By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
It's hard not to feel that this is the best way forward. Another one of their players could potentially be sold for £30m. Top recruitment by them, but this isn't achieved through good fortune, they seem to do it time and time again.
We wouldn’t have Downes, Bishop, Dozzell, Woolfenden, Lankester, Dobra etc. if we went down the Brentford route. At least not as home-grown players but players we picked up at 18-19 because they fell through the cracks.
But I think that 2 million Academy investment can be supplemented by a Brentford approach. Arguably buying younger and/or undervalued players was happening under Mick. But bizarrely and catastrophically it was abandoned by Hurst when the squad value was high and the youngsters like Downes and Nydam were just starting to make an impact in the first team ... instead we went for relatively expensive 25 year olds and bloated the squad.
Lambert finally looks like he may be getting back to the former approach this season but it’ll have been a waste of three years and a lot of money even, in the best case, if we get promoted this year.
Pronouns: He/Him
3
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 08:15 - Oct 12 with 2132 views
Many their fans also recognise and appreciate that a model that guarantees the future of the club long term is preferable to a short term desperate effort to reach the Premier league. They accept that top end championship is success for them.
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 07:50 - Oct 12 by Darth_Koont
We wouldn’t have Downes, Bishop, Dozzell, Woolfenden, Lankester, Dobra etc. if we went down the Brentford route. At least not as home-grown players but players we picked up at 18-19 because they fell through the cracks.
But I think that 2 million Academy investment can be supplemented by a Brentford approach. Arguably buying younger and/or undervalued players was happening under Mick. But bizarrely and catastrophically it was abandoned by Hurst when the squad value was high and the youngsters like Downes and Nydam were just starting to make an impact in the first team ... instead we went for relatively expensive 25 year olds and bloated the squad.
Lambert finally looks like he may be getting back to the former approach this season but it’ll have been a waste of three years and a lot of money even, in the best case, if we get promoted this year.
When they make sales of £28m for Watkins and £30m for Benrahma in one transfer window, ME must be thinking this is too tempting not to try? Yes, Ipswich has a deep rooted reputation to developing home grown talent and we wouldn't have produced those youngsters as you listed if we did adopt this approach, but I doubt that if we looked to sell them now, in January or next summer they would collectively generate even close to one of those transfer fees. Football, as we both know, has become a business and the financial rewards that Brentford are producing while maintaining a promotion chasing team, must be raising a few eyebrows in boardrooms across the country.
We're pretty good at buying cheap and selling well. In recent years, that would include Mings and Webster, plus we turned down offers that would lead to big profits on Didz and, this summer, Jackson. Brentford are doing it better, but they are top end of Championship.
0
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 08:33 - Oct 12 with 2078 views
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 07:50 - Oct 12 by Darth_Koont
We wouldn’t have Downes, Bishop, Dozzell, Woolfenden, Lankester, Dobra etc. if we went down the Brentford route. At least not as home-grown players but players we picked up at 18-19 because they fell through the cracks.
But I think that 2 million Academy investment can be supplemented by a Brentford approach. Arguably buying younger and/or undervalued players was happening under Mick. But bizarrely and catastrophically it was abandoned by Hurst when the squad value was high and the youngsters like Downes and Nydam were just starting to make an impact in the first team ... instead we went for relatively expensive 25 year olds and bloated the squad.
Lambert finally looks like he may be getting back to the former approach this season but it’ll have been a waste of three years and a lot of money even, in the best case, if we get promoted this year.
That was always the myth about Paul Hurst signing 'young and hungry' players, that they weren't that young - and certainly didn't have much future sale potential, when you compare to someone like Adam Webster, as an example.
The only player he signed we could have made good money on was Kayden jackson, had he hit the ground running and scored goals in the second tier and potentially Gwion Edwards. The other main signings - Nsiala, Nolan, Harrison and Donacien were basically lower league journeymen who were never going to be worth proper money.
That summer's transfer business set the club back so far, and we are still recovering from it - we got lucky that some of Mick's signings like Webster, Moore and Mings had subsequent big transfers that allowed a bit of transfer cash to trickle in. It really was a complete disaster - and to think some billed it our best summer ever....
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 08:21 - Oct 12 by Chrisd
When they make sales of £28m for Watkins and £30m for Benrahma in one transfer window, ME must be thinking this is too tempting not to try? Yes, Ipswich has a deep rooted reputation to developing home grown talent and we wouldn't have produced those youngsters as you listed if we did adopt this approach, but I doubt that if we looked to sell them now, in January or next summer they would collectively generate even close to one of those transfer fees. Football, as we both know, has become a business and the financial rewards that Brentford are producing while maintaining a promotion chasing team, must be raising a few eyebrows in boardrooms across the country.
[Post edited 12 Oct 2020 9:40]
Maybe he would be tempted by that, but we have to get back there first. We paid the price for his indecision over how to progress after 2014/15 which was compounded by bad luck given the injuries suffered by players who could either have had us continuing to challenge or been sold to generate money. Throw in Hurst’s 4 month demolition job and Lambert’s confused first 18 months, we’ve ended up grateful for the CoronaVirus break because it really does appear as though some strategic discussion took place and that it’s being implemented at last.
0
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 08:39 - Oct 12 with 2040 views
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 08:33 - Oct 12 by itfcjoe
That was always the myth about Paul Hurst signing 'young and hungry' players, that they weren't that young - and certainly didn't have much future sale potential, when you compare to someone like Adam Webster, as an example.
The only player he signed we could have made good money on was Kayden jackson, had he hit the ground running and scored goals in the second tier and potentially Gwion Edwards. The other main signings - Nsiala, Nolan, Harrison and Donacien were basically lower league journeymen who were never going to be worth proper money.
That summer's transfer business set the club back so far, and we are still recovering from it - we got lucky that some of Mick's signings like Webster, Moore and Mings had subsequent big transfers that allowed a bit of transfer cash to trickle in. It really was a complete disaster - and to think some billed it our best summer ever....
There's a fair few who appreciate quantity over quality when it comes to transfers.
0
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 08:45 - Oct 12 with 2006 views
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 08:39 - Oct 12 by patrickswell
Maybe he would be tempted by that, but we have to get back there first. We paid the price for his indecision over how to progress after 2014/15 which was compounded by bad luck given the injuries suffered by players who could either have had us continuing to challenge or been sold to generate money. Throw in Hurst’s 4 month demolition job and Lambert’s confused first 18 months, we’ve ended up grateful for the CoronaVirus break because it really does appear as though some strategic discussion took place and that it’s being implemented at last.
They still spend decent amounts on players which Evans hasn't shown he's will to do. They've got in a fair few for over 2 million +. When we sell we don't reinvest it on top of Evans' contribution, so in reality we are never able to go that bit further.
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 08:21 - Oct 12 by Chrisd
When they make sales of £28m for Watkins and £30m for Benrahma in one transfer window, ME must be thinking this is too tempting not to try? Yes, Ipswich has a deep rooted reputation to developing home grown talent and we wouldn't have produced those youngsters as you listed if we did adopt this approach, but I doubt that if we looked to sell them now, in January or next summer they would collectively generate even close to one of those transfer fees. Football, as we both know, has become a business and the financial rewards that Brentford are producing while maintaining a promotion chasing team, must be raising a few eyebrows in boardrooms across the country.
[Post edited 12 Oct 2020 9:40]
To be fair, ME is not alone in being less successful in transfer trading than Brentford. They are a bit of a one off.
It's not really a 'model' - more a common sense approach like Leicester's current run of transient success. Good recruitment that is very difficult and perhaps even impossible to sustain as various incumbents are head hunted - or their luck runs out.
I have long advocated not bothering with an academy and simply researching all the discards from Premier League downwards.... you could argue we'd miss out on all those young players we have stunted the development of... and harking back to when Portsmouth pioneered this approach in the 60s, we got Mick Mills thank you very much.
I agree Brentford looks very impressive at the moment - but then so did Swansea, Stoke, Wimbledon, Bolton, Blackpool etc etc and Indeed Derby, Forest and ITFC back on the day - ie 'minnows' punching above their weight surfing the good times and mistakenly thinking they will last forever in the transitory world of football.
All it takes is a couple of duff signings for the wheels ot fall off and implosion to occur.
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 07:50 - Oct 12 by Darth_Koont
We wouldn’t have Downes, Bishop, Dozzell, Woolfenden, Lankester, Dobra etc. if we went down the Brentford route. At least not as home-grown players but players we picked up at 18-19 because they fell through the cracks.
But I think that 2 million Academy investment can be supplemented by a Brentford approach. Arguably buying younger and/or undervalued players was happening under Mick. But bizarrely and catastrophically it was abandoned by Hurst when the squad value was high and the youngsters like Downes and Nydam were just starting to make an impact in the first team ... instead we went for relatively expensive 25 year olds and bloated the squad.
Lambert finally looks like he may be getting back to the former approach this season but it’ll have been a waste of three years and a lot of money even, in the best case, if we get promoted this year.
That's the thing, we don't need to abandon the Academy* in order to pursue a lucrative transfer strategy. The £2m a year we're spending is not going to stop us laying out just £10k (plus a friendly) on a Tyrone Mings, if we come across one. It didn't prevent us from attracting Connor Wickham at the age of 13.
* Which, in any case, is not what Brentford have done. They're running the footballing equivalent of a sixth-form college, only taking in the older Youths. Partly because they are in a big city, surrounded by a number of larger clubs more likely to attract the youngsters.
They spend the money they saved on closing their academy on their scouting network, but the issue is where is their ambition Premier league or Championship and below?
One of my friends has been a Brentford fan for 60 + years and as he keeps saying Brentford should have been promoted to the Prem years ago but the clubs policy of sell, sell sell, has stop them. Even when they have a good season like last season rather than retain their best players and strengthen it the areas that need it they sell again their best players.
Their whole policy is built on buy a player and then sell for a profit 2 years later, it's never been buy to win promotion, if promotion comes then fine but it's always been about buy a player to sell.
0
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 10:03 - Oct 12 with 1734 views
Without a decent academy though, isn't 'buy cheap, sell high' ultimately built on sand? All it takes is a limp relegation or a couple of misjudged signings and it falls to bits rather easily?
[Post edited 12 Oct 2020 10:03]
I'm one of the people who was blamed for getting Paul Cook sacked. PM for the full post.
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 08:15 - Oct 12 by Bluefish
Many their fans also recognise and appreciate that a model that guarantees the future of the club long term is preferable to a short term desperate effort to reach the Premier league. They accept that top end championship is success for them.
At some stage they're going to make it into the Premiership
I believe their policy is always to sell which in some cases has hampered their promotion hopes, I believe some of their fans feel they'd have been there sooner if they didn't always sell off their best players?
Alcohol is the answer but I can't remember the question!
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 10:03 - Oct 12 by BlueBadger
Without a decent academy though, isn't 'buy cheap, sell high' ultimately built on sand? All it takes is a limp relegation or a couple of misjudged signings and it falls to bits rather easily?
[Post edited 12 Oct 2020 10:03]
What isn't built on sand? Empires rise and Empires fall, the only question is how long they will last.
Liverpool, so dominant in the 70s and 80s took 30 years to win the title they practically owned for many years.
Manchester United, dominant 1993-2013 under Ferguson who combined a particularly good crop of youth players with some astute signings... how many managers have tried and "failed" since?
I would assert that Brentford's model can afford the odd hiccup and continue on for some time yet.
Where their model will fall apart is if their scouting and coaching set up falls apart; retirements, fall outs, poaching by bigger clubs [e.g. Villa] who are fed up paying Brentford's retail prices and decide to cut out the middle man. Sign the staff that unearth the gems and then unearth them yourself. Even this is not as easy as typing it, I've said on this forum many times; Success is down to chemistry - be it SBR / Mr. John, Clough / Taylor, Old School Liverpool boot room... whatever. And even if you move the components elsewhere there is no guarantee of success like the distilling of a fine malt whisky - you can move the distillery elsewhere lock, stock and barrel BUT the whisky won't taste the same. Produced maybe at a different altitude, different elements in the water etc.
But that's the biggest danger I see to Brentford right now - being stripped of that scouting / coaching network that has served them so well.
The more you read about Brentford's transfer success on 10:07 - Oct 12 by bournemouthblue
At some stage they're going to make it into the Premiership
I believe their policy is always to sell which in some cases has hampered their promotion hopes, I believe some of their fans feel they'd have been there sooner if they didn't always sell off their best players?
Therein lies the problem, once they hit the top division is that where it falls apart?
As others have said what is the owners ambition? Do they harbour thoughts of hitting CL level?
TBH I think their approach is sensible long term, maybe they looked at us 2000-2002 and learned of the problems of too much too soon...
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
