Portsmouth after Reuben Reid

Freathy wrote:

zyph wrote:

PAFC should show some backbone and say NO SALE.....back your manager Mr Brent to get us out of this basement league.

How long have you been following Argo LOL!

Reid should be considered gone

 At least the club now has what would appear to be a decent manager. If only the same could be said of the owner. It'll either end in tears, or the reluctant one will be able to cash in, on the back of a resurgence in on field performance.
Either way, the sooner he and his jamboys are gone, the better.................and you and I might be able to attend, once again.

I spoke to a Pompey fan yesterday with his ear close to the ground and he said it was all tosh started by some kid who swears he saw Reuben outside Fratton Park 2 hours before the Forest Green game.

Freathy wrote:

zyph wrote:

PAFC should show some backbone and say NO SALE.....back your manager Mr Brent to get us out of this basement league.

How long have you been following Argo LOL!

Reid should be considered gone

60+ years.....seen it all more than once.

Dick Trickle wrote:

I spoke to a Pompey fan yesterday with his ear close to the ground and he said it was all tosh started by some kid who swears he saw Reuben outside Fratton Park 2 hours before the Forest Green game.

I have just had a look on two Pompey forums, the majority would like him at Fratton Park, some others are saying it is bullshit and one or two are saying Pompey can't afford to buy Reid as the club are now skint.

Many though think Pompey will finish in a decent League Two position.

If Pompey dont want him come January when Reubes has 6 months left on his current deal a few will do.

Angry wrote:

If Pompey dont want him come January when Reubes has 6 months left on his current deal a few will do.

They'll only be able to sign him on a pre-contract deal if they're out of England. Otherwise they'll either have to bid for him and make do till summer.

I think the Pompey link is absolute bollocks myself. Yes, under the apparent new austerity measures I don't doubt that we'd sell Reid for what the club perceived to be the right offer. I have no doubt that, as I did regarding Hourihane, I would strongly disagree with the club's assessment of what an acceptable offer would be. £200k was far too low to sell Hourihane and we shouldn't have even considered it. Yet even with Hourihane having a year to go on his contract, we rejected the first two desultory offers from Barnsley. I think any club would have to bid at least that amount to buy Reid too. Maybe a decent league one club could afford to buy him. But could Pompey? And could they afford to also take on his wages (especially when he reportedly turned down their offer to make him League Two's best paid player last summer)? I don't buy it myself. Sounds like some absolute bollocks made up by a kid on twitter who's probably pissing himself at the reaction it got.

GreenSam wrote:

Angry wrote:

If Pompey dont want him come January when Reubes has 6 months left on his current deal a few will do.

They'll only be able to sign him on a pre-contract deal if they're out of England. Otherwise they'll either have to bid for him and make do till summer.

I think the Pompey link is absolute bollocks myself. Yes, under the apparent new austerity measures I don't doubt that we'd sell Reid for what the club perceived to be the right offer. I have no doubt that, as I did regarding Hourihane, I would strongly disagree with the club's assessment of what an acceptable offer would be. £200k was far too low to sell Hourihane and we shouldn't have even considered it. Yet even with Hourihane having a year to go on his contract, we rejected the first two desultory offers from Barnsley. I think any club would have to bid at least that amount to buy Reid too. Maybe a decent league one club could afford to buy him. But could Pompey? And could they afford to also take on his wages (especially when he reportedly turned down their offer to make him League Two's best paid player last summer)? I don't buy it myself. Sounds like some absolute bollocks made up by a kid on twitter who's probably pissing himself at the reaction it got.

whether the pompey rumour has/jad any merit or not still doesnt cover up the fact that he is in his lasy tear of his current deal ad if he continues to score goals a club or clubs will start circulating come jan. Given he would only have 6 months left by then i think the club will be open to sell him over losing him for free even if its not for a decent fee.

I agree- the concern is losing him in January. That, more so than this window, is when I think our mettle will be really tested.

Time to slap a new 2 year contract under his nose, I reckon.

Sir Francis Drake wrote:

Time to slap a new 2 year contract under his nose, I reckon.

yeap if he turns it down sell him in january i say.

If Argyle are up amongst the top come Dec/Jan and RR is doing well he won't go. Then wave the contract at him. However - a new frontman in on loan and Jervis signed I wonder how it will all pan out over the next few weeks.

tigertony wrote:

If Argyle are up amongst the top come Dec/Jan and RR is doing well he won't go. Then wave the contract at him. However - a new frontman in on loan and Jervis signed I wonder how it will all pan out over the next few weeks.

If the reluctant one and his helpful board have any true business sense they'd start the ball rolling on new contract talks around October and give him till 31st December to accept it and sign it. Same with other key players why wait till the summer get them secured sooner.

If reid rejects it then we look to sell him in january and use whatever cash we get to bringing a replacement even if its short term till the summer where can look in more depth for his replacement full time. Of coyrse I rather he stayed personally.

Let me start by saying I think the rumour is bollocks and I don't believe that Reuben would be sold. But, there's only 500k left on the creditors debt, I believe? Which is to be found from the income of 2000 tickets sold per match over the season. If Reubs, or any other prized player, was to be sold then the club would be stupid not to push for at least that half a mil price range. That money could wipe the debts and in turn open up the revenue of 2000 seats per match back into the budget. Reubs is our highest earner which is anticipated to be at around 2.5 to 3k pw. Half a million could help us bring in a few other players of that quality (assuming higher wages correlates with better players - not always, but more frequently). It wouldn't necessarily be a bad move.

Personally I think he's worth double that at least, today's footballing prices are mental and we should capitalise (if sales were to happen), rather than accepting fees based off similar sales a few decades back. Consecutive 20 goal a season hitters aren't common, we'd be a fool to get rid easily - but for the right price it could seriously help us. Only issue currently would be timing. This is really what we should have been thinking last season with the Conor sale, it should have been used to near enough clear our debts.

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Let me start by saying I think the rumour is bollocks and I don't believe that Reuben would be sold. But, there's only 500k left on the creditors debt, I believe? Which is to be found from the income of 2000 tickets sold per match over the season. If Reubs, or any other prized player, was to be sold then the club would be stupid not to push for at least that half a mil price range. That money could wipe the debts and in turn open up the revenue of 2000 seats per match back into the budget. Reubs is our highest earner which is anticipated to be at around 2.5 to 3k pw. Half a million could help us bring in a few other players of that quality (assuming higher wages correlates with better players - not always, but more frequently). It wouldn't necessarily be a bad move.

Personally I think he's worth double that at least, today's footballing prices are mental and we should capitalise (if sales were to happen), rather than accepting fees based off similar sales a few decades back. Consecutive 20 goal a season hitters aren't common, we'd be a fool to get rid easily - but for the right price it could seriously help us. Only issue currently would be timing. This is really what we should have been thinking last season with the Conor sale, it should have been used to near enough clear our debts.

We will not get a high price for himm with him having less than 11 months on his current deal.

Don't care. Get that price or don't sell, simple as that as far as I'm concerned. I feel the same way with the Conor deal, we were very much push overs in that one. It should be considered that the more we can get to clear the debt, the less revenue will be needed to service said debt and thus the more added to general playing budget (in theory). Even Shez actually came out and said at the very least Conor was worth twice what we sold him for, why we're doing half price sales for competitors is beyond me? Doesn't make business sense to me and supposedly our owners a whiz with the biz.

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Don't care. Get that price or don't sell, simple as that as far as I'm concerned.

Good logic for a team that wants to succeed. Spot on. Chase the ball, not the dollar. Everything else will follow.

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Don't care. Get that price or don't sell, simple as that as far as I'm concerned. I feel the same way with the Conor deal, we were very much push overs in that one. It should be considered that the more we can get to clear the debt, the less revenue will be needed to service said debt and thus the more added to general playing budget (in theory). Even Shez actually came out and said at the very least Conor was worth twice what we sold him for, why we're doing half price sales for competitors is beyond me? Doesn't make business sense to me and supposedly our owners a whiz with the biz.

He has less than 11 months on his current deal. If turns down a new deal or says he wants out the club should sell him for all they can in January albeit it wont be for his full value for obvious reasons rather than allow him to be signed up by another club for free in the summer. Its not good business sense to be stubborn in these cases.

Jeez Angry, you sound just like Brent. In fact, for all your talk, I reckon you would run the club just like him if you had half a chance.

Reid's similar to Conor. Unless he goes for the right price then we can't replace, directly or indirectly, and it'll cost more over the season than the inadequate fee received just cos we're weeing ourselves over him leaving on a free when the summer's up.

In short, would we have gone up last season if we kept Conor? There's no guarantee, but I have no doubts in my mind that we would. Is that worth more or less than receiving 200k rather than going up and then allowing him free reign in the window?

With this current squad I believe Reid is the difference between bottom half and potential promotion. Simple decision for me, anything less than a debt clearing amount (500k) ain't worth considering and it's worth the gamble of having him play and trying to attain the better figure from a promotion.

John Hawkins wrote:

Jeez Angry, you sound just like Brent. In fact, for all your talk, I reckon you would run the club just like him if you had half a chance.

so you would allow your best player to walk on a free?

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Reid's similar to Conor. Unless he goes for the right price then we can't replace, directly or indirectly, and it'll cost more over the season than the inadequate fee received just cos we're weeing ourselves over him leaving on a free when the summer's up.

In short, would we have gone up last season if we kept Conor? There's no guarantee, but I have no doubts in my mind that we would. Is that worth more or less than receiving 200k rather than going up and then allowing him free reign in the window?

With this current squad I believe Reid is the difference between bottom half and potential promotion. Simple decision for me, anything less than a debt clearing amount (500k) ain't worth considering and it's worth the gamble of having him play and trying to attain the better figure from a promotion.

and what part of he is in his last year of his contract is confusing here? would any club pay full whack for a player like reid when they know he will be free come june 1st? not many unless they wanted him right now certainly wont pay it in january. I'd rather get something than be stubborn and get nothing providing he states he wants to go by jan.

hourihane was sold far too cheaply in the summer where we should have asked for more an seeing as most went to ipswich and the cva and barely any went to sheridan's budget but that is brent for ya.

Angry wrote:

John Hawkins wrote:

Jeez Angry, you sound just like Brent. In fact, for all your talk, I reckon you would run the club just like him if you had half a chance.

so you would allow your best player to walk on a free?

If it came to that, yes. He didn't cost the club anything, and even if he did, it's just depreciation from a cost of very little, if anything. It's all "unbudgeted income" as we know it Jim. In the meantime, the club might just succeed on the pitch.

Angry wrote:

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Reid's similar to Conor. Unless he goes for the right price then we can't replace, directly or indirectly, and it'll cost more over the season than the inadequate fee received just cos we're weeing ourselves over him leaving on a free when the summer's up.

In short, would we have gone up last season if we kept Conor? There's no guarantee, but I have no doubts in my mind that we would. Is that worth more or less than receiving 200k rather than going up and then allowing him free reign in the window?

With this current squad I believe Reid is the difference between bottom half and potential promotion. Simple decision for me, anything less than a debt clearing amount (500k) ain't worth considering and it's worth the gamble of having him play and trying to attain the better figure from a promotion.

and what part of he is in his last year of his contract is confusing here? would any club pay full whack for a player like reid when they know he will be free come june 1st? not many unless they wanted him right now certainly wont pay it in january. I'd rather get something than be stubborn and get nothing providing he states he wants to go by jan.

hourihane was sold far too cheaply in the summer where we should have asked for more an seeing as most went to ipswich and the cva and barely any went to sheridan's budget but that is brent for ya.

No confusion angry, I just see potential promotion as more valuable than an insufficient sum. If the figure ain't right then bollocks to them, we'll have him play instead - It's a gamble, but it's a gamble worth taking if we're to learn anything from the Hourihane feck up.

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Angry wrote:

SwimWithTheTide wrote:

Reid's similar to Conor. Unless he goes for the right price then we can't replace, directly or indirectly, and it'll cost more over the season than the inadequate fee received just cos we're weeing ourselves over him leaving on a free when the summer's up.

In short, would we have gone up last season if we kept Conor? There's no guarantee, but I have no doubts in my mind that we would. Is that worth more or less than receiving 200k rather than going up and then allowing him free reign in the window?

With this current squad I believe Reid is the difference between bottom half and potential promotion. Simple decision for me, anything less than a debt clearing amount (500k) ain't worth considering and it's worth the gamble of having him play and trying to attain the better figure from a promotion.

and what part of he is in his last year of his contract is confusing here? would any club pay full whack for a player like reid when they know he will be free come june 1st? not many unless they wanted him right now certainly wont pay it in january. I'd rather get something than be stubborn and get nothing providing he states he wants to go by jan.

hourihane was sold far too cheaply in the summer where we should have asked for more an seeing as most went to ipswich and the cva and barely any went to sheridan's budget but that is brent for ya.

No confusion angry, I just see potential promotion as more valuable than an insufficient sum. If the figure ain't right then bollocks to them, we'll have him play instead - It's a gamble, but it's a gamble worth taking if we're to learn anything from the Hourihane feck up.

THere is no gamble here if he doesnt want to stay he can go asap if he does great sign the deal and score the goals. Leaving for nothing come May is not good buisness at all.

He don't want to go, so don't worry it.