Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Miles Leaburn - Signs New 3 Year Contract (p77)
Comments
-
His run for the 2nd was superbly timed, just stepped from offside briefly back onside at the perfect moment before sprinting away
19 -
If he asked for 10k a week, he'd be worth it long term, as what he will command as a fee will more than make up for it. He will be the best academy product we have produced in terms of return imo, there's no one around like him with his record at his age barring Haaland who is a freak of nature.5
-
76 games for charlton, 30 goals, 8 assists. Name another player from our academy with that kind of record, Lookman included.11
-
This picture was displaying far too big on my screen to see who it was, so I had to minimise to see it properly. I would have put money on it being a young Del Boy.carly burn said:
9 -
Yeah? Ask JRS what he thinks about that.Fortune 82nd Minute said:
But he's not going to stagnate or go backwards. He's shown today that fully fit and committed he can play at a much higher level.Exiled_Addick said:If he’s smart, he realize that if he gets this stage of his development right, he can go on to start games regularly in the Premier League and earn far far more than $10k a week for years to come. Make the jump to a premier league academy too soon and he could easily get lost in the numbers and stagnate/go backwards.
Sure he needs to pick his PL club carefully. Chelsea and Man City, for example, would probably see him struggle to hold down a place in the first team squad. But go somewhere like Brentford or, God forbid, Palace and that would quickly see him around the matchday 18 man squad.
Just enjoy him while we can.If you want to enjoy him while we can, it would be better if people didnt post defeatist nonsense after one game where he captures the headlines, and instead remind Charlie Methven of what he said on the record to the Charlton Dossier in May 2023:
“So if you think about the selling of young players who have broken through into the first team, you know, we all know that they really need to be sold at the optimal moment. Unfortunately, if a club is cash constrained, they often don’t get sold the optimum, they get sold the earliest moment, and the club concern loses out on the crucial delta, which comes from that player playing an extra season or two, and already proving that he is going to be a Premier League player. So if you think about, you know how Peterborough managed Ivan Toney, they held on to him until the point at which everyone could see that he was going to be a top player. And if they sold him a year earlier, they would have got half less than half as much.”10 -
Biggest spam in club football our Charles.Stig said:
This picture was displaying far too big on my screen to see who it was, so I had to minimise to see it properly. I would have put money on it being a young Del Boy.carly burn said:
0 -
What if we gave him a 10k a week contract for 3 years and his hamstring went again next month?CAFCDAZ said:If he asked for 10k a week, he'd be worth it long term, as what he will command as a fee will more than make up for it. He will be the best academy product we have produced in terms of return imo, there's no one around like him with his record at his age barring Haaland who is a freak of nature.2 -
A big if, bit if he gets sold that tells us all we need to know about the clowns trying to run things.2
-
Offer of 500k and Charlie says goodbye.hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
Does he have a release clause?Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'll be amazed if Leaburn is still here at the end of this transfer window. For one simple reason. His pay packet.
He must look at his old mate from the youth team, Mason Burstow and think I want some of that.
Despite Leaburn always being a better long term prospect in view of his size and strength, he has watched as Burstow signed on for Chelsea for a pay packet of about £10k a week and already made a small fortune in the period since he left.
Leaburn wouldn't be human if realising he could quadruple his pay packet by leaving he didn't want to follow in Burstows footsteps.
Modern football sucks but that's the reality.1 - Sponsored links:
-
Everything is risk in football, if we don't roll the dice, it's all ifs, buts and maybesChris_from_Sidcup said:
What if we gave him a 10k a week contract for 3 years and his hamstring went again next month?CAFCDAZ said:If he asked for 10k a week, he'd be worth it long term, as what he will command as a fee will more than make up for it. He will be the best academy product we have produced in terms of return imo, there's no one around like him with his record at his age barring Haaland who is a freak of nature.2 -
I don't think that's fair at alll, every player in the world has a price, the real indication will be what's done with any incoming fee.ElfsborgAddick said:A big if, bit if he gets sold that tells us all we need to know about the clowns trying to run things.8 -
Madness to sell him in January unless it's an exceptional offer. If the owners want any chance of promotion we can't sell key players.ElfsborgAddick said:
Offer of 500k and Charlie says goodbye.hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
Does he have a release clause?Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'll be amazed if Leaburn is still here at the end of this transfer window. For one simple reason. His pay packet.
He must look at his old mate from the youth team, Mason Burstow and think I want some of that.
Despite Leaburn always being a better long term prospect in view of his size and strength, he has watched as Burstow signed on for Chelsea for a pay packet of about £10k a week and already made a small fortune in the period since he left.
Leaburn wouldn't be human if realising he could quadruple his pay packet by leaving he didn't want to follow in Burstows footsteps.
Modern football sucks but that's the reality.7 -
We’ve got Hylton and Der Gasman to replace him thoughhoof_it_up_to_benty said:
Madness to sell him in January unless it's an exceptional offer. If the owners want any chance of promotion we can't sell key players.ElfsborgAddick said:
Offer of 500k and Charlie says goodbye.hoof_it_up_to_benty said:
Does he have a release clause?Fortune 82nd Minute said:I'll be amazed if Leaburn is still here at the end of this transfer window. For one simple reason. His pay packet.
He must look at his old mate from the youth team, Mason Burstow and think I want some of that.
Despite Leaburn always being a better long term prospect in view of his size and strength, he has watched as Burstow signed on for Chelsea for a pay packet of about £10k a week and already made a small fortune in the period since he left.
Leaburn wouldn't be human if realising he could quadruple his pay packet by leaving he didn't want to follow in Burstows footsteps.
Modern football sucks but that's the reality.
2 -
Excuse me for my presumptiousness and irritability, but I'm going to repeat what I posted just a few posts above. It's a direct quote from the Methven interview. If you still want to argue that Miles would be sold in this window, please first read this quote again and then tell me, on what planet any offer of less than £10m fits with what he has stated there as the new ownership's approach to young players. (and if you want to challenge me on the £10m, well I've got my benchmark. Lookman, plus inflation of transfer fees since we sold him.
“So if you think about the selling of young players who have broken through into the first team, you know, we all know that they really need to be sold at the optimal moment. Unfortunately, if a club is cash constrained, they often don’t get sold the optimum, they get sold the earliest moment, and the club concern loses out on the crucial delta, which comes from that player playing an extra season or two, and already proving that he is going to be a Premier League player. So if you think about, you know how Peterborough managed Ivan Toney, they held on to him until the point at which everyone could see that he was going to be a top player. And if they sold him a year earlier, they would have got half less than half as much.”
6 -
If Leaburn doesn't sign a contract soon, he will more than likely be sold in January, for a fraction of his true value.PragueAddick said:Excuse me for my presumptiousness and irritability, but I'm going to repeat what I posted just a few posts above. It's a direct quote from the Methven interview. If you still want to argue that Miles would be sold in this window, please first read this quote again and then tell me, on what planet any offer of less than £10m fits with what he has stated there as the new ownership's approach to young players. (and if you want to challenge me on the £10m, well I've got my benchmark. Lookman, plus inflation of transfer fees since we sold him.
“So if you think about the selling of young players who have broken through into the first team, you know, we all know that they really need to be sold at the optimal moment. Unfortunately, if a club is cash constrained, they often don’t get sold the optimum, they get sold the earliest moment, and the club concern loses out on the crucial delta, which comes from that player playing an extra season or two, and already proving that he is going to be a Premier League player. So if you think about, you know how Peterborough managed Ivan Toney, they held on to him until the point at which everyone could see that he was going to be a top player. And if they sold him a year earlier, they would have got half less than half as much.”
Charlie Methven's words aren't worth relying on.9 -
Can see him and Small going for a pittanceElliotCAFC said:
If Leaburn doesn't sign a contract soon, he will more than likely be sold in January, for a fraction of his true value.PragueAddick said:Excuse me for my presumptiousness and irritability, but I'm going to repeat what I posted just a few posts above. It's a direct quote from the Methven interview. If you still want to argue that Miles would be sold in this window, please first read this quote again and then tell me, on what planet any offer of less than £10m fits with what he has stated there as the new ownership's approach to young players. (and if you want to challenge me on the £10m, well I've got my benchmark. Lookman, plus inflation of transfer fees since we sold him.
“So if you think about the selling of young players who have broken through into the first team, you know, we all know that they really need to be sold at the optimal moment. Unfortunately, if a club is cash constrained, they often don’t get sold the optimum, they get sold the earliest moment, and the club concern loses out on the crucial delta, which comes from that player playing an extra season or two, and already proving that he is going to be a Premier League player. So if you think about, you know how Peterborough managed Ivan Toney, they held on to him until the point at which everyone could see that he was going to be a top player. And if they sold him a year earlier, they would have got half less than half as much.”
Charlie Methven's words aren't worth relying on.3 -
You spelt scam wrong.carly burn said:
Biggest spam in club football our Charles.Stig said:
This picture was displaying far too big on my screen to see who it was, so I had to minimise to see it properly. I would have put money on it being a young Del Boy.carly burn said:2 -
But any fee will be ‘undisclosed’ so we won’t know ! 😉PragueAddick said:Excuse me for my presumptiousness and irritability, but I'm going to repeat what I posted just a few posts above. It's a direct quote from the Methven interview. If you still want to argue that Miles would be sold in this window, please first read this quote again and then tell me, on what planet any offer of less than £10m fits with what he has stated there as the new ownership's approach to young players. (and if you want to challenge me on the £10m, well I've got my benchmark. Lookman, plus inflation of transfer fees since we sold him.
“So if you think about the selling of young players who have broken through into the first team, you know, we all know that they really need to be sold at the optimal moment. Unfortunately, if a club is cash constrained, they often don’t get sold the optimum, they get sold the earliest moment, and the club concern loses out on the crucial delta, which comes from that player playing an extra season or two, and already proving that he is going to be a Premier League player. So if you think about, you know how Peterborough managed Ivan Toney, they held on to him until the point at which everyone could see that he was going to be a top player. And if they sold him a year earlier, they would have got half less than half as much.”0 -
Anything close to 5 million going to be tough to turndown.6
- Sponsored links:
-
I'm not "relying on" them. I am arguing that what he says is good business sense, and I've waited 20 years (since the Parker saga) for an ownership that comes out and says it. In fact, what he says often makes a lot of sense. The question is always whether he delivers on what he says.ElliotCAFC said:
If Leaburn doesn't sign a contract soon, he will more than likely be sold in January, for a fraction of his true value.PragueAddick said:Excuse me for my presumptiousness and irritability, but I'm going to repeat what I posted just a few posts above. It's a direct quote from the Methven interview. If you still want to argue that Miles would be sold in this window, please first read this quote again and then tell me, on what planet any offer of less than £10m fits with what he has stated there as the new ownership's approach to young players. (and if you want to challenge me on the £10m, well I've got my benchmark. Lookman, plus inflation of transfer fees since we sold him.
“So if you think about the selling of young players who have broken through into the first team, you know, we all know that they really need to be sold at the optimal moment. Unfortunately, if a club is cash constrained, they often don’t get sold the optimum, they get sold the earliest moment, and the club concern loses out on the crucial delta, which comes from that player playing an extra season or two, and already proving that he is going to be a Premier League player. So if you think about, you know how Peterborough managed Ivan Toney, they held on to him until the point at which everyone could see that he was going to be a top player. And if they sold him a year earlier, they would have got half less than half as much.”
Charlie Methven's words aren't worth relying on.
The reason I'm pushing this is that instead of defeatist comments such as we see all over this thread we should be standing up and reminding Charlie of his words and ensuring he knows that he'll be held to account if he goes this window.
The contract extension is the problem of course, but Charlie Methven knows that perfectly well. Personally I think it's doable thanks to Miles family - after all it ought not to be so difficult to swing a "do the right think by Charlton" argument to at least give both sides space to make it to season-end and see where we are. The role model there, at least on the pitch, would be Darren Bent in our final doomed FAPL season.3 -
-
“Optimal moment” has to include consideration of remaining contract term surely? This window he has 18 months left. In the summer (if he doesn’t sign an extension) then he’ll have less than a year left and his value starts to plummet pretty dramatically from that point onwards.PragueAddick said:Excuse me for my presumptiousness and irritability, but I'm going to repeat what I posted just a few posts above. It's a direct quote from the Methven interview. If you still want to argue that Miles would be sold in this window, please first read this quote again and then tell me, on what planet any offer of less than £10m fits with what he has stated there as the new ownership's approach to young players. (and if you want to challenge me on the £10m, well I've got my benchmark. Lookman, plus inflation of transfer fees since we sold him.
“So if you think about the selling of young players who have broken through into the first team, you know, we all know that they really need to be sold at the optimal moment. Unfortunately, if a club is cash constrained, they often don’t get sold the optimum, they get sold the earliest moment, and the club concern loses out on the crucial delta, which comes from that player playing an extra season or two, and already proving that he is going to be a Premier League player. So if you think about, you know how Peterborough managed Ivan Toney, they held on to him until the point at which everyone could see that he was going to be a top player. And if they sold him a year earlier, they would have got half less than half as much.”We all want to make sure we keep Miles for as long as possible and get as much for him as possible when he does go, but what we want and commercial reality need to come into contact with one another.1 -
Depends how much serious competition there is. £5m is nothing for a young English striker with such a well rounded game yet so much room to improve. Let’s not make excuses for the board given Methven has said we’ve sold players too cheaply in the past.DubaiCAFC said:Anything close to 5 million going to be tough to turndown.4 -
We got more than that for Konsa, and strikers go for a lot more than defenders. Players like Lookman and Toney are comparable, both were sold for several million years ago.bobmunro said:DubaiCAFC said:Anything close to 5 million going to be tough to turndown.
Fortunately then, it will be nothing close to £5 million. £1 million maybe, with sell on/performance clauses.3 -
Why is it defeatist speculating that he will go? To be brutally honest, based on our last few years, it is realistic.PragueAddick said:
I'm not "relying on" them. I am arguingthat what he says is good business sense, and I've waited 20 years (since the Parker saga) for an ownership that comes out and says it. In fact, what he says often makes a lot of sense. The question is always whether he delivers on what he says.ElliotCAFC said:
If Leaburn doesn't sign a contract soon, he will more than likely be sold in January, for a fraction of his true value.PragueAddick said:Excuse me for my presumptiousness and irritability, but I'm going to repeat what I posted just a few posts above. It's a direct quote from the Methven interview. If you still want to argue that Miles would be sold in this window, please first read this quote again and then tell me, on what planet any offer of less than £10m fits with what he has stated there as the new ownership's approach to young players. (and if you want to challenge me on the £10m, well I've got my benchmark. Lookman, plus inflation of transfer fees since we sold him.
“So if you think about the selling of young players who have broken through into the first team, you know, we all know that they really need to be sold at the optimal moment. Unfortunately, if a club is cash constrained, they often don’t get sold the optimum, they get sold the earliest moment, and the club concern loses out on the crucial delta, which comes from that player playing an extra season or two, and already proving that he is going to be a Premier League player. So if you think about, you know how Peterborough managed Ivan Toney, they held on to him until the point at which everyone could see that he was going to be a top player. And if they sold him a year earlier, they would have got half less than half as much.”
Charlie Methven's words aren't worth relying on.
The reason I'm pushing this is that instead of defeatist comments such as we see all over this thread we should be standing up and reminding Charlie of his words and ensuring he knows that he'll be held to account if he goes this window.
The contract extension is the problem of course, but Charlie Methven knows that perfectly well. Personally I think it's doable thanks to Miles family - after all it ought not to be so difficult to swing a "do the right think by Charlton" argument to at least give both sides space to make it to season-end and see where we are. The role model there, at least on the pitch, would be Darren Bent in our final doomed FAPL season.Most of us don’t want him to go, but my thought that he might do so is based upon the way the club has acted for some time.I virtually always have a positive outlook but I do not, absolutely do not, trust the SMT.
Furthermore, I very much doubt that even if the whole Valley was ‘standing up and reminding Charlie of his words’, it would make the slightest difference to their actions. I’m all for protest but Methven is far too thick skinned to care.7 -
The fee is only part of the equation. The opportunity for the player will be another part. We have been here many times before.
The club would also need to consider what selling Leaburn in January would do to the team’s immediate prospects (and what they are). A scenario in which we go on a losing run and fall further off the play-offs is very different from one in which we win the next three league games and find ourselves in the top six.
Personally, I think selling Leaburn in January would be extremely damaging, to the club and to the board. If you snuff out hope every time it surfaces don’t be surprised if more people give up on you.
34 -
Ideally he signs a new contract, but if not then we should hold out for the summer and try and get him on a loan back for next season as well as a decent fee. Even if the deal that offers that loan back is slightly less, 18 more months of Leaburn is worth it1
