Do players get rewarded too easily at the club?

[The Rational Fan]

Odoi, Bryan and neeskens recently had contracts renewed if news is to be believed.

Whilst I appreciate Bryans contribution to our season last year and odois service to the club, is there enough critical thought being put into how we manage the squad and our contracts?

Whilst not always the case it can be suggested that with most new contracts you can get favourable terms.

I think we give contracts out too easily.

How much did odoi play last year and in what capacity? Surely instead of extending his contract we should've considered what the end of his contract would mean and whether it would be more meaningful for the club to bring in another starting CB who could challenge our current starters and subsequently improve our squads quality and depth instead of perhaps keeping it stagnant or perhaps ageing it.

I appreciate odoi is versatile and probably a good guy to have in the squad but just using him as an example of someone who illustrates the point.

We've also given contracts to Kevin Mcdonald who has hardly played since but got one for being a good guy to have around. Sounds harsh, and I'm sure Kevin would prefer to be playing and I do like Kevin but again a contract and squad space for am and going player when we really should've probably been looking to not keep him on but to evolve our squad with someone better and younger and not resting on our laurels.

TK can't win on this board. When he brings in "too many new players," he's accused of disrespecting the core of the team that came up and ruined the season. Now he's rewarding players and maintaining continuity and buying prudently, and people are questioning whether he's too generous and why we haven't brought in more players yet.

If there's any criticism to be had, it's going all in on guys like Knockaert, BDR and Cavaleiro last season when they may have zero use in the Premier League, but the gamble was to go up ... and we did. We'll have to deal with the consequences of those decisions and hopefully survive them, but no one was complaining when we brought those players in last season. It's a tough needle to thread.

Look at the last five seasons of promoted teams (2015-19):
2015: Bournemouth (now in Champ), Watford (Champ), Norwich (Champ)
2016: Burnley (still in Prem), Boro (Champ), Hull City (now in League 1)
2017: Newcastle (still in Prem, but edgy), Brighton (same), Huddersfield (Champ)
2018: Wolves (had Prem roster when they went up, now strong), Cardiff (Champ), Fulham (Relegated and now back)
2019: Norwich (back in Champ), Sheff Utd (great first Prem season; we'll see), Villa (barely survived Year 1)

Of the last 15 teams that were promoted, eight are already back out of the Prem (with Hull dropping two leagues) and we also were relegated previously. Several others have barely scraped staying up. It's not easy to get out of the Champ and build something stable in the Premier League in this money/FFP era. "Experienced football people" have had as much trouble with it as our "unqualified DOF."

(Edit to clarify: The assumption is we committed to buy those three players last summer, but had to do loan-to-buy structures for FFP reasons related to the lateness of the Sess sale. Criticizing us for "buying" those players later on is unfair; they weren't separate decisions and it would have been somewhere between unethical to impossible not to complete the deals.)

Some of the decision made were the right decision at the time, buying Bobby Reid released a loan spot so allowed us to bring in another centre back (Kongolo) which we needed; we needed to extend Knockaert's season after lockdown, we tried to extend the loan failed and instead of keep trying to negotiate a loan extension "exercised the buy clause". Both decisions weren't great value, but got us in the premier league, so worth it. TK job is really hard when players like Josh King and Danny Rose think they are too good for Fulham, while most fans are hoping for better players than them.

[Mince n Tatties]

Terry Angus, one of the most committed players ever to have represented the club was reputedly on a basic salary of £7,500 and used to commute to games from his home in Coventry.
Now that's value for money from the great man.

And a great pro,who more than once shed blood for the cause.

[RaySmith]

I once saw the great Tony Macedo travelling to a game in which he was playing, on the tube, with his wife - which is why he refused to sign  his autograph for me as usual.

Thing we a lot different then, and players could suffer financial hardship, especially if they got a serious injury, or after their careers finished.

Johnny Haynes ws the first player to break the wage cap, under PFA rep Jimmy Hill's guidance, and became the first 100 pound a week player.

Today clubs have to pay players market rates if they want to keep the top players -and even Championship players are elite  quality players, and many youngsters  don't make the grade.

[toshes mate]

Johnny Haynes ws the first player to break the wage cap, under PFA rep Jimmy Hill's guidance, and became the first 1000 pound a week player.

Today clubs have to pay players market rates if they want to keep the top players -and even Championship players are elite  quality players, and many youngsters  don't make the grade.

I know inflation bites quickly but Haynes was on one hundred pounds a week, but the point you make about differences between then and now is well made.   

I and a couple of school mates spent half an hour or so on a train talking cricket and sport generally with Jim Laker who lived in Barnes.  He gave us all autographs and showed us all kinds of spinning tricks.  I cannot remember any of the tricks really well but the whole trip was a rich and vivid memory of a top English cricketer being civil with a bunch of early secondary school kids as if it happened yesterday.   Totally different world.