Are Free transfers killing professional football?

Are Free transfers killing professional football?

Author
Discussion

LotusOmega375D

Original Poster:

8,078 posts

160 months

Friday 8th October 2021
quotequote all
Free transfers used to be the preserve of unwanted players, either due to age, fitness and/or lack of ability.

However in the past couple of years, they have been cropping up more and more for top notch players of any age.

Of course there is no such thing as a “Free” transfer: the potential fee effectively becomes the player’s new wages for the duration of his contract. Therefore the money goes out of the Club bank account and into the player’s and agent’s pockets.

Previously the transfer fee would remain predominantly within the Game and get passed down the Leagues as Clubs sought to replace their respective player. Obviously this is a significant source of income for lower league clubs.

As soon as a player attracted a potential suitor from a wealthier club, it was the usual pattern for the Chairman to get said player to tie down a new long-term contract, possibly with an extremely high buy-out clause. This was always spun as a sign of loyalty from the player and ambition from the club. Of course, it was really nothing of the sort. It was just a way to maximise the player’s value and guarantee a hefty transfer fee being paid at some point. This fee would thereafter be mainly re-invested in new signings and the money would work its way down the football ladder.

It is clear that agents of top players have advised their clients that greater personal riches are to be had by not signing contract extensions with their existing clubs. Likewise even the wealthiest clubs are now targeting players of any age who are due to be out of contract within 18 months. I am pretty sure they are influencing the agents to decline any contract extensions, with a view to signing them on a “Free” further down the line. There was a period where clubs would stage a cut price fire sale 12 months from the end of a player’s contract, but even that fashion seems to have died off.

I guess the next really big name to cash in will be Mbappe. It would have been unheard of even 5 years ago for a young superstar player to move to another club for nothing. I think this will be the new normal and all that money will just end up in the bank accounts of the player and his agent.

I’m not saying there won’t be players signed on transfer fees, but I doubt that any club will be paying £200 million for a player anymore. Unless you’re Newcastle Utd of course…

Kevin Cozner

1,065 posts

111 months

Friday 8th October 2021
quotequote all
Wow, that is one hot take.

Muzzer79

11,031 posts

194 months

Friday 8th October 2021
quotequote all
I don't know about 'killing professional football'.

At the highest level, there is a strategy.

That being:

1. Sign a 3 or 4 year contract
2. Assess at year 2 or 3 whether you want to stay.
3. If you do, negotiate terms for a longer deal
4. If you don't, let contract run down and sign terms on a deal with huge wages, because the buying club have saved on transfer fees.

I think the change at present is that, in years gone by, if point 4 came about, the club would sell you.

Nowadays, if you're good (like Mbappe) the club are willing to get the benefit of your services for another year and then re-assess when your contract runs out. A lot can change in a year - look at Barcelona.

There's only a couple of players who have managed to exploit this process and get all the way to the end of point 4. It possibly requires a lot of smoke and mirrors as to whether you're going to stay at your club or not and timing with transfer windows, etc.

Weirdly, the two I can think of who have 'won' would be Alexei Sanchez to Man Utd and Aaron Ramsey to Juventus.

TwigtheWonderkid

44,647 posts

157 months

Friday 8th October 2021
quotequote all
A top player is taking a big risk running his contract down. If he has a career ending injury 3 weeks before his contract runs out, he walks away with 3 weeks wages, say £450K. If he had 2 years to run, he'd walk away with £15.6m. To compensate for this, he can take out insurance, but it's very expensive.

GTO-3R

7,644 posts

220 months

Friday 8th October 2021
quotequote all
TwigtheWonderkid said:
A top player is taking a big risk running his contract down. If he has a career ending injury 3 weeks before his contract runs out, he walks away with 3 weeks wages, say £450K. If he had 2 years to run, he'd walk away with £15.6m. To compensate for this, he can take out insurance, but it's very expensive.
This.

Pothole

34,367 posts

289 months

Friday 8th October 2021
quotequote all
Nothing to worry about for a while. Mo will be at Anfield for a good while yet!

franki68

10,667 posts

228 months

Friday 8th October 2021
quotequote all
Surely the question is ‘are billionaire owners killing football ?’

48k

13,951 posts

155 months

Friday 8th October 2021
quotequote all
LotusOmega375D said:
Free transfers used to be the preserve of unwanted players, either due to age, fitness and/or lack of ability.

However in the past couple of years, they have been cropping up more and more for top notch players of any age.

Of course there is no such thing as a “Free” transfer: the potential fee effectively becomes the player’s new wages for the duration of his contract. Therefore the money goes out of the Club bank account and into the player’s and agent’s pockets.

Previously the transfer fee would remain predominantly within the Game and get passed down the Leagues as Clubs sought to replace their respective player. Obviously this is a significant source of income for lower league clubs.

As soon as a player attracted a potential suitor from a wealthier club, it was the usual pattern for the Chairman to get said player to tie down a new long-term contract, possibly with an extremely high buy-out clause. This was always spun as a sign of loyalty from the player and ambition from the club. Of course, it was really nothing of the sort. It was just a way to maximise the player’s value and guarantee a hefty transfer fee being paid at some point. This fee would thereafter be mainly re-invested in new signings and the money would work its way down the football ladder.

It is clear that agents of top players have advised their clients that greater personal riches are to be had by not signing contract extensions with their existing clubs. Likewise even the wealthiest clubs are now targeting players of any age who are due to be out of contract within 18 months. I am pretty sure they are influencing the agents to decline any contract extensions, with a view to signing them on a “Free” further down the line. There was a period where clubs would stage a cut price fire sale 12 months from the end of a player’s contract, but even that fashion seems to have died off.

I guess the next really big name to cash in will be Mbappe. It would have been unheard of even 5 years ago for a young superstar player to move to another club for nothing. I think this will be the new normal and all that money will just end up in the bank accounts of the player and his agent.

I’m not saying there won’t be players signed on transfer fees, but I doubt that any club will be paying £200 million for a player anymore. Unless you’re Newcastle Utd of course…
It's a somewhat rose tinted view to think that the cash sloshing around from transfers at the top level works its way down the football ladder.

LotusOmega375D

Original Poster:

8,078 posts

160 months

Friday 8th October 2021
quotequote all
OK, take this as a recent example. Man City pay Villa £100m for Grealish. amongst other signings, Villa spends £25m on Ings from Southampton. In turn Southampton sign Adam Armstrong from Blackburn for £15m. This helps fill a Covid shape void in the Blackburn bank account.

BoRED S2upid

20,319 posts

247 months

Friday 8th October 2021
quotequote all
franki68 said:
Surely the question is ‘are billionaire owners killing football ?’
Yes definitely.

As for players running down their contracts killing it. No that’s just nonsense. It’s only in the top tiers where huge fees are paid. It’s peanuts or free moves at the lower leagues.

Muzzer79

11,031 posts

194 months

Friday 8th October 2021
quotequote all
LotusOmega375D said:
OK, take this as a recent example. Man City pay Villa £100m for Grealish. amongst other signings, Villa spends £25m on Ings from Southampton. In turn Southampton sign Adam Armstrong from Blackburn for £15m. This helps fill a Covid shape void in the Blackburn bank account.
OK, but very, very few players will want or be permitted to run their contract down like Mbappe is.

It's only because PSG have squilions and are probably hoping they can get him to change his mind. They can afford to risk that he goes for nothing.

For by far the majority, players allowed to run their contracts down have little transfer value due to age, form or similar reasons.

So the Grealish-style transfers will still happen. The thing preventing some of them at present appears to be the risk that your £100m+ transfer doesn't work out and that FFP means you can only do so many of them in a year.

ChocolateFrog

28,576 posts

180 months

Friday 8th October 2021
quotequote all
It'll only take one high profile player to have a career ending injury weeks from the end of his contract to make the others reassess whether they really need the extra £100k a week.

48k

13,951 posts

155 months

Friday 8th October 2021
quotequote all
LotusOmega375D said:
OK, take this as a recent example. Man City pay Villa £100m for Grealish. amongst other signings, Villa spends £25m on Ings from Southampton. In turn Southampton sign Adam Armstrong from Blackburn for £15m. This helps fill a Covid shape void in the Blackburn bank account.
That's a sample size of 1 out of how many transfers that were undertaken in the summer? And of that single sample, only 15% of the money made it outside of the Premier League and even that ended up only one level down the pyramid. 85% of the money either stayed in the Premier League or bought players from Germany and Greece. That doesn't strike me as a compelling argument that that free transfers are killing football because non-free transfers provide significant sources of income for lower league clubs.


phil-sti

2,813 posts

186 months

Friday 8th October 2021
quotequote all
LotusOmega375D said:
OK, take this as a recent example. Man City pay Villa £100m for Grealish. amongst other signings, Villa spends £25m on Ings from Southampton. In turn Southampton sign Adam Armstrong from Blackburn for £15m. This helps fill a Covid shape void in the Blackburn bank account.
On the flip side Blackburn want Joe Rothwell to sign a new contract as there are a few clubs showing an interest in him. He is refusing and will run his contract down and we lose out on £5 million plus 🤷‍♂️

hepy

1,320 posts

147 months

Saturday 9th October 2021
quotequote all
phil-sti said:
LotusOmega375D said:
OK, take this as a recent example. Man City pay Villa £100m for Grealish. amongst other signings, Villa spends £25m on Ings from Southampton. In turn Southampton sign Adam Armstrong from Blackburn for £15m. This helps fill a Covid shape void in the Blackburn bank account.
On the flip side Blackburn want Joe Rothwell to sign a new contract as there are a few clubs showing an interest in him. He is refusing and will run his contract down and we lose out on £5 million plus ?????
Ah, so that's why Joe Rothwell has been playing better. Not sure about £5m though.

Bighoose

74 posts

43 months

Saturday 9th October 2021
quotequote all
No free transfers aren't killing professional football, quite the opposite, the possibility that nomatter how much a club pays for a player they could potentially end up leaving for free at the end of a contract acts as a bit of a brake on ever escalating transfer fees, which are very bad for the game.

popegregory

1,536 posts

141 months

Saturday 9th October 2021
quotequote all
phil-sti said:
LotusOmega375D said:
OK, take this as a recent example. Man City pay Villa £100m for Grealish. amongst other signings, Villa spends £25m on Ings from Southampton. In turn Southampton sign Adam Armstrong from Blackburn for £15m. This helps fill a Covid shape void in the Blackburn bank account.
On the flip side Blackburn want Joe Rothwell to sign a new contract as there are a few clubs showing an interest in him. He is refusing and will run his contract down and we lose out on £5 million plus ?????
Or as has been demonstrated above, he signs a new contract and he loses out on £5m?

popegregory

1,536 posts

141 months

Saturday 9th October 2021
quotequote all
Huddersfield had similar with Mbenza. Terminated contract then signed in Qatar literally the next day

48k

13,951 posts

155 months

Saturday 9th October 2021
quotequote all
Bighoose said:
No free transfers aren't killing professional football, quite the opposite, the possibility that nomatter how much a club pays for a player they could potentially end up leaving for free at the end of a contract acts as a bit of a brake on ever escalating transfer fees, which are very bad for the game.
There's been a brake on ever escalating transfer fees?

Freshprince

216 posts

62 months

Saturday 9th October 2021
quotequote all
I think there is a limit to what wages they would be willing to pay even on a free, be it wage structure and other players asking for more/resentement. Also, as few clubs have found out recently, you take on players on big salaries near end of careers, they could be crap and your stuck with them e.g Alexis Sanchez