| Jamie bids 21:45 - Jun 24 with 24865 views | fitzochris |
|  |
| |  |
| Jamie bids on 16:50 - Jun 26 with 3860 views | ChaffRAFC |
| Jamie bids on 16:39 - Jun 26 by RAFCBLUE |
I think this is different since the circumstances being outlined here are that Jamie Allen might move in this transfer window whilst under a playing contract that has a full year (?) left to run. The conjecture is that he wouldn't be happy to sign a new deal here at the end of the season so would prefer to move now.
If it is that case then the club and particularly Keith Hill get to decide if they support the move - not the player or his representative.
Jamie (or his representative) would need to hand in a transfer request and the last person to do that was Craig Dawson before he signed the last deal here before he went to WBA. Notwithstanding a transfer request, pre-season training starts in a week so I don't think the move is well timed this early in the window.
When Jamie Allen leaves Rochdale for a bigger club (which is ultimately inevitable) I can't think of someone who won't wish him well. The wider point for me is if we choose to cash in this August.
We didn't with Lund but could have done - football coming in over money both in August and January. For what it's worth I think Lund has moved at the right time of his career to the Championship but chose the favourites for relegation in Burton. Lund's 2017/18 season is pivotal if he wants to be anything more than a League 1 player.
I also don't believe Jamie's development for 2017/18 would be helped by specifically joining Bolton. I think all the midfielders Bolton have currently signed are better than Jamie (most of which are older) and they will be looking at other options. That would mean at best a squad slot for Jamie in the Championship with the risks that come with that in the short term, but offset by more money than he currently earns here.
The club have a record of not standing in player's way as Dawson and Hogan proved but it has to be at the right time and place and I don't see Bolton being able to put the sort of money on the table in August that would allow the deal to happen.
My backstop to all of this is that at 22 Jamie Allen has his best years to come but has this opportunity due to the time and effort and skill he has put into his Rochdale career.
I think if he was to sign a new deal to take him to 2019/20 he could at that point (and likely before) have his pick of the Championship or Premier League clubs if he continues to improve without the unneeded career risk at 22 - where he has potential but is not the finished article. [Post edited 26 Jun 2017 16:40]
|
Get what you're saying but surely if he signs a new deal then he adds value to a deal which might put off any potential Championship club and he might see this as his ideal opportunity. It's all well and good saying stay a little longer and get your move in 12 months or whatever but a player is only ever one injury away from ending their career. Jamie Allen is a tremendous player and has potential to be even better. That said, if someone came in with £500,000, I'd want more but wouldn't be devastated either like I was for Done, Le Fondre, Holt etc.
At this stage, I'd be more bothered about losing Camps. We're very well stocked in midfield anyway and half a million in one hit is something a club of our size would struggle to turn down. I'd sooner take that money now than risk losing him on a free next summer, albeit with a tribunal fee. |  |
| If I hadn't seen such riches, I could live with being poor |
| |
| Jamie bids on 17:03 - Jun 26 with 3809 views | 49thseason |
I think getting £500k for Jamie would be a decent result as it would represent a gamble on the part of the club buying him because of his lack of inches. If he were a foot taller, there would be far more interest by now and we would be looking at another Hogan deal, but he isnt and we are were we are.
Getting Morley and Adshead into the shop window might be worth much more in the medium term thañ worrying about a couple of hundred thousand pounds today.... I never thought I would write a sentence like that about Rochdale, happy days! |  | | |
| Jamie bids on 17:39 - Jun 26 with 3707 views | CamdenDale |
Ah, short contract then. |  | | |
| Jamie bids on 17:50 - Jun 26 with 3662 views | CamdenDale |
Aye, fair play. Look, JA and CC and indeed anyone else for sale. That's the way it is. We must sell and move on. Not knocking anyone's business acumen or overall plan either. Having said that, club seems to blush like an Austen virgin when anyone even looks. | | | |
| Jamie bids on 18:25 - Jun 26 with 3555 views | Shun |
I don't think anyone is doubting that Allen will be allowed to leave if the right bid comes in - that's how the club works and everyone accepts that. What's up for debate is what a player's value is, especially in today's market. £500,000 today isn't even close to £500,000 from 5 years ago. I think some people are in danger of seeing a traditionally large figure and getting excited about it, when in reality, due to not only the inflated football market today but the club's healthy standing and its chances of obtaining Championship status, such a figure isn't anywhere near as valuable as it was, and we might get better value in simply holding on to the player and accepting what a tribunal dictates next summer.
I spoke earlier about how it seems the club are acting a bit stronger and more aggressively this transfer window, perhaps born from a relatively healthy financial state or a genuine belief that Championship football isn't out of our reach. This boldness shouldn't be seen as a negative. Yes, we sell players to survive, but in being a bit more brazen in any negotionations, as perhaps we were with the Williams transfer, it could help us and improve our standing without ever compromising our future, because, put simply, Chris Dunphy wouldn't allow it. |  | | |
| Jamie bids on 18:54 - Jun 26 with 3445 views | RAFCBLUE |
| Jamie bids on 18:25 - Jun 26 by Shun |
I don't think anyone is doubting that Allen will be allowed to leave if the right bid comes in - that's how the club works and everyone accepts that. What's up for debate is what a player's value is, especially in today's market. £500,000 today isn't even close to £500,000 from 5 years ago. I think some people are in danger of seeing a traditionally large figure and getting excited about it, when in reality, due to not only the inflated football market today but the club's healthy standing and its chances of obtaining Championship status, such a figure isn't anywhere near as valuable as it was, and we might get better value in simply holding on to the player and accepting what a tribunal dictates next summer.
I spoke earlier about how it seems the club are acting a bit stronger and more aggressively this transfer window, perhaps born from a relatively healthy financial state or a genuine belief that Championship football isn't out of our reach. This boldness shouldn't be seen as a negative. Yes, we sell players to survive, but in being a bit more brazen in any negotionations, as perhaps we were with the Williams transfer, it could help us and improve our standing without ever compromising our future, because, put simply, Chris Dunphy wouldn't allow it. |
The tribunal isn't as random as it used to be either.
The EFL has seen many cases so there are precedents in existence - which I suppose give the selling club a fair idea of what to settle for in the case of wanting to sell before or not go to tribunal.
This is a really good article from November 2016 on the process and how it might apply to Jamie Allen or others:
http://fullcontactlaw.co.uk/2016/11/compensation-players-24-mystery/ |  |
| |
| Jamie bids on 19:14 - Jun 26 with 3370 views | 442Dale |
| Jamie bids on 18:25 - Jun 26 by Shun |
I don't think anyone is doubting that Allen will be allowed to leave if the right bid comes in - that's how the club works and everyone accepts that. What's up for debate is what a player's value is, especially in today's market. £500,000 today isn't even close to £500,000 from 5 years ago. I think some people are in danger of seeing a traditionally large figure and getting excited about it, when in reality, due to not only the inflated football market today but the club's healthy standing and its chances of obtaining Championship status, such a figure isn't anywhere near as valuable as it was, and we might get better value in simply holding on to the player and accepting what a tribunal dictates next summer.
I spoke earlier about how it seems the club are acting a bit stronger and more aggressively this transfer window, perhaps born from a relatively healthy financial state or a genuine belief that Championship football isn't out of our reach. This boldness shouldn't be seen as a negative. Yes, we sell players to survive, but in being a bit more brazen in any negotionations, as perhaps we were with the Williams transfer, it could help us and improve our standing without ever compromising our future, because, put simply, Chris Dunphy wouldn't allow it. |
It is a debate and all about opinions when it comes to fees. 500k for a player who didn't start 20 of our league games last season is pretty good. Would we want more? Of course.
We have to stick to the model. That's the main thing. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Jamie bids on 19:26 - Jun 26 with 3328 views | D_Dale |
| Jamie bids on 18:54 - Jun 26 by RAFCBLUE |
The tribunal isn't as random as it used to be either.
The EFL has seen many cases so there are precedents in existence - which I suppose give the selling club a fair idea of what to settle for in the case of wanting to sell before or not go to tribunal.
This is a really good article from November 2016 on the process and how it might apply to Jamie Allen or others:
http://fullcontactlaw.co.uk/2016/11/compensation-players-24-mystery/ |
Last season Jamie made 31 league appearances, plus six in cup games. Assuming Dale turn down a £500k bid and he makes 50 appearances next season, it would be the equivalent of paying over £13k (plus his wages) for each match he plays.
It's been argued that he'll be an even bigger asset next summer, or even in 2019. But interest in him might have evaporated, or as one poster mentioned he might suffer a bad injury.
If £500k has been offered, I'd expect the club to accept it. But where is that figure from? Not Peter O'Rourke, who only vaguely mentions two offers from a Championship club. His tweets are usually more specific (more recently, for example, that Blackburn are poised to sign Bradley Dack). |  | | |
| Jamie bids on 19:28 - Jun 26 with 3320 views | fitzochris |
| Jamie bids on 19:26 - Jun 26 by D_Dale |
Last season Jamie made 31 league appearances, plus six in cup games. Assuming Dale turn down a £500k bid and he makes 50 appearances next season, it would be the equivalent of paying over £13k (plus his wages) for each match he plays.
It's been argued that he'll be an even bigger asset next summer, or even in 2019. But interest in him might have evaporated, or as one poster mentioned he might suffer a bad injury.
If £500k has been offered, I'd expect the club to accept it. But where is that figure from? Not Peter O'Rourke, who only vaguely mentions two offers from a Championship club. His tweets are usually more specific (more recently, for example, that Blackburn are poised to sign Bradley Dack). |
Peter O'Rourke gets his news from player agents. True story. | |
| |
| Jamie bids on 19:35 - Jun 26 with 3300 views | Yorkshire_Dale |
| Jamie bids on 17:50 - Jun 26 by CamdenDale |
Aye, fair play. Look, JA and CC and indeed anyone else for sale. That's the way it is. We must sell and move on. Not knocking anyone's business acumen or overall plan either. Having said that, club seems to blush like an Austen virgin when anyone even looks. |
I knew a bloke who had an Austin Allegro.never rated it.......should have gone for the Virgin,told him so
(Great comment Camden,love it) | | | |
| Jamie bids on 19:36 - Jun 26 with 3299 views | 442Dale |
| Jamie bids on 19:28 - Jun 26 by fitzochris |
Peter O'Rourke gets his news from player agents. True story. |
Where does the Rochdale Observer get theirs? | |
| |
| Jamie bids on 19:45 - Jun 26 with 3261 views | TVOS1907 |
| Jamie bids on 19:36 - Jun 26 by 442Dale |
Where does the Rochdale Observer get theirs? |
They don't bother. |  |
| When I was your age, I used to enjoy the odd game of tennis. Or was it golf? |
| |
| Jamie bids on 19:45 - Jun 26 with 3258 views | fitzochris |
| Jamie bids on 19:36 - Jun 26 by 442Dale |
Where does the Rochdale Observer get theirs? |
This forum? | |
| |
| Jamie bids on 19:46 - Jun 26 with 3254 views | 442Dale |
| Jamie bids on 19:45 - Jun 26 by fitzochris |
This forum? |
But that would make it worth reading. | |
| |
| Jamie bids on 20:47 - Jun 26 with 3053 views | rochdaleriddler |
| Jamie bids on 12:14 - Jun 26 by fitzochris |
Have a look at my previous post. Our whole model is based on selling players we develop. This is because we don’t get massive crowds or sell global merchandise. We cannot pick and choose when to sell them if their value is met. I believe the expression is make hay while the sun shines. There may be a lean period when we have no academy players to sell and we need to rely on the money made from previous sales. |
Most clubs sell when a players value is met by another club, in the past we have sold some of ours too cheaply, I was just hoping we now have reached a point where when we don't need to sell out of necessity we make sure we get the absolute top price for our assets |  |
| |
| Jamie bids on 20:52 - Jun 26 with 3027 views | 442Dale |
| Jamie bids on 20:47 - Jun 26 by rochdaleriddler |
Most clubs sell when a players value is met by another club, in the past we have sold some of ours too cheaply, I was just hoping we now have reached a point where when we don't need to sell out of necessity we make sure we get the absolute top price for our assets |
Think we're at that point now. Hill will have a clear figure in his head, then we will sell. It might be a bit less than some want but that's his prerogative. | |
| |
| Jamie bids on 21:02 - Jun 26 with 2982 views | fitzochris |
| Jamie bids on 20:47 - Jun 26 by rochdaleriddler |
Most clubs sell when a players value is met by another club, in the past we have sold some of ours too cheaply, I was just hoping we now have reached a point where when we don't need to sell out of necessity we make sure we get the absolute top price for our assets |
Yeah but what the club think he's worth and what supporters think he's worth is proabably a different figure. | |
| |
| Jamie bids on 21:24 - Jun 26 with 2923 views | pioneer |
| Jamie bids on 20:52 - Jun 26 by 442Dale |
Think we're at that point now. Hill will have a clear figure in his head, then we will sell. It might be a bit less than some want but that's his prerogative. |
Surely the board should be the decision makers on the whether the fee offered is enough, not the manager. | | | |
| Jamie bids on 21:35 - Jun 26 with 2883 views | fitzochris |
Has anyone seen the second part of Hill's interview on iFollow? | |
| |
| Jamie bids on 21:59 - Jun 26 with 2799 views | D_Dale |
Some of the fans' comments on the report are also of interest, especially about whether Bristol Rovers' £2m offer for Dack should have been accepted in the 2015-16 season.
There's also an innocent optimist who thinks the £500k should be used to sign 'a quality midfielder and striker'. | | | |
| Jamie bids on 22:14 - Jun 26 with 2764 views | SaxonDale |
It may be a decent indication of the market for a midfielder at this level, however I don't think it is a true reflection of what we can hope to get for Allen. The key difference is that Dack turns 24 in December, thus when his contract expires next July Gillingham will be entitled to nothing. So in effect for Gillingham if they were to keep Dack in the hope he signed a new deal/they got promoted it could be seen as a £500,000 gamble. For us though, due to the tribunal, that gamble is much, much less. Quick search on Google found an article which suggests the main criteria is as follows,
-The status of the two clubs (transferor and transferee) is taken into account
-The age of the player
-The length of time the player was at the club.
-The terms of the new contracts offered to the player by each club are considered
-The player’s playing record is looked at
-Finally, interest shown by any other clubs is taken into account.
A lot of the criteria would suit us well going into a tribunal. Granted, it's unknown territory for the club (but I doubt it'll be the last time we have this discussion!) it will be interesting to see what happens over the next few weeks. |  | | |
| Jamie bids on 23:17 - Jun 26 with 2589 views | boromat |
Just managed to watch both Hill interviews on iFollowsometimeswhenitworks and the very last question is very directly asking about the speculation around Jamie. Basically says every player at this club has a price but Jamie is currently not for sale. He worked hard to extend his contract and he's in his plans for the season ahead. He believes Jamie is happy and it's his representatives that are playing the usual closed season games. | |
| |
| Jamie bids on 20:52 - Jun 27 with 1935 views | ColDale |
The deal has gone through. 750k plus add ons.
Is it safe to assume from this that the whispers about their interest in Camps had something about them? I'd dismissed any chance of it being true because I couldn't see Rovers spending that much money but now they've done this...
It's perhaps getting 2+2 = 5 but if they were interested in Camps, but have settled for Dack, it does suggest that we are putting real value on Camps' head for us to even consider. |  | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
