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.
Correct me if I'm wrong. There may be stuff going on behind the scenes, but here are the facts.
1 We scout him, a promising rugby player, and sign him into our Academy 2 We coach him to be a footballer and provide him with accommodation, contract etc. 3 We choose Swindon Town as a good place for him to develop as a player, presumably based on the football they play,/coaching reputation etc. 4 He has a promising first half of the season in League Two, so we recall him to preserve OUR asset who WE discovered and pay the wages of. 5 He or his agent decide they don't want to stay at ITFC and things fall apart.
With that in mind, I am finding some criticism of the club baffling. Are we supposed to just roll over with every player? And please, I've seen a couple of references to this being like Rhodes and Wickham. I know people who are Swindon season ticket holders and saw most of his games. They were impressed with his pace and speed but not his finishing or control, and would be amazed if he went to a Championship club. Rhodes and Wickham were very special players and everybody knew that. Wickham in particular had proved himself against Championship defences. Simpson's work has all been in League Two.
I'm really not sure what else the club could have done.
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:12 - Apr 22 by JackPITFC
Joe,
Do you think this could be a common theme for a lot of the young players coming through that can't see a clear pathway through to the first team then?
Obviously hear good things about Humphries on a regular basis and hoping it doesn't come back and haunt us in the future for other young talent.
I was impressed by the way McK trimmed the squad in January and effectively opened up pathways that have been previously blocked so hopefully that isn't the case.
Guess a number of factors have been the cause of this - most notably Simpson not signing a new deal when he went out on loan because we maybe (as a club) didn't rate him, and that has left us in a vulnerable position.
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:25 - Apr 22 by Guthrum
So it basically comes dowm to a difference between ITFC's assessment of his worth/readiness and that of himself/his agent.
Which, IMO, is fair enough on both sides, altho it's the player who will most have to justify his position by the future progress of his career. Best wishes to Simpson, it's his life. If the club have made an error, it may cost them to rectify it by hiring someone else.
If you're Ashton, I guess you cannot agree to any demand from young players for wage increases etc. You're opening yourself up to being held to ransom any time any of our teenage players have a purple patch, either for us or while on loan.
Part of me still hopes it will work out with Simpson.
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:25 - Apr 22 by Guthrum
So it basically comes dowm to a difference between ITFC's assessment of his worth/readiness and that of himself/his agent.
Which, IMO, is fair enough on both sides, altho it's the player who will most have to justify his position by the future progress of his career. Best wishes to Simpson, it's his life. If the club have made an error, it may cost them to rectify it by hiring someone else.
Pretty much, although I think Town should have offered the contract which was put on the table in January in the summer before he went to Swindon. Then I would imagine it would have been signed fairly swiftly at that point before 11 goals in League Two had altered expectations.
1
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:31 - Apr 22 with 1367 views
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:27 - Apr 22 by itfcjoe
I was impressed by the way McK trimmed the squad in January and effectively opened up pathways that have been previously blocked so hopefully that isn't the case.
Guess a number of factors have been the cause of this - most notably Simpson not signing a new deal when he went out on loan because we maybe (as a club) didn't rate him, and that has left us in a vulnerable position.
I guess aswell with all of the signings last summer his pathway was completely blocked and they didn't really see him having a future which is why they didn't negotiate a contract at the time, which I guess would've disappointed Simpson, but the main goal for Ipswich was promotion although we failed.
Hopefully with more structure like you say and trimming of the squad young players coming through should see a pathway and players that are going out on loan can negotiate contracts before doing so to protect an asset aswell as being able to see a pathway upon returning.
0
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:33 - Apr 22 with 1363 views
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:17 - Apr 22 by Bobbychase
The loan spell made him a saleable asset, so we moved to tie him to a longer deal. I'm sure it was inconvenient for him but I'm not a Tyreece Simpson fan, I'm an Ipswich fan. Club did the right thing.
We've been shafted so many times over transfers in the Evans era, and had the cream of our Academy swiped for pitiful compensation fees more than once by Premier League clubs. Good on Ashton etc for playing hardball.
It doesn't appear that playing hardball did us any good, ultimately. Doesn't strike me as a particularly productive way to do business with a young footballer. Sure, be firm with what you're offering, keep to your wage structure, but I don't see the use in trying to strongarm players into doing what you want.
Maybe we leave him at Swindon, he scores another 11 goals in the second half of the season and even if he still wants out, then we can ask for £1m for him rather than £500k. Maybe if you maintain a good relationship with him, he's a bit less inclined to listen to his agent. Like I say, I don't think in hindsight it looks like a productive move.
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:27 - Apr 22 by itfcjoe
I was impressed by the way McK trimmed the squad in January and effectively opened up pathways that have been previously blocked so hopefully that isn't the case.
Guess a number of factors have been the cause of this - most notably Simpson not signing a new deal when he went out on loan because we maybe (as a club) didn't rate him, and that has left us in a vulnerable position.
I think it's probably pretty common knowledge we are going to be bringing in at least 2 strikers this summer with at least one of them being a heavy hitter by L1 standards. So can imagine 'pathways' is a pretty hard sell to him and his agent.
0
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:35 - Apr 22 with 1356 views
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:31 - Apr 22 by JackPITFC
I guess aswell with all of the signings last summer his pathway was completely blocked and they didn't really see him having a future which is why they didn't negotiate a contract at the time, which I guess would've disappointed Simpson, but the main goal for Ipswich was promotion although we failed.
Hopefully with more structure like you say and trimming of the squad young players coming through should see a pathway and players that are going out on loan can negotiate contracts before doing so to protect an asset aswell as being able to see a pathway upon returning.
We did it with Corrie Ndaba before he joined Salford in August, just didn't for whatever reason with Simpson - i guess that can be linked back to Dyer's comments of not thinking he was ready as a widely held club view that they didn't expect him to succeed. Hopefully goes down in the lessons learned column
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:35 - Apr 22 by itfcjoe
We did it with Corrie Ndaba before he joined Salford in August, just didn't for whatever reason with Simpson - i guess that can be linked back to Dyer's comments of not thinking he was ready as a widely held club view that they didn't expect him to succeed. Hopefully goes down in the lessons learned column
Is there much of a lesson to be learned about that sort of judgement call? If a kid gets to the last year of their contract and we don't think they'll make it, then I'm not sure if we can extend their deal.
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:42 - Apr 22 by jayessess
Is there much of a lesson to be learned about that sort of judgement call? If a kid gets to the last year of their contract and we don't think they'll make it, then I'm not sure if we can extend their deal.
I think if sending them out to an EFL club on loan you just have to do it to protect yourself, as in this case we could have tied Tyreece down on a cheap longer contract (i.e. very low risk)
Very few clubs, especially looking at the well run ones, let players go out on loan through the last year of their deal - it's just unnecessarily risky
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:47 - Apr 22 by itfcjoe
I think if sending them out to an EFL club on loan you just have to do it to protect yourself, as in this case we could have tied Tyreece down on a cheap longer contract (i.e. very low risk)
Very few clubs, especially looking at the well run ones, let players go out on loan through the last year of their deal - it's just unnecessarily risky
Is the logic of that extending Clements and McGavin too?
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:52 - Apr 22 by jayessess
Is the logic of that extending Clements and McGavin too?
McGavin hasn't gone to EFL club, and Clements is with a view to him finding a club as already been told he is being released so that's more a loan to help him find somewhere
It's doing what we did with Ndaba, and have done with Dobra - making sure that those who are going to league clubs and expecting to play regularly. We've even extended Ben Morris this week who is 22/23 and on loan in the Swedish 3rd tier
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 16:04 - Apr 22 by itfcjoe
McGavin hasn't gone to EFL club, and Clements is with a view to him finding a club as already been told he is being released so that's more a loan to help him find somewhere
It's doing what we did with Ndaba, and have done with Dobra - making sure that those who are going to league clubs and expecting to play regularly. We've even extended Ben Morris this week who is 22/23 and on loan in the Swedish 3rd tier
Morris was actually done when he went out to Sweden, which backs up your point further!
0
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 16:34 - Apr 22 with 1243 views
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 16:04 - Apr 22 by itfcjoe
McGavin hasn't gone to EFL club, and Clements is with a view to him finding a club as already been told he is being released so that's more a loan to help him find somewhere
It's doing what we did with Ndaba, and have done with Dobra - making sure that those who are going to league clubs and expecting to play regularly. We've even extended Ben Morris this week who is 22/23 and on loan in the Swedish 3rd tier
GAIS (who Morris plays for) have long been in Superettan, which is the 2nd tier.
0
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 16:45 - Apr 22 with 1224 views
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:47 - Apr 22 by itfcjoe
I think if sending them out to an EFL club on loan you just have to do it to protect yourself, as in this case we could have tied Tyreece down on a cheap longer contract (i.e. very low risk)
Very few clubs, especially looking at the well run ones, let players go out on loan through the last year of their deal - it's just unnecessarily risky
Only it was not the last year as we held an option, something Evans felt was right which means you can hedge your bets. I guess Dyer may not have been a good judge of player if he felt he was not ready or a good one as the route we took was probably the right one. Players will always divide opinion as with the Jordan Rhodes fiasco, I remember Sir Bobby letting Colin Clarke and the defender who went to Brighton as being maybe mistakes but were they better than Hunter/Beattie/Butcher/Osman, Mariner/Whymark / Brazil at the time? I think we know the answer. Simpson is a youngster that wants to leave and we should allow it to happen and get a fee for the player.
0
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 16:54 - Apr 22 with 1201 views
At the last fans forum Ashton made some general points about the club not being agent led or held to ransom and he would always put the club first. He didn’t mention Simpson by name but as this was said in response to a question about Simpson initially the inference was pretty clear.
Simpson and his agent presumably haven’t got what they wanted and as a result want out of Ipswich. That’s their prerogative but the club are right to stand firm. No player is bigger than the club, certainly not one who has come across as ‘Billy Big Boll0cks’ on the back of half a season at Swindon!
Town are going places with or without Simpson so we move on.
[Post edited 22 Apr 2022 17:04]
1
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 18:40 - Apr 22 with 1122 views
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 13:23 - Apr 22 by clive_baker
I don't really get the reaction to be honest, towards the club or player. It happens all the time, players come and go, and if as a club and fan base we were happy for 'demolition man' to bin off players that have been here from a young age without giving them the courtsey of more than a 3 minute chat, as many were highly supportive of last summer, we can't be too critical when it works the other way.
He's a young player who might or might not have a decent career, who knows. For whatever reason whether it be financial, football, personal he quite clearly doesn't want to be at Ipswich though, so feck him. Protect our interests by selling him to whoever makes the most compelling offer in both the short and longer term by way of sell ons etc.
I don't understand it either. From what Phil was saying yesterday, it simply sounds that we can't reach an agreement and he (his agent?) wants more than we're willing to pay. He's unproven for us. As you say, maybe he will go on and have a decent career, but if we can't settle on terms that's all a bit academic, so we let him go and wish him well (or not, judging by some people's reaction!).
It's very routine.
Personally I think he's overreaching a bit to soon without actually doing anything in the game, but that's his choice. Maybe he is good enough to demand more and we'll end up regretting moving him on. But we can't be held hostage by kids with a handful of L2 games to their name.
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:25 - Apr 22 by itfcjoe
Just listened to a YT video with Stu Watson and he seems to think that the young player contracts are a bit all over the place and Ashton is trying to bring it into a more standardised structure.
Ultimately that doesn't currently help Simpson if he wants to be paid what his cohorts like Dobra, El Miz and Ndaba here are earning, and has every right to expect that.
If we lose one promising youth player every season over this, then we aren't getting it right though so hopefully there isn't anyone else we struggle to tie down - I note Tawanda Chirewa is out of contract this summer
The running of ITFC has been a complete sh1tshow for years, and will take more than a year to sort out. I don't bear Evans much ill will tbh, but it does grate how he was so absent but didn't have anyone decent to sort sh1t out. I guess his fingers were burned by the dual donkey appointments of Clegg and Keane.
Let's hope and pray we can make money sooner rather than later, i.e. get promoted.
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:11 - Apr 22 by Bobbychase
I'm not angry with the player. Let's get that clear. He has the right to do what he wants.
But I refuse to accept this weird narrative that is developing that he is somehow being treated badly by the club.
As a season ticket holder and Academy sponsor, the club have done nothing wrong in my book.
Absolutely. Ashton has made it pretty clear that his agent and or representatives are behind this. And rightly he has stood his ground and is not giving into them. Social media is full of Swindon fans moaning because we took him away from them. Tough.
People are saying he is an employee, and he is. But footballers are different to most employees in that they can’t just decide to leave. If they are under contract, then they can be sold or made to stay put. It might seem harsh, but players often take advantage of it (E.g. Ozil sitting in the stands at Arsenal while making £300k a week.
Hopefully we get a good fee from him and his career is a flop. Otherwise many others will see what he’s done and try the same thing.
[Post edited 22 Apr 2022 19:15]
1
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 19:05 - Apr 22 with 1094 views
Can we nip these odd Tyreece Simpson narratives in the bud pls on 15:33 - Apr 22 by jayessess
It doesn't appear that playing hardball did us any good, ultimately. Doesn't strike me as a particularly productive way to do business with a young footballer. Sure, be firm with what you're offering, keep to your wage structure, but I don't see the use in trying to strongarm players into doing what you want.
Maybe we leave him at Swindon, he scores another 11 goals in the second half of the season and even if he still wants out, then we can ask for £1m for him rather than £500k. Maybe if you maintain a good relationship with him, he's a bit less inclined to listen to his agent. Like I say, I don't think in hindsight it looks like a productive move.
Was it not the case that he was refusing to even speak to the club about a potential new deal when he was at Swindon? Pretty sure that's what was reported - and that being the case, if he's not going to pay us, his employer, enough respect to even hear us out, we're not obliged to let him spend the rest of his contract something that will benefit him and him alone.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
