Boros model for signing players

GibbosEmpire

GibbosEmpire

Well-known member
What is it? I keep seeing that we're linked with players over the summer and this window, and they might not fit the "model", but what is the model? Would we really turndown a player who's 28 but good value for money, improves the team and does a better job than anyone we have? For example Shankland signs, bangs in 15 goals and gets us into the playoffs, we win the playoffs and go up, why would we say no to that?
 
We need to be a little bit careful as we are short of a few senior pros. While I agree with the model principle, we saw at the start of the season chucking 5-6 new players bursting with "potential" didn't work as well as we hoped.

I wouldn't be disappointed if we signed a couple of experienced 29-30 yr olds on 2 yr deals to supplement the younger players.
 
Clearly the model is young players with room to develop who can later be sold on for a profit. Obviously there will always be the odd exception to that or deals with are a necessity or too good to turn down, but its obvious I think the way the club is heading
 
Whilst we have a model to sign players, I think we would be cutting our nose to spite our face if we decided to not sign a really good player who improves the team just because he's the wrong side of 20
 
h_m_boro said:
We need to be a little bit careful as we are short of a few senior pros. While I agree with the model principle, we saw at the start of the season chucking 5-6 new players bursting with "potential" didn't work as well as we hoped.

I wouldn't be disappointed if we signed a couple of experienced 29-30 yr olds on 2 yr deals to supplement the younger players.
Click to expand...
I agree. I think the model is obvious: buy players we hope we can sell for more than we bought them for (Carrick talks often about 'improving' players) but you can go too far. Senior pros like Howson, McNair, Lenihan and Smith (all brought in by previous managers) are invaluable and also add more to the squad than their performances on the pitch alone.
 
h_m_boro said:
We need to be a little bit careful as we are short of a few senior pros. While I agree with the model principle, we saw at the start of the season chucking 5-6 new players bursting with "potential" didn't work as well as we hoped.

I wouldn't be disappointed if we signed a couple of experienced 29-30 yr olds on 2 yr deals to supplement the younger players.
Click to expand...
I don't really think we are short of senior pros when everyone is fit. Dieng, Smith, Lenihan, McNair, Howson, Crooks can all be classed as senior players, even possibly Fry who, despite being a bit of a biff has captained the side, It's just we never have everyone fit.
 
GibbosEmpire said:
What is it? I keep seeing that we're linked with players over the summer and this window, and they might not fit the "model", but what is the model? Would we really turndown a player who's 28 but good value for money, improves the team and does a better job than anyone we have? For example Shankland signs, bangs in 15 goals and gets us into the playoffs, we win the playoffs and go up, why would we say no to that?
Click to expand...
U23, Under £3m.. top six championship performance level with premier league growth potential.
 
I think we have a clear model.

But we would be foolish to have the blinkers on for that model alone.

Its not a perfect science, as we know, there needs to be a degree of planning for long and short term and not to be short sighted in any opportunity that might come up, regardless of age.
 
Mayor Goldie Wilson said:
I don't really think we are short of senior pros when everyone is fit. Dieng, Smith, Lenihan, McNair, Howson, Crooks can all be classed as senior players, even possibly Fry who, despite being a bit of a biff has captained the side, It's just we never have everyone fit.
Click to expand...
Agree, but Smith and Lenihan are out for the season; McNair back??? and he's in the last 6 months of his contract....may even be sold. So we are a little short of older experienced Championship pros.

One or two on 18 month deals could be a good move👍
 
I see the model as picking up players on the cheap, or at value based on what they can add to the side now and potential to grow later. Not being afraid to pick up pros that can add to the side but not forking out top money on a players final contract as they wind down

Not being afraid to sell players when big bids come in as that enables you to buy the next crop

You do this enough times successfully and you have a lot of cash to build a good squad

Pitfall is when the players don't perform or fans expect instant success or promotion pushes and see player sales as bottling it, but without the model you end up with high paid stars again (I.e people wanting to pay akpom £50k a week+) and if you don't get promoted you wind up back to square one

It did Brentford no harm not Brighton, but they have a lot of data to power their model.

I don't see the model as being hard and fast - immediate needs will always trump a rule but better to buy a developing prospect than fill a gap with someone who won't be sticking around or be declining, but at the same time not devaluing experience.
 
From my understanding it is based a lot on what Brentford, Brighton, etc have done.

The concept is that you make a higher number of low risk high reward signings with a view that only one or two need to come off to pay for the whole outlay/next step of investment.

For example, the last few years we bought McGree, Hoppe, Rogers, VDB, Silvera, Forss, Bangura, Engel, Lath, Dieng, Gilbert. All as youngish players for relatively low fees. You would hope the value gained by McGree and VDB alone already would pay for the Hoppe/Gilbert flops (and then some) and most of the others have at least maintained value i suspect.

It doesn't stop us adding more experienced players, but we are generally only doing it for good value. Scott also brought in Lenihan, Smith, Clark and Barlaser - all for good value. You don't gamble on paying a lot for the "form" player - like Rhodes back in the day.

And then complimented with a few loans (Greenwood/O'Brien) - I suspect this years loans were both with an eye to possible longer term deals.

It probably overall reduces chance of short term success, but should keep you consistently competitive. Like Brentford - they were in and around the playoffs for several years before it eventually worked out.
 
I think it's better if you say we're looking to sign players we can improve and possibly sell for a profit and not include the age.
In general, you'd think it was only young players, but there'll always be players who haven't found their ideal environment in which to flourish (Chuba anyone?). If we could find another Akpom then I'm sure we wouldn't baulk at his age.
 
dooderooni said:
I think it's better if you say we're looking to sign players we can improve and possibly sell for a profit and not include the age.
In general, you'd think it was only young players, but there'll always be players who haven't found their ideal environment in which to flourish (Chuba anyone?). If we could find another Akpom then I'm sure we wouldn't baulk at his age.
Click to expand...

Absolutely - there will be wrong calls along the way, but every club does it, even the biggest ones, they are just able to absorb the losses better (or ignore the rules and crack on regardless!)
 
GibbosEmpire said:
For example Shankland signs, bangs in 15 goals and gets us into the playoffs, we win the playoffs and go up, why would we say no to that?
Click to expand...
Because for far too often we have adopted this mindset, and ended up with players of no resale value and who havent delivered on the outlay.

Get a 15 million 30k a week signing wrong, A la Assombalonga, and it will cripple you for seasons. Get 4 or 5 One Million quid 6k-a-week type signings, if one or two of them are wrong, no big deal, move them on, which is easier to do, and bring the next one in.

N.B I think Shankland would fit "the model" as outlay on transfer and wages would potentially be low with sell on potential. I dont think Age is the over riding factor.
 
This model is ancient . In 1983 on my 48k spectrum playing football manager ( Boro of course) if my midfield was full of skill level 1 or 2 players of a good age I would wait til someone with skill 3 or 4 popped up on the transfers. I wouldn't worry about age though as my mam would kick me off the only tv we had before I could bother to save the game.
 
For me there'll be a general thought amongst the management team (which will include quite a few under Scott's leadership) that we work within a budget, and that inexperienced players are cheaper than established pros. That doesn't mean the management team are wearing blinkers and can't pick up a bargain with experience if there's one available, and I'm sure, to the best of his ability, Gibson will make that possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top