Willing to stay for at least another year. Did I miss it or has that one crept through without the gossips noticing it.
I assume that may be because he is under contract, so nothing has really happened. If he were to sign an extension, that would be more of a news story. In any case, if O'Riley has his heart fully set on playing for Fulham this coming season, that can only be a good thing.
I agree that this is a brilliant thing but as the Press gave the impression that he was as keen as Elliott to get out any positive news is good news.
The thing with O'Reilly is that he WANTS to play for Fulham - his family will tell you as much. The rumour is that he just doesn't want to use their preferred agent, which seems fair enough to me - a contractors representation shouldn't be restricted by an employer. But we're looking at so many talented players who want out of clubs (not just Fulham) and we have a very talented young man who actively wants to be here - that's got to be a real positive. Hopefully we (the club and the player) can find a way forward to the best of everyone.
thought I read somewhere that he wanted to work with Parker and that's why he was willing to stay
Quote from: Dr Quinzel on July 09, 2019, 10:43:57 AM
The thing with O'Reilly is that he WANTS to play for Fulham - his family will tell you as much. The rumour is that he just doesn't want to use their preferred agent, which seems fair enough to me - a contractors representation shouldn't be restricted by an employer. But we're looking at so many talented players who want out of clubs (not just Fulham) and we have a very talented young man who actively wants to be here - that's got to be a real positive. Hopefully we (the club and the player) can find a way forward to the best of everyone.
Was Elliott using the preferred agent then?
If so then not a great deal of help there
Quote from: sunburywhite on July 09, 2019, 12:18:25 PM
Quote from: Dr Quinzel on July 09, 2019, 10:43:57 AM
The thing with O'Reilly is that he WANTS to play for Fulham - his family will tell you as much. The rumour is that he just doesn't want to use their preferred agent, which seems fair enough to me - a contractors representation shouldn't be restricted by an employer. But we're looking at so many talented players who want out of clubs (not just Fulham) and we have a very talented young man who actively wants to be here - that's got to be a real positive. Hopefully we (the club and the player) can find a way forward to the best of everyone.
Was Elliott using the preferred agent then?
If so then not a great deal of help there
Fair point, and honestly I don't know. Ironically, it is the preferred agent who is TC's agent ie the player who gets a new contract every year due to whatever has been stirred up, so God knows why the preferred is just that.
Fulham's u23 scored the least goals in PL2 and second worst in goal difference a long way behind Reading and Blackburn, so it's hard to think our team is packed with many gems other than the full backs.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on July 09, 2019, 01:50:06 PM
Fulham's u23 scored the least goals in PL2 and second worst in goal difference a long way behind Reading and Blackburn, so it's hard to think our team is packed with many gems other than the full backs.
So, based on your cherry picked statistics without context, why would the full backs be "gems"?
Curious. I keep reading about the club using a preferred agent and the troubles that can cause in negotiations with current or prospective players.
What exactly is the benefit? One would assume that it isn't because the agent gives sweetheart deals because they would, seemingly, have a fiduciary responsibility to get the best deal possible for their clients. So, is this decision to deal with only certain agent(s) more to do with cutting out the bad dealing agents (the McKay's of the world)? Or is it something else? The whole thing seems to limit the pool of players from which the club can choose. On the surface, it doesn't seem beneficial.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on July 09, 2019, 01:50:06 PM
Fulham's u23 scored the least goals in PL2 and second worst in goal difference a long way behind Reading and Blackburn, so it's hard to think our team is packed with many gems other than the full backs.
This has been plucked with no reference and I presume no experience watching any of these players. Our U23s operate as a very small group and most are 17/18/19 rather than most clubs really utilising the 21-23. We've been without a striker for the majority of the season and central midfielder Jayden Harris has found himself out wide at times. We don't have a left-back.
We played Leeds in the PL Cup with two 17-year-olds, two 18-year-olds and four 19-year-olds in the starting eleven (two were out of position). In that game, Leeds had Barry Douglas, Gaetano Berardi, Izzy Brown and Jack Clarke involved and we took them to penalties.
Back to the point on O'Riley, it's a shame not only for Fulham but for English football that he's got less than 10 games at this point. He's a real talent. And I also find it bizarre that Luca De La Torre had a legitimate man of the match performance against Millwall and didn't play again. The talent is there, finding the game time in such key positions is difficult but we've got players here that can absolutely supplement the squad as opposed to paying other clubs fees and wages for loan players.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on July 09, 2019, 01:50:06 PM
Fulham's u23 scored the least goals in PL2 and second worst in goal difference a long way behind Reading and Blackburn, so it's hard to think our team is packed with many gems other than the full backs.
At one point recently O'Riley had created more chances on his own than some other teams had done cumulatively. To say that you can't have gems in a team because the team overall doesn't succeed isn't true.
Quote from: ToodlesMcToot on July 09, 2019, 02:20:32 PM
Curious. I keep reading about the club using a preferred agent and the troubles that can cause in negotiations with current or prospective players.
What exactly is the benefit? One would assume that it isn't because the agent gives sweetheart deals because they would, seemingly, have a fiduciary responsibility to get the best deal possible for their clients. So, is this decision to deal with only certain agent(s) more to do with cutting out the bad dealing agents (the McKay's of the world)? Or is it something else? The whole thing seems to limit the pool of players from which the club can choose. On the surface, it doesn't seem beneficial.
Probably something to do with the Fee the agent wants and how quick they are to ask for a payrise for there client every year or the client is off
Quote from: The Rational Fan on July 09, 2019, 01:50:06 PM
Fulham's u23 scored the least goals in PL2 and second worst in goal difference a long way behind Reading and Blackburn, so it's hard to think our team is packed with many gems other than the full backs.
Does that rule also go for the first team then? Surely we have some "gems" there cos everyone is over the moon Mitro signed a new deal.
Quote from: FPT on July 09, 2019, 02:58:53 PM
Quote from: The Rational Fan on July 09, 2019, 01:50:06 PM
Fulham's u23 scored the least goals in PL2 and second worst in goal difference a long way behind Reading and Blackburn, so it's hard to think our team is packed with many gems other than the full backs.
This has been plucked with no reference and I presume no experience watching any of these players. Our U23s operate as a very small group and most are 17/18/19 rather than most clubs really utilising the 21-23. We've been without a striker for the majority of the season and central midfielder Jayden Harris has found himself out wide at times. We don't have a left-back.
We played Leeds in the PL Cup with two 17-year-olds, two 18-year-olds and four 19-year-olds in the starting eleven (two were out of position). In that game, Leeds had Barry Douglas, Gaetano Berardi, Izzy Brown and Jack Clarke involved and we took them to penalties.
Back to the point on O'Riley, it's a shame not only for Fulham but for English football that he's got less than 10 games at this point. He's a real talent. And I also find it bizarre that Luca De La Torre had a legitimate man of the match performance against Millwall and didn't play again. The talent is there, finding the game time in such key positions is difficult but we've got players here that can absolutely supplement the squad as opposed to paying other clubs fees and wages for loan players.
All good points the u23 is very young so some players could be gems developing in a few years and i concede. that a team that is not packed with gems could still have a couple of gems especially if finishing is shocking.
So more accurately i should have said "....so it's hard to think our team is packed with many gems (ready for the championship next season) other than the full backs and maybe a couple of others (eg Riley)."
I haven't watched the u23 live, but really doubt like people suggest that Cameron Thompson is better than Rui Fonte for next season. The key to a good squad is trying to get a little better each season and most of our u23 need to be concentrating on doing better in PL2, the rest should need to try to make it in some lower ranked team before coming back like Rodak has.
If this agent thing is true, then I can understand it. It's like choosing not to use certain companies because you don't like the way they run their business. Whilst that may limit the players we can deal with, I am behind it as a principle of pushing back against undesirable agents.
Agents play a part in driving up market prices, taking us to where we are today with the ridiculous sums being discussed in terms of both transfer fees and wages.
Quote from: The Rational Fan on July 09, 2019, 01:50:06 PM
Fulham's u23 scored the least goals in PL2 and second worst in goal difference a long way behind Reading and Blackburn, so it's hard to think our team is packed with many gems other than the full backs.
Are these so called talented young players that good or are they being hyped up? I think they could be.
Elliott's agents are a company called Wasserman who represent Van Dijk and Jordan Henderson. Makes you think this 'deal' may have been bubbling under for some time with complicit parents etc.
Quote from: Herbie on July 10, 2019, 06:01:41 AM
If this agent thing is true, then I can understand it. It's like choosing not to use certain companies because you don't like the way they run their business. Whilst that may limit the players we can deal with, I am behind it as a principle of pushing back against undesirable agents.
Agents play a part in driving up market prices, taking us to where we are today with the ridiculous sums being discussed in terms of both transfer fees and wages.
It depends why they are deemed undesirable. The agents we were understood to have dealt with this Summer just gone were hardly those with stellar reputations.
Quote from: MikeW on July 10, 2019, 08:40:38 AM
Elliott's agents are a company called Wasserman who represent Van Dijk and Jordan Henderson. Makes you think this 'deal' may have been bubbling under for some time with complicit parents etc.
His Dad is a Liverpool fan - I have a friend who knows him well enough. For them it's a dream move if it happens, so wish them well. A kick in the teeth for us, but that is the system, which we're not beyond taking advantage of ourselves. Elliott for instance came to us from QPR at 13.
Quote from: Nero on July 09, 2019, 03:57:28 PM
Quote from: ToodlesMcToot on July 09, 2019, 02:20:32 PM
Curious. I keep reading about the club using a preferred agent and the troubles that can cause in negotiations with current or prospective players.
What exactly is the benefit? One would assume that it isn't because the agent gives sweetheart deals because they would, seemingly, have a fiduciary responsibility to get the best deal possible for their clients. So, is this decision to deal with only certain agent(s) more to do with cutting out the bad dealing agents (the McKay's of the world)? Or is it something else? The whole thing seems to limit the pool of players from which the club can choose. On the surface, it doesn't seem beneficial.
Probably something to do with the Fee the agent wants and how quick they are to ask for a payrise for there client every year or the client is off
Thanks. Just trying to figure out the logic of it.
Quote from: ToodlesMcToot on July 10, 2019, 07:05:27 PM
Quote from: Nero on July 09, 2019, 03:57:28 PM
Quote from: ToodlesMcToot on July 09, 2019, 02:20:32 PM
Curious. I keep reading about the club using a preferred agent and the troubles that can cause in negotiations with current or prospective players.
What exactly is the benefit? One would assume that it isn't because the agent gives sweetheart deals because they would, seemingly, have a fiduciary responsibility to get the best deal possible for their clients. So, is this decision to deal with only certain agent(s) more to do with cutting out the bad dealing agents (the McKay's of the world)? Or is it something else? The whole thing seems to limit the pool of players from which the club can choose. On the surface, it doesn't seem beneficial.
Probably something to do with the Fee the agent wants and how quick they are to ask for a payrise for there client every year or the client is off
Thanks. Just trying to figure out the logic of it.
If one agent handles all the signings, then the agent can reassure players that other supporting players will come along and explain the long-term plans of the club. For example at Fulham, any top RW would probably wait until we have signed a better RB; and any top RB would probably wait until we have signed a better RCB; and a top RCB won't sign unless we upgrade the RW etc. If you haven't noticed that forms an infinite loop to get a RW you need a RB, to get a RB you need a RCB, to get a RCB you need a RW, who needs a RB, who needs a RCB on forever and ever.
But, if an agent is signing the RW, RCB and RB, then he can reassure all of them that those positions would be upgraded. The advantage for club is there is a more collaborative trusting arrangement between the club and agent, the advantage for the players is that their agent is able to provide more claity about where that club is going. It helps clubs move up the league ladder, but it also gives the agent more power which means you could easily find you team going down the ladder faster too. Personally, I wouldn't use one agent but recommend building a team slowly year on year going up the ladder. I guess the ultimate would be using a clever combination getting some of the advantages of both (e.g. maybe using one agent when you get caught in an infinite loop situation).
Any player signing with Fulham wants to know how much Fulham intends to spend if we get promoted next season. I wouldn't be surprised if Tony Khan and Mitrovoic discussed how much Tony Khan is going to spend on deadline day this season, because a comment like i'll spend every pound i get from the sale of Sessegnon, Seri and Fabri would make Mitro more likely to sign. Of course, TK cannot have that conversation with players outside the club but a single agents can.
Lad looks great on Youtube, but the test will be whether he can remain so composed when he has less time on the ball and he's getting aggressively tackled. Optimistic though.
O'Reilly has the wrong agent and refuses to change, for this reason we have severely limited his game time so far, the lads a proper baller.
