if young don't ask and you don't offer more, you don't know
Did you think about that?
Did you think about that?
I did think about that
and if you were a selling club, you would then sell
Did you think about that?
Just enjoy watching Libby in a Phoenix shirt this year and appreciate it like it will be his last season here.
The Phoenix wouldn't sell a young player with a future who wanted to be here. In the same way a number of players have gone to US colleges that the Phoenxi firmly believe would be A-League players. The Academy is about helping players and people and if the better option is a full scholarship at Harvard then the Phoenix aren't going to stand in the way.
Some of the absolute garbage written here makes me wonder if we support the same club.
It's odd you're not interested in debating the issue. The Phoenix, based on the article with extensive quotes from the GM, seem to be intending to pursue a strategy where a portion of the revenue each season will come from selling players. As evidence of that strategy, they have acquired a player (Piscopo) and paid a transfer fee, seemingly on the basis that as well as being an asset on the pitch, they may be able to generate a transfer fee from him in the future.
Some of us have queried whether this is in fact a sustainable approach, or is just another flash in the pan as a result of a once in a generation player probably generating a once in a generation fee. At the same time, it seems odd that the Phoenix are saying they want to generate funds from player sales, when the most obvious player who could generate a fee (Cacace) does not have a contract beyond this season.
The entire point here is that if the club is going to RELY on funding from player sales, the entire club needs to be set up along that model.
The academy needs to be pumping out players for the first team. The coach needs to accept he will have to play players from the academy, and that may have an impact on the pitch. We as fans need to accept that players may be sold. We need to be smart with our contracting so that players aren't leaving on free transfers when we could have generated a transfer fee.
These are not insubstantial issues. There seems to be a general view that this is what was always intended. I don't think that is the case, although I do think it was clear Welnix wanted to be bringing players through the academy and I personally think that is the way forward.
Normo's coming home
Players aren't commodoties, there's things outside of the Phoenix's control like whether they want to sign a contract extension or whether they want to move to the club which is offering to buy them.
The Phoenix wouldn't sell a young player with a future who wanted to be here. In the same way a number of players have gone to US colleges that the Phoenxi firmly believe would be A-League players. The Academy is about helping players and people and if the better option is a full scholarship at Harvard then the Phoenix aren't going to stand in the way.
Some of the absolute garbage written here makes me wonder if we support the same club.
Interested as to how they could stand in the way of an Academy players choosing to got a US College?
Founder
The Phoenix wouldn't sell a young player with a future who wanted to be here. In the same way a number of players have gone to US colleges that the Phoenxi firmly believe would be A-League players. The Academy is about helping players and people and if the better option is a full scholarship at Harvard then the Phoenix aren't going to stand in the way.
Some of the absolute garbage written here makes me wonder if we support the same club.
Interested as to how they could stand in the way of an Academy players choosing to got a US College?
Technically they can't, unless the player has signed a contract or owes the club money. In which cases the club can deny any transfer until the contract is terminated/settled or the owed monies are paid.
Fir U23 players they are entitled to a 'development fee' should they chose to, if the player goes to a professional club.
The Phoenix wouldn't sell a young player with a future who wanted to be here. In the same way a number of players have gone to US colleges that the Phoenxi firmly believe would be A-League players. The Academy is about helping players and people and if the better option is a full scholarship at Harvard then the Phoenix aren't going to stand in the way.
Some of the absolute garbage written here makes me wonder if we support the same club.
Interested as to how they could stand in the way of an Academy players choosing to got a US College?
People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. You can't trust people.
The Phoenix wouldn't sell a young player with a future who wanted to be here. In the same way a number of players have gone to US colleges that the Phoenxi firmly believe would be A-League players. The Academy is about helping players and people and if the better option is a full scholarship at Harvard then the Phoenix aren't going to stand in the way.
Some of the absolute garbage written here makes me wonder if we support the same club.
It's odd you're not interested in debating the issue. The Phoenix, based on the article with extensive quotes from the GM, seem to be intending to pursue a strategy where a portion of the revenue each season will come from selling players. As evidence of that strategy, they have acquired a player (Piscopo) and paid a transfer fee, seemingly on the basis that as well as being an asset on the pitch, they may be able to generate a transfer fee from him in the future.
Some of us have queried whether this is in fact a sustainable approach, or is just another flash in the pan as a result of a once in a generation player probably generating a once in a generation fee. At the same time, it seems odd that the Phoenix are saying they want to generate funds from player sales, when the most obvious player who could generate a fee (Cacace) does not have a contract beyond this season.
The entire point here is that if the club is going to RELY on funding from player sales, the entire club needs to be set up along that model.
The academy needs to be pumping out players for the first team. The coach needs to accept he will have to play players from the academy, and that may have an impact on the pitch. We as fans need to accept that players may be sold. We need to be smart with our contracting so that players aren't leaving on free transfers when we could have generated a transfer fee.
These are not insubstantial issues. There seems to be a general view that this is what was always intended. I don't think that is the case, although I do think it was clear Welnix wanted to be bringing players through the academy and I personally think that is the way forward.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/apr/28/l...
Before Welnix took over our youth programme was a scholarship setup by the fans. The current owners brought a fairly successful academy to Wellington, expanded it, linked with a fairly successful academy in Auckland and integrated the youth teams within the NZ football pyramid. If you think what they are saying is all a bit of fluff, it's very expensive fluff then.
Again, there are benefits to the team in having young players either still on scholarship or recent pros that perform above their salary which gives us a competitive advantage in a salary capped league. If we are able to get revenue either through direct sale or training compensation every other year, great.
The Phoenix wouldn't sell a young player with a future who wanted to be here. In the same way a number of players have gone to US colleges that the Phoenxi firmly believe would be A-League players. The Academy is about helping players and people and if the better option is a full scholarship at Harvard then the Phoenix aren't going to stand in the way.
Some of the absolute garbage written here makes me wonder if we support the same club.
It's odd you're not interested in debating the issue. The Phoenix, based on the article with extensive quotes from the GM, seem to be intending to pursue a strategy where a portion of the revenue each season will come from selling players. As evidence of that strategy, they have acquired a player (Piscopo) and paid a transfer fee, seemingly on the basis that as well as being an asset on the pitch, they may be able to generate a transfer fee from him in the future.
Some of us have queried whether this is in fact a sustainable approach, or is just another flash in the pan as a result of a once in a generation player probably generating a once in a generation fee. At the same time, it seems odd that the Phoenix are saying they want to generate funds from player sales, when the most obvious player who could generate a fee (Cacace) does not have a contract beyond this season.
The entire point here is that if the club is going to RELY on funding from player sales, the entire club needs to be set up along that model.
The academy needs to be pumping out players for the first team. The coach needs to accept he will have to play players from the academy, and that may have an impact on the pitch. We as fans need to accept that players may be sold. We need to be smart with our contracting so that players aren't leaving on free transfers when we could have generated a transfer fee.
These are not insubstantial issues. There seems to be a general view that this is what was always intended. I don't think that is the case, although I do think it was clear Welnix wanted to be bringing players through the academy and I personally think that is the way forward.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/apr/28/l...
Before Welnix took over our youth programme was a scholarship setup by the fans. The current owners brought a fairly successful academy to Wellington, expanded it, linked with a fairly successful academy in Auckland and integrated the youth teams within the NZ football pyramid. If you think what they are saying is all a bit of fluff, it's very expensive fluff then.
Again, there are benefits to the team in having young players either still on scholarship or recent pros that perform above their salary which gives us a competitive advantage in a salary capped league. If we are able to get revenue either through direct sale or training compensation every other year, great.
That's a pretty extreme case though. Generally speaking training compensation is nothing to write home about.
The Phoenix wouldn't sell a young player with a future who wanted to be here. In the same way a number of players have gone to US colleges that the Phoenxi firmly believe would be A-League players. The Academy is about helping players and people and if the better option is a full scholarship at Harvard then the Phoenix aren't going to stand in the way.
Some of the absolute garbage written here makes me wonder if we support the same club.
It's odd you're not interested in debating the issue. The Phoenix, based on the article with extensive quotes from the GM, seem to be intending to pursue a strategy where a portion of the revenue each season will come from selling players. As evidence of that strategy, they have acquired a player (Piscopo) and paid a transfer fee, seemingly on the basis that as well as being an asset on the pitch, they may be able to generate a transfer fee from him in the future.
Some of us have queried whether this is in fact a sustainable approach, or is just another flash in the pan as a result of a once in a generation player probably generating a once in a generation fee. At the same time, it seems odd that the Phoenix are saying they want to generate funds from player sales, when the most obvious player who could generate a fee (Cacace) does not have a contract beyond this season.
The entire point here is that if the club is going to RELY on funding from player sales, the entire club needs to be set up along that model.
The academy needs to be pumping out players for the first team. The coach needs to accept he will have to play players from the academy, and that may have an impact on the pitch. We as fans need to accept that players may be sold. We need to be smart with our contracting so that players aren't leaving on free transfers when we could have generated a transfer fee.
These are not insubstantial issues. There seems to be a general view that this is what was always intended. I don't think that is the case, although I do think it was clear Welnix wanted to be bringing players through the academy and I personally think that is the way forward.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/apr/28/l...
Before Welnix took over our youth programme was a scholarship setup by the fans. The current owners brought a fairly successful academy to Wellington, expanded it, linked with a fairly successful academy in Auckland and integrated the youth teams within the NZ football pyramid. If you think what they are saying is all a bit of fluff, it's very expensive fluff then.
Again, there are benefits to the team in having young players either still on scholarship or recent pros that perform above their salary which gives us a competitive advantage in a salary capped league. If we are able to get revenue either through direct sale or training compensation every other year, great.
That's a pretty extreme case though. Generally speaking training compensation is nothing to write home about.
For a player such as Cacace leaving us out of contract it falls under the FIFA training compensation regime, which is completely different from that which the Danny Ings payment came from, which is particular to English rules.
The Phoenix wouldn't sell a young player with a future who wanted to be here. In the same way a number of players have gone to US colleges that the Phoenxi firmly believe would be A-League players. The Academy is about helping players and people and if the better option is a full scholarship at Harvard then the Phoenix aren't going to stand in the way.
Some of the absolute garbage written here makes me wonder if we support the same club.
It's odd you're not interested in debating the issue. The Phoenix, based on the article with extensive quotes from the GM, seem to be intending to pursue a strategy where a portion of the revenue each season will come from selling players. As evidence of that strategy, they have acquired a player (Piscopo) and paid a transfer fee, seemingly on the basis that as well as being an asset on the pitch, they may be able to generate a transfer fee from him in the future.
Some of us have queried whether this is in fact a sustainable approach, or is just another flash in the pan as a result of a once in a generation player probably generating a once in a generation fee. At the same time, it seems odd that the Phoenix are saying they want to generate funds from player sales, when the most obvious player who could generate a fee (Cacace) does not have a contract beyond this season.
The entire point here is that if the club is going to RELY on funding from player sales, the entire club needs to be set up along that model.
The academy needs to be pumping out players for the first team. The coach needs to accept he will have to play players from the academy, and that may have an impact on the pitch. We as fans need to accept that players may be sold. We need to be smart with our contracting so that players aren't leaving on free transfers when we could have generated a transfer fee.
These are not insubstantial issues. There seems to be a general view that this is what was always intended. I don't think that is the case, although I do think it was clear Welnix wanted to be bringing players through the academy and I personally think that is the way forward.
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/apr/28/l...
Before Welnix took over our youth programme was a scholarship setup by the fans. The current owners brought a fairly successful academy to Wellington, expanded it, linked with a fairly successful academy in Auckland and integrated the youth teams within the NZ football pyramid. If you think what they are saying is all a bit of fluff, it's very expensive fluff then.
Again, there are benefits to the team in having young players either still on scholarship or recent pros that perform above their salary which gives us a competitive advantage in a salary capped league. If we are able to get revenue either through direct sale or training compensation every other year, great.
That's a pretty extreme case though. Generally speaking training compensation is nothing to write home about.
Not sure that relaying on a Tribunal ruling would be a wise strategy for the Nix in terms of training compensation. Like I said, the case referred to above is pretty extreme, with big European clubs involved. The sums involved with clubs in OFC are much more modest - there's no category 1 clubs in OFC, and Category 2 (which presumably the Nix would lie) is $30k US per season. WeeNix would probably count as less than that (maybe Category 3), and that's $10k US per season (obviously these amounts are negotiable when it comes to transfers, they just serve as a general framework). We're not talking huge sums of money here.
Obviously something is better than something, but you wouldn't want to relay on training compensation if this is to be the club's strategy.
The Phoenix, based on the article with extensive quotes from the GM, seem to be intending to pursue a strategy where a portion of the revenue each season will come from selling players.
That's a rather large stretch, isn't it? Maybe I missed something, but aren't you making presumptions about how significant a part of the revs the player selling might be, and how frequently it might benefit the club.
They may simply be hoping to sell a significant player once every few years, all going well. Perhaps with the odd other smaller transfer deal.
I think it's just a sign that the club is maturing, is more secure, that the academy has been producing solid to very good players for a couple of years now; that it doesn't seem ludicrous to talk about selling on transfer after the Singh deal; and given the number of good players that have been at the 'Nix or the academy and moved on to bigger things over the years (iirc that may include McKain, Kosta, Marco, Burns, Brockie, Musa, Krishna, Rodriguez who I think all directly or indirectly went to non-A League clubs and were probably more valuable for their time here?)
Just seems to me that, of course, we'd be a selling club. It's just a matter of how big a deal that is over time.
The Phoenix's main disadvantage is they don't have the budget of bigger clubs - blame it on the depth of the owners pockets or on the size of the metro or whatever, it's a fact. The main advantage is they have exclusive access to the largest pool of players of any club in the competition, and they have a rule in place locking those players to the Phoenix if they want to stay in the A-League. It's a massive deal if you think about it.
It's prudent to maximise their strengths and develop players for the first team, because it's a captive market kiwi players will be priced cheaper than equivalent Australians (until they're good enough to be foreigners) and they also generate extra money if they're sold which can be spent on the squad.
It really is the most obvious way for the Phoenix to challenge for silverware under current circumstances.
I doubt the club are looking to sell several players every year, no one would want to go through another rebuild to the extent that they are right now, but a player every year or two makes good sense. The Phoenix are a football club first and foremost, selling players is just a way to close the gap to bigger clubs and it happens all over the world.
I don't understand why people are bitter about this other than the fact that they're bitter about life in general.
Also, it means more kiwi pros at clubs which want to pay for them which is good for NZ.
No ones bitter Ryan
But
When the NIx bosses boast about being a selling club, because they got lucky that one of the top 5 clubs in the world sighted Singh at an international tournament and were lucky enough to have him under contract
And they don't act like a professional club in other matters like Cacere (who potentially is actually better)
Then they should be called as being the true amateurs they are
Anyway let's revisit this at the end of the season and see whom is right
Want to bet a northern membership on it?
Or force him to resign if he dosnt want to
Last season didn't AP bet everyone we were going to come dead last? :D
No ones bitter Ryan
But
When the NIx bosses boast about being a selling club, because they got lucky that one of the top 5 clubs in the world sighted Singh at an international tournament and were lucky enough to have him under contract
And they don't act like a professional club in other matters like Cacere (who potentially is actually better)
Then they should be called as being the true amateurs they are
Anyway let's revisit this at the end of the season and see whom is right
Want to bet a northern membership on it?
I did a quick search and actually couldn't find any quotes attributed to Dome or Morrison (or any of the other owners) saying the Phoenix are a selling club, the article which mentions selling club has this quote which is the closest:
"If we invest in the youth and bring them through and they go on to better and bigger things then it's win-win for everybody"
The whole "selling club" thing seems to be something that Phillip Rollo coined because Dome and Tallay said that the strategy is (and has been) to invest in local players and see a return on that investment.
Last season didn't AP bet everyone we were going to come dead last? :D
If only he'd promised to leave if we didn't.
Minutes player by teenagers at the Wellington Phoenix
Teenager = turning 19 or younger the year the season starts
For reference, playing every minute of 27 matches = 2430 minutes.
07-08 and 08-09 aren't easily acccesible.
Ricki Herbert
09-10 – 514 (Barbarouses 459, Rojas 55)
10-11 – 1114 (Rojas 914, Musa 175, Lovemore 25)
11-12 – 0
Ricki Herbert/Chris Greenacre
12-13 – 3085 (Fenton 1653, Boyd 784, Gameiro 566, Biss 82)
Ernie Merrick
13-14 – 1566 (Boyd 775, Ridenton 632, Adams 154, Rufer 5)
14-15 – 91 (Ridenton 66, Rufer 25)
15-16 – 859 (Ridenton 710, Rufer 135, McGarry 14)
Ernie Merrick/Des Buckingham & Chris Greenacre
16-17 – 72 (Singh 47, Rogerson 24, McGarry 1)
Darije Kalezic/Chris Greenacre
17-18 – 1783 (Singh 563, Cacace 552, Smith 540, Rogerson 128)
Mark Rudan
18-19 – 4622 (Cacace 2318, Singh 2031, Stensness 106, Waine 90, Elliot 77)
19-20 – ??? (Cacace & Waine the relevant contracted players)
No point playing guys just for the sake of it maybe players hadnt shown enough.
Im worried we r gonna be the next CCM, as we just play young players for the sake of the shop window, were a top 6 finish becomes redundant all for the sake of a transfer fee.
How can you advertise a great player if you are constantly getting the Wooden spoon or next to it.
Mr Positive
Im worried we r gonna be the next CCM, as we just play young players for the sake of the shop window, were a top 6 finish becomes redundant all for the sake of a transfer fee.
How can you advertise a great player if you are constantly getting the Wooden spoon or next to it.
Gotta wait and see where we finish this season tbh, last season we didn't finish wooden spoon and played a lot of youth and the seasons before that youth wasn't really a priority
I'm excited about seeing more young Kiwi players making the first team.
Always great to see a new teenager come through.
I'm excited about seeing more young Kiwi players making the first team.
Always great to see a new teenager come through.
Im worried we r gonna be the next CCM, as we just play young players for the sake of the shop window, were a top 6 finish becomes redundant all for the sake of a transfer fee.
How can you advertise a great player if you are constantly getting the Wooden spoon or next to it.
Clearly whatever we have been doing hasn't been a success so the kneejerk hate of a change in strategy is a bit funny. Worried about becoming CCM? Yeah, it sure would suck to be a team wearing yellow playing in front of dwindling crowds and spending most seasons just hoping we don't come last.
Sure there are risks with this kind of approach the article is suggesting but there are risks with every strategy. We don't have the money to adopt a City group approach of throwing cash around and even if we did it's harder to attract players to Wellington than to Melbourne or Sydney. Where we do have an advantage though is a captive pool of potential youth prospects that would be foreign players for all of the other clubs. Even in their immediate catchment area CCM are still competing with the Jets and the two Sydney clubs for young players.
People like Coldplay and voted for the Nazis. You can't trust people.
I'm excited about seeing more young Kiwi players making the first team.
Always great to see a new teenager come through.
was it great to see Keegan Smith :)
Founder
I'm excited about seeing more young Kiwi players making the first team.
Always great to see a new teenager come through.
was it great to see Keegan Smith :)
Valley FC til I die?
I'm excited about seeing more young Kiwi players making the first team.
Always great to see a new teenager come through.
was it great to see Keegan Smith :)
Where is Smith these days? And how's his keeping post Nix? I felt sorry for him the way things turned out. Personally, I'd be very happy for him to mature into a decent keeper and make it back to the pro ranks at some stage.
I'm excited about seeing more young Kiwi players making the first team.
Always great to see a new teenager come through.
was it great to see Keegan Smith :)
Where is Smith these days? And how's his keeping post Nix? I felt sorry for him the way things turned out. Personally, I'd be very happy for him to mature into a decent keeper and make it back to the pro ranks at some stage.
Was at Bubbles at the start of the winter season, and then I think he got hurt.
Also played last summer for Tasman United but struggled to nail down the starting spot.
Valley FC til I die?
It would be great to think he could recover. But, I saw him play a few games at start of winter season in Central League, and he didn't seem any better than most at that level. Shame, I suspect he was a victim of some pretty poor management, and it will be extremely tough making it back to that level (assuming that he even wants to).
It would be great to think he could recover. But, I saw him play a few games at start of winter season in Central League, and he didn't seem any better than most at that level. Shame, I suspect he was a victim of some pretty poor management, and it will be extremely tough making it back to that level (assuming that he even wants to).
Not sure what they were thinking, he was way out of his depth
Normo's coming home
....
...
..... No reason for Talay to tell fibs......
Except his ego.
