19 Oct 2018 18:43:19
Not specifically Liverpool related but a discussion we were having in the pub earlier regarding contracts. Do you think it would make it more interesting if a player has to play the length of their contract. They can't be offered an extension by their current club, no one can bid for them but in the last month of their contracts they can listen to offers from both their current team and other teams. It was such an interesting debate that I thought I would bring it on here. It would certainly be entertaining in their last month and no drama throughout the contract so I'm for it in that sense, but players don't settle straight away, whether it be location, don't gel with the other players so I'm against it for that, but the more I think about it, the more I'm conflicted about the idea, just wanted to know what others think.


1.) 19 Oct 2018
19 Oct 2018 19:55:34
No way. Some players never get used to some styles, some players never hit the expectations and they will be stuck for years in a club they don't play. Aswell some people don't get on and they will be stuck tigether aswell. One big NO from me.


2.) 19 Oct 2018
19 Oct 2018 19:53:08
I see what you mean Welsh, it is a decent theory, it would work and it would have a subtle change on football that would completely change the feel of transfer season as most contracts run until the summer.

But;

I quite like the transfer season, it is mental, everyday we are full of hope as we chase players, are linked with top stars and sign underwhelming players. Near on everybody didn't want AOC but now we love him. I wish he was available for selection, I think fekir was an Ox replacement. We need that driving forward, milner and Keita have a good go but the ox has quick feet and good end product. I think mo salah is missing him big time.

At the end of the day, we don't want players who don't want to be here. They seem to develop bad backs.

Footballers are the modern day circus. These kids leave home at 12 and never really settle in one place. They are constantly travelling with the circus from match to match. Let's not make them prisoners.


3.) 19 Oct 2018
19 Oct 2018 20:50:11
There are so many other ways the transfer market reforming other than this.


4.) 19 Oct 2018
19 Oct 2018 21:27:06
What happens when a club sacks Sam Allardyce and brings in Marco Silva? You’re stuck with hoof-ball players on a 5 year contract under a manager who wants football players. Daft idea that could never work.

{Ed025's Note - or you could end end up with 10 jordan hendersons KK....where the ball would never cross the half way line...what a nightmare!!..


5.) 19 Oct 2018
19 Oct 2018 22:16:33
Think you would see a lot more 1 or 2 year deals. Also if I was a player I wouldn't want that kind restriction.


6.) 19 Oct 2018
19 Oct 2018 22:41:43
I think you would see a lot of 12 month rolling contracts which would lead to player be more transient. The club have a lot less assets but maybe it would be a good thing for football.


7.) 20 Oct 2018
20 Oct 2018 09:45:29
Appreciate the replies, I wasn't saying I'm behind this idea in any way, I just thought it was an interesting subject. I could see the loan market going through the roof if this were to happen, I also think the youth may get more of a chance if players don't settle. I personally think it's a bad idea but still thoughtful to discuss.


8.) 20 Oct 2018
20 Oct 2018 11:42:25
There is potential in it as an idea, but you would end up with loads of players on 1 year deals, particularly in the lower leagues (which most do anyway) as managers come and go like the rain in Manchester.
What you would probably also see is the money spent on transfer fees going on Agents fees and signing on fees as high profile players would command a figure to sign at new clubs/ re-sign for their current club and clubs would have to pay it.
I don’t see the likes of the big 6, Real/ Barca, Bayern etc. being happy not having the top players on long term deals, so it’s not likely to ever happen.