O'Brien

[HuddsTerrier]

Jan 17, 2021 10:41:04 GMT 1 Headless Chicken said:

Jan 17, 2021 10:13:52 GMT 1 HuddsTerrier said:

If this story is true it sounds like town are actively touting LOB to other clubs (even employing a third party agency to do it)

the72.co.uk/215650/huddersfield-town-using-a-top-agency-to-flog-midfielder-burnley-newcastle-united-in-waiting/

I suspect this story is crap, but if not, wow, we're desperate, stupid or both.

As I said, I don't believe it's true, in part because touting will ordinarily indicate you're in a weak position. PH and DH are effectively salesman.

Either way it's potnetially bad, because if it's crap, someone is intentionally stirring shit.

Agree I doubt we’d pay someone to tout our best player

The trouble with stories like this is that other teams will hear it, think we’re in a financial mess - throw in the numerous public statements on covid impact - and hammer us on the sale price or play hard ball taking any deal until very late in the window

[kennyk2]

Jan 17, 2021 10:13:52 GMT 1 HuddsTerrier said:

If this story is true it sounds like town are actively touting LOB to other clubs (even employing a third party agency to do it)

the72.co.uk/215650/huddersfield-town-using-a-top-agency-to-flog-midfielder-burnley-newcastle-united-in-waiting/

From Steve Chicken:

I know this story will have fans worried - am looking into it but fwiw my initial reaction is it doesn't add up at all. Town have no burning desire to let LOB go. Even if they did (again, they don't) this would be out of keeping with how they did e.g. Billing, Grant negotiations

[boooothy]

Jan 17, 2021 10:55:38 GMT 1 kennyk2 said:

Jan 17, 2021 10:13:52 GMT 1 HuddsTerrier said:

If this story is true it sounds like town are actively touting LOB to other clubs (even employing a third party agency to do it)

the72.co.uk/215650/huddersfield-town-using-a-top-agency-to-flog-midfielder-burnley-newcastle-united-in-waiting/

From Steve Chicken:

I know this story will have fans worried - am looking into it but fwiw my initial reaction is it doesn't add up at all. Town have no burning desire to let LOB go. Even if they did (again, they don't) this would be out of keeping with how they did e.g. Billing, Grant negotiations

Is it not exactly how they sold Billing?

[Big Ern]

I think if there ever was an occasion for Maynard to rebuff this is it.

[kennyk2]

Chicken again:

Have received categorical confirmation that #htafc are NOT trying to find a buyer for Lewis O'Brien this month.

[crux]

This sounds like a players agent planting stories to create an 'atmosphere' to get a move that the club aren't interested in. As Steve Chicken pointed out, the club are perfectly capable of negotiating a deal that fits their needs without spending money on someone else to do it.

[Headless Chicken]

Jan 17, 2021 11:31:28 GMT 1 crux said:

This sounds like a players agent planting stories to create an 'atmosphere' to get a move that the club aren't interested in. As Steve Chicken pointed out, the club are perfectly capable of negotiating a deal that fits their needs without spending money on someone else to do it.

I actually know his agent, but unfortunately not quite well enough to drop him a message to ask him if he's started all this!

[Up the Duff.]

Jan 17, 2021 11:30:17 GMT 1 kennyk2 said:

Chicken again:

Have received categorical confirmation that #htafc are NOT trying to find a buyer for Lewis O'Brien this month.

This month ??!!

[kennyk2]

Jan 17, 2021 15:08:42 GMT 1 Up the Duff. said:

Jan 17, 2021 11:30:17 GMT 1 kennyk2 said:

Chicken again:

Have received categorical confirmation that #htafc are NOT trying to find a buyer for Lewis O'Brien this month.

This month ??!!

He could go on 1 Feb of course.

[jqhtfc]

Same as any player at pretty much most clubs if a club meets our valuation he will go, I’m fine with that but very much doubt we’d see it reinvested if it’s anything like our other transfer dealings.

[richhtfc]

Sounds like the potential buying club, Burnley, Newcastle etc.. trying to unsettle the player to me.

[htfcterrier83]

Doesn’t make sense at all. Town are trying to cut the wage bill and I can’t see LOB as one of the clubs highest earners given he signed his Town contact before making an appearance. I might believe it more if there were talking about Pritchard.

[Tinpot]

Jan 17, 2021 16:32:36 GMT 1 htfcterrier83 said:

Doesn’t make sense at all. Town are trying to cut the wage bill and I can’t see LOB as one of the clubs highest earners given he signed his Town contact before making an appearance. I might believe it more if there were talking about Pritchard.

I would approve of the tactic if it was Pritchard.

[brighousebandbred]

Jan 17, 2021 15:19:21 GMT 1 jqhtfc said:

Same as any player at pretty much most clubs if a club meets our valuation he will go, I’m fine with that but very much doubt we’d see it reinvested if it’s anything like our other transfer dealings.

Agree totally if valuation met and player makes huge desire to move on you sell. We all know though that the replacement will not materialise, which the way things are going will take its toll on what little faith supporters have with our new owner. It will as they say suck the life out of us.

[overtonterrierspirit]

Jan 21, 2021 16:16:46 GMT 1 brighousebandbred said:

Jan 17, 2021 15:19:21 GMT 1 jqhtfc said:

Same as any player at pretty much most clubs if a club meets our valuation he will go, I’m fine with that but very much doubt we’d see it reinvested if it’s anything like our other transfer dealings.

Agree totally if valuation met and player makes huge desire to move on you sell. We all know though that the replacement will not materialise, which the way things are going will take its toll on what little faith supporters have with our new owner. It will as they say suck the life out of us.

Again agreed.
Recent history suggests that we would not get an adequate replacement but probably a lower / non league player with “promise”
Since the Mooy transfer this has been the way for us.

[dugnet]

Jan 21, 2021 18:34:30 GMT 1 overtonterrierspirit said:

Jan 21, 2021 16:16:46 GMT 1 brighousebandbred said:

Agree totally if valuation met and player makes huge desire to move on you sell. We all know though that the replacement will not materialise, which the way things are going will take its toll on what little faith supporters have with our new owner. It will as they say suck the life out of us.

Again agreed.
Recent history suggests that we would not get an adequate replacement but probably a lower / non league player with “promise”
Since the Mooy transfer this has been the way for us.

Here's a question that a,non Town supporting, friend asked me:

"You are said to admire the Brentford model. Do you think it is likely that Brentford would sign Keogh,Ward and/or Holmes"?

In that context it certainly provokes a debate.

As another friend, who is a Town supporter, said: "Brentford buy reasonable, recruit well, and sell at the optimum price. They also are prepared to pay a reasonable fee for replacements for those they sell. Witness Maupay, bought for circa £2m sold for £20m. Watkins bought at similar, sold for £30m+, Toney bought with money accumulated".

To date, and it is early days to be fair, Grant is the only transaction that fits that model.

The academy may generate a big transfer but would a proportion of that be used to enhance the squad? Or would it support running costs?

I don't think, as Brentford has been mentioned by those in charge, it's an unreasonable debate.

[Camel Grabber]

Jan 21, 2021 19:05:42 GMT 1 dugnet said:

Jan 21, 2021 18:34:30 GMT 1 overtonterrierspirit said:

Again agreed.
Recent history suggests that we would not get an adequate replacement but probably a lower / non league player with “promise”
Since the Mooy transfer this has been the way for us.

Here's a question that a,non Town supporting, friend asked me:

"You are said to admire the Brentford model. Do you think it is likely that Brentford would sign Keogh,Ward and/or Holmes"?

In that context it certainly provokes a debate.

As another friend, who is a Town supporter, said: "Brentford buy reasonable, recruit well, and sell at the optimum price. They also are prepared to pay a reasonable fee for replacements for those they sell. Witness Maupay, bought for circa £2m sold for £20m. Watkins bought at similar, sold for £30m+, Toney bought with money accumulated".

To date, and it is early days to be fair, Grant is the only transaction that fits that model.

The academy may generate a big transfer but would a proportion of that be used to enhance the squad? Or would it support running costs?

I don't think, as Brentford has been mentioned by those in charge, it's an unreasonable debate.

I would agree. But Brentford have had their model going 4 or 5 years longer than us.

We wont see the benefit of the B team for probably another 18 months- 2 years.

[Porrohman]

O'Brien getting slated by Chicken in his 5 Things article from last night's game

[Maynardblue]

Jan 21, 2021 19:05:42 GMT 1 dugnet said:

Jan 21, 2021 18:34:30 GMT 1 overtonterrierspirit said:

Again agreed.
Recent history suggests that we would not get an adequate replacement but probably a lower / non league player with “promise”
Since the Mooy transfer this has been the way for us.

Here's a question that a,non Town supporting, friend asked me:

"You are said to admire the Brentford model. Do you think it is likely that Brentford would sign Keogh,Ward and/or Holmes"?

In that context it certainly provokes a debate.

As another friend, who is a Town supporter, said: "Brentford buy reasonable, recruit well, and sell at the optimum price. They also are prepared to pay a reasonable fee for replacements for those they sell. Witness Maupay, bought for circa £2m sold for £20m. Watkins bought at similar, sold for £30m+, Toney bought with money accumulated".

To date, and it is early days to be fair, Grant is the only transaction that fits that model.

The academy may generate a big transfer but would a proportion of that be used to enhance the squad? Or would it support running costs?

I don't think, as Brentford has been mentioned by those in charge, it's an unreasonable debate.

Brentford actually had a bid accepted for Holmes in the summer but couldn't complete the deal as the Benrahma deal didn't go through in time.

[Deleted]

Jan 21, 2021 19:05:42 GMT 1 dugnet said:

Jan 21, 2021 18:34:30 GMT 1 overtonterrierspirit said:

Again agreed.
Recent history suggests that we would not get an adequate replacement but probably a lower / non league player with “promise”
Since the Mooy transfer this has been the way for us.

Here's a question that a,non Town supporting, friend asked me:

"You are said to admire the Brentford model. Do you think it is likely that Brentford would sign Keogh,Ward and/or Holmes"?

In that context it certainly provokes a debate.

As another friend, who is a Town supporter, said: "Brentford buy reasonable, recruit well, and sell at the optimum price. They also are prepared to pay a reasonable fee for replacements for those they sell. Witness Maupay, bought for circa £2m sold for £20m. Watkins bought at similar, sold for £30m+, Toney bought with money accumulated".

To date, and it is early days to be fair, Grant is the only transaction that fits that model.

The academy may generate a big transfer but would a proportion of that be used to enhance the squad? Or would it support running costs?

I don't think, as Brentford has been mentioned by those in charge, it's an unreasonable debate.

I could set up a company based on the Apple Computer model but, as I am not Steve Jobs, there is no guarantee I would be as successful. Brentford, like Southampton, have done really well at spotting potential, developing it and selling on at a really good profit. There are not many clubs who manage that. Town, in emulating the way Brentford operate, are not guaranteed to do as well, but it is not a bad model to align yourself to.

The thing they do very well is they are prepared to pay large amounts for decent players, instead of large amounts for players who don't make the cut. Having said that they paid £2.7m for Halil Dervisoglu, who hasn't pulled up any trees, and I'm sure they have had their failures. They have had a lot of successes though and you do need to kiss a few frogs to find a prince

So the question is reasonable. Brentford spot young players, as we are trying to do, and develop them but they also make very shrewd high value purchases and that is the hard part. They are also putting these good players into an already very good team, which will help them play to their best and maximise their value.

We will need to see how our new young additions and those coming through the academy do, but that will probably be next season. Whether we ever get good enough to spot the Maupays of this world remains to be seen. We did get Mooy though.

I don't think Brentford managed this transformation in one season though and they probably had their detractors in the early days. I do think this is a long game but I know that will not stop people being unhappy with what they watch now. That is football though.

[dugnet]

Jan 21, 2021 21:04:46 GMT 1 Maynardblue said:

Jan 21, 2021 19:05:42 GMT 1 dugnet said:

Here's a question that a,non Town supporting, friend asked me:

"You are said to admire the Brentford model. Do you think it is likely that Brentford would sign Keogh,Ward and/or Holmes"?

In that context it certainly provokes a debate.

As another friend, who is a Town supporter, said: "Brentford buy reasonable, recruit well, and sell at the optimum price. They also are prepared to pay a reasonable fee for replacements for those they sell. Witness Maupay, bought for circa £2m sold for £20m. Watkins bought at similar, sold for £30m+, Toney bought with money accumulated".

To date, and it is early days to be fair, Grant is the only transaction that fits that model.

The academy may generate a big transfer but would a proportion of that be used to enhance the squad? Or would it support running costs?

I don't think, as Brentford has been mentioned by those in charge, it's an unreasonable debate.

Brentford actually had a bid accepted for Holmes in the summer but couldn't complete the deal as the Benrahma deal didn't go through in time.

Interesting insight - It would be equally interesting to know the player budget they look to work to and how they factor in transfer revenue (both in and out).

[Captainslapper]

Thats Holmes accounted for then.
Dont think theyd have signed Ward, but if they had a pile of centre backs injured and needed an experienced older head just for a few months, then I can't think why they wouldnt sign Keogh.

Grants the only one that mirrors their transfer success so far, but I could certainly see Koroma doing the same if he continues to progress like he was.

Aarons might turn out to be the type of player brentford buy and make a big profit on.

[Tinpot]

Jan 22, 2021 0:51:19 GMT 1 Captainslapper said:

Thats Holmes accounted for then.
Dont think theyd have signed Ward, but if they had a pile of centre backs injured and needed an experienced older head just for a few months, then I can't think why they wouldnt sign Keogh.

Grants the only one that mirrors their transfer success so far, but I could certainly see Koroma doing the same if he continues to progress like he was.

Aarons might turn out to be the type of player brentford buy and make a big profit on.

I'd add Pipa to that as well.

[Solihull Terrier]

It's also worth pondering if Brentford will be able to continue "doing a Brentford" as picking up EU based bargains will be very hard now with most of their previous overseas signings unlikely to pass visa requirements if they were signed now. Granted they've done well with UK based signings too but I imagine prices there will start to increase.