pukki and other players too to reinvest those funds? I am sure he'd much rather keep them and not have to rip the team apart!

I do wonder if he may be slightly regretting his words at the start of the window, as it effectively means he has less of a negotiating position and less power to say no - imagine how it would impact his relationship between Cantwell and / or Aarons if he now tried to block a transfer after saying they were free to leave for a 'good price'? 

Had he issued a hands-off warning, a la Watford, then we might not now have this interest in our players to the same extent and he wouldn't be going back on any promises to try and resist bids (to a degree at least).

We will see how things pan out but it certainly isn't going to be a dull few weeks!

Edited August 5, 2021 by Hank shoots Skyler

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

9 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Has any other "happy clapper" been receiving those strange phone calls from NCFC? They last about an hour and constantly repeat The Birdy Song while the barely audible mesmeric voice of Delia repeats over and over: "Blindly accept everything we say (or don't say even though Jim says we say it)", and, " You must be conditioned into accepting that selling is just how it has to be", and, "That Jim fella just keeps making up patronising rubbish; he thinks you, Webber, and Farke are incapable of using your own minds".

Horsefly I am pleased to see you are taking a back seat this time and just liking other peoples' posts against mine... A wise decision my friend. 😄

[Alex Moss 2,165]

19 minutes ago, hogesar said:

But that's the point, isn't it? We're only going to sell Cantwell if we believe we can reinvest successfully - unless you literally have zero respect for what Webbers achieved so far and think he's thick as sh*t.

In one, Hogesar 🎯, but out of reactions!

I actually do think they think Webber’s full of shoite. It’s very evident they don’t trust him to reinvest the money properly, or otherwise they’d be a bit calmer about the situation, and understand why we’re also relaxed about it. Lack of ambition? The complete opposite. Think we can strengthen the overall team further for that kind of money? Yes, because I trust Webber. Want to see Cantwell go? Absolutely not, but there’s a reality to this situation that really needs to be grasped.

[Badger 2,405]

21 minutes ago, Coneys Knee said:

I also think that what worries people, me included, is that historically our re-investment from player sales hasn’t always been the most encouraging. Selling Buendia and then possibly Cantwell would be easier to take if we saw a couple of real statement signings coming the other way. But, time and again we tend to see us linked with a good signing only to see us fail due to finance or just our sheer attractiveness to the players we really need.

I think that everybody is hugely disappointed by the sale of Buendia and possibly, Cantwell, but that does not mean that it is necessarily the right thing to do to block the sales if the player is clear that he wants to go.

I do take issue with the suggestion that our re-investment hasn't been any good historically and I really don't think that you can argue against the fact that our squad is much stronger than it was when Webber came. I'm not interested in whether or not they are "statement signings," but whether or not they improve the team's prospects.

[hogesar 9,671]

2 minutes ago, Hank shoots Skyler said:

Yes totally agree, if you read my prior post on this same thread, I said I would accept the sale if Webber is confident we can get the replacements. So I fully accept this. 

But surely there would also come a point where Webber would also say, 'no more'? 4 weeks left in the window, with Buendia and Cantwell revenues still to spend.  Do you think he would be happy selling Aarons, Pukki and other players too to reinvest those funds? I am sure he'd much rather keep them and not have to rip the team apart!

I do wonder if he may be slightly regretting his words at the start of the window, as it effectively means he has less of a negotiating position and less power to say no - imagine how it would impact his relationship between Cantwell and / or Aarons if he now tried to block a transfer after saying they were free to leave for a 'good price'? 

Had he issued a hands-off warning, a la Watford, then we might not now have this interest in our players to the same extent and he wouldn't be going back on any promises to try and resist bids (to a degree at least).

We will see how things pan out but it certainly isn't going to be a dull few weeks!

I think the hands-off warning makes zero difference if a club really wants someone though, its just lip-service to come across a certain way to fans, or to try and ramp up prices.

I think Webber purposefully doesn't do this and part of our model is attracting young players who could potentially move on to European football etc and we'd let them.

Certainly you're right, I wouldn't want to sell someone really late as it makes replacements very difficult.

[Capt. Pants 4,234]

I actually think this coming season is our best chance ever of avoiding relegation, particularly with Cantwell.

However, if he is sold and we reinvest and make the squad even stronger it will still be our best chance ever. What we cannot do is sell him for less than £40m or not strengthen the squad this transfer window. So that means unless there are targets pretty much nailed on (the same Todd is with Villa), just awaiting signature, then he cannot be allowed to leave.

It's a tough ask of the club but I think this coming season is really pivotal for us. Every last bean and effort has to be spent on survival.

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

1 hour ago, Jim Smith said:

What do you mean “oh dear”. The notion we can replace Cantwell with “better players” when we basically can’t spend more than £10m or pay wages above £30,000 a week is frankly nonsense. 

100%

[Hank shoots Skyler 2,094]

4 minutes ago, hogesar said:

I think the hands-off warning makes zero difference if a club really wants someone though, its just lip-service to come across a certain way to fans, or to try and ramp up prices.

I think Webber purposefully doesn't do this and part of our model is attracting young players who could potentially move on to European football etc and we'd let them.

Certainly you're right, I wouldn't want to sell someone really late as it makes replacements very difficult.

I'm less sure. I think if the Watford Sporting Director had come out and said 'it starts with a 3...' and 'free to go to the right club' etc etc etc at the start of the window, it would've had an impact on clubs' interest in players like Sarr. As it happens there has been no such interest.

All conjecture of course! I have to do some work now... please do not respond I cannot do this again.... 

Edited August 5, 2021 by Hank shoots Skyler

[horsefly 4,300]

32 minutes ago, Jim Smith said:

With respect it is different to most other salaried jobs. They have signed fixed term contracts which they should honour and they are already earning enough money to set them up for life and playing at the highest level possible in English football. 

So naive! Perhaps you can give Buendia a call and explain to him that the extra £30-£40,000 a week he will be earning at Villa is irrelevant to his life. 

Yes, they are fixed term contracts and by law we could force players to see them out (willingly or unwillingly). But that is rather the point, fixed term contracts come to an end, and when they do the player concerned can walk away from the club without any transfer fee incoming to the coffers. Cantwell's contract is coming towards its end and there have been absolutely no signs that he is willing to sign a new one. If we were to turn down £40m from Villa and let him walk for free in a year and a half's time I would personally launch a brick through the boardroom window (I would, of course, chisel your name on it first).

[TheGunnShow 5,940]

"Hands-off warnings" are symbols for the symbol minded. Money talks in this game. It always has. And now it shouts. With Webber at the helm, I'm far more confident in our ability to get a decent share of it, and to spend it more wisely when we get it.

Edited August 5, 2021 by TheGunnShow

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

32 minutes ago, hogesar said:

But that's the point, isn't it? We're only going to sell Cantwell if we believe we can reinvest successfully - unless you literally have zero respect for what Webbers achieved so far and think he's thick as sh*t.

Or remember the last recruitment when in the top flight. It's not a Webber is sh*t or Webber is a genius argument. It's we have yet to prove we can recruit enough quality to stay in the premiership. The jury is still 100% out....

[Alex Moss 2,165]

35 minutes ago, Coneys Knee said:

I think some fair points being raised here. A good thread at last with some reasoned discussion. There’s only one person trying their best to turn it into an argument which is refreshing. For me, Jim and Hank make some very valid points and don’t deserve to be belittle for them.

Excuse me? My points and others also are perfectly reasoned thank you, even if you don’t think so because they’re not in agreement of yours and Jim’s.

[horsefly 4,300]

2 minutes ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Or remember the last recruitment when in the top flight. It's not a Webber is sh*t or Webber is a genius argument. It's we have yet to prove we can recruit enough quality to stay in the premiership. The jury is still 100% out....

We had F'all money last time, but thanks to the strategic long-term planning of the self-funding model we have considerably more to spend this time, even with a Covid bill of about £35m.

[Coneys Knee 953]

1 minute ago, Alex Moss said:

Excuse me? My points and others also are perfectly reasoned thank you, even if you don’t think so because they’re not in agreement of yours and Jim’s.

Yes your points are valid. I understand them and agree with some of them. I was making reference more to the condescending style of delivery I think.

Anyway, I think emotions always run high when top players get sold or get talked about being sold. We all would surely want them to stay in an ideal world. It’s a hard life being a football supporter.

[horsefly 4,300]

14 minutes ago, Alex Moss said:

In one, Hogesar 🎯, but out of reactions!

I actually do think they think Webber’s full of shoite. It’s very evident they don’t trust him to reinvest the money properly, or otherwise they’d be a bit calmer about the situation, and understand why we’re also relaxed about it. Lack of ambition? The complete opposite. Think we can strengthen the overall team further for that kind of money? Yes, because I trust Webber. Want to see Cantwell go? Absolutely not, but there’s a reality to this situation that really needs to be grasped.

Indeed! How weird to believe that the obviously astute Webber and Farke are doing everything they possibly can to destroy their own reputations, future careers, and future earning potential.

[hogesar 9,671]

19 minutes ago, Kenny Foggo said:

Or remember the last recruitment when in the top flight. It's not a Webber is sh*t or Webber is a genius argument. It's we have yet to prove we can recruit enough quality to stay in the premiership. The jury is still 100% out....

But you've been one of those advocating for owners with more money to give to Webber to spend? We're generating more money to spend and now the jury is out? You can't have it both ways.

Unless you want new owners to come in, sack Webber and Farke and start from scratch? Which one is it?

[Badger 2,405]

6 minutes ago, horsefly said:

Indeed! How weird to believe that the obviously astute Webber and Farke are doing everything they possibly can to destroy their own reputations, future careers, and future earning potential.

This is it in a nutshell. Please somebody explain why they think that Farke and Webber would deliberately do things that would damage our chances of success and their own reputation. They know the situation better than anyone on here and are not having to live off "newspaper" rumours etc + they know what the players think and want.

If they thought that a macho "statement" stand was the best thing for the club and their futures, I'm sure that they would make it: the fact that they haven't (yet) kind of suggests that they don't think that this is the best thing to do (yet). In the meantime, the subtext of many comments on here are that "I know better than they do."

[Badger 2,405]

2 minutes ago, hogesar said:

Unless you want new owners to come in, sack Webber and Farke and start from scratch? Which one is it?

He wants a squillionaire 😄

[Kenny Foggo 1,116]

33 minutes ago, horsefly said:

We had F'all money last time, but thanks to the strategic long-term planning of the self-funding model we have considerably more to spend this time, even with a Covid bill of about £35m.

LOL! Strategic long term planning .... we have money because we continue to sell our best players. Have Watford sold SARR, have Brentford sold Tooney? Yet they have invested in new players. We had to sell Buendia. We had F'all with out it. Net spend so far? £2m? Not much change from last time so far...ps. Other clubs got Covid issue too...

[Jim Smith 2,317]

1 hour ago, chicken said:

The issue is Jim, that Cantwell has two years max left with us in terms of his contract.

We have already seen his valuation by the club go up because we have sold one player and the need to sell two isn't as great in addition to being further on in the transfer window.

If Cantwell is saying he won't sign a new contract we are caught in a conundrum. Next summer, with the option taken up, he'll be within the last 12 months of his contract. That puts the club in a very difficult situation. This is the last point, unless he signs a new contract, that we could get full value for him.

Next summer he will not be worth as much due to being in the final year of his contract. We also don't know - and boy, we'd all like to be able to say for certain that we'll be Prem - which league we'll be in. Again, his valuation will be impacted depending upon which league we are in.

Not only that, but throw into the equation the uncertainty around Covid still. If we get a new variant that throws everything into disarray again. Not to mention the global market for players is currently shrinking, France have lost the TV money, clubs in Spain and Italy are struggling financially - even Real Madrid and Barcelona, and are having to cut their wage bills and spending budgets. Though that doesn't seem to be impacting the EPL market at the moment, all of the Super League / false rescue package rubbish from last season does point towards change in financial security could be around the corner.

In other words, this could be the last window we get an opportunity to sell a player who ultimately won't sign a new contract for maximum value.

Now, the argument may well be that he is worth more to us staying up this season than the difference in money we'd lose over the next season.

However it isn't even that simple anymore. If his sale releases funds to buy 3-4 players, who will join on 3-4 year contracts, we arguably are securing more long term talent.

So the issue then becomes -
1) Keep Cantwell for one season and lose him for less money next season with the hope that he heavily contributes to us staying up and thus another season of premier league money which would mitigate the money we maybe lose in value on his sale.
2) Sell Cantwell now, reinvest the majority of the money into the squad, bringing in more quality across the park and ensuring that we have players that could also keep us up but also keep us there for seasons to come. Then have proceeds of another season to spend 100% on improving the squad.

It is far from straight forward, and if the club have good targets lined up, it becomes a very, very difficult one to call.

If Cantwell had been signed last summer abd was 1 year into a 3 year contract would there be this fuss?

personally I think it’s worth us taking the risk we get less (but still probably £15m plus) for him next summer if we have to sell then.