Zac Lovelace
- Thread starter Saxon Lion
- Start date
Millwall Of Oz
Well-known member
sick of any half decent kid basically gets ripped away. They need to put a rule in that makes higher level clubs pay serious money - something like £2-5million so it either gives proper compensation to the clubs that have nurtured or they dont get picked off so easily.
Overseaswall
Well-known member
Makes me sick ,should get 100% of a y future sell on fee
In future it’s best we don’t put our youngsters in the shop window of the first team until they have been signed on a professional deal with us. It was obvious that as soon as he hit the headlines as a 15 yr old being named on the bench he must be pretty useful. Our club is managed by buffoons.
Secondwave
Well-known member
Don’t think clubs can give professional deals to 15 yr olds. Man City have picked a couple up off us, however they paid an agreed fee rather than go to tribunal.
There should be a robust compensation for all this cherry picking, plus extras if players play U23’s or are loaned out to other teams for experience and a 50% cut of any fee received, as well as a 50% cut of any transfer fee received. Finally if players manage to make the first team, the initial fee should be doubled or trebled on top of any of any of the extras mentioned.
I seriously doubt that would help. Scouts actively watch the games they play in. By all account he has been banging in the goals at that level so that would put him on the radar anyway.
Who was that other kid we lost a couple of seasons ago to Man City?
There needs to be a proper scheme here that all clubs adhere too.
Too easy for clubs outside the Prem to lose young talent.
Ilderton Wanderer
Well-known member
I think its the other way round, we probably put him in the first team frame to show the boy that there’s a pathway into professional football for him at Millwall rather than be lured away by a bigger club and potentially end up on the scrap heap like many others have done before.
There was a good interview with Fitzgerald recently either in the Southwark news or SLP but he was saying the same thing specifically about Lovelace and it makes sense why now. I would bet that the kid or more specifically his agent has had bigger clubs sniffing around for a while.
As Fitzgerald said we’re not just competing against Charlton and Palace anymore, the rich premier league clubs have their tentacles spread all over the country and beyond and just as their money is ruining the game at the top it’s also fucking up clubs like us at the bottom too.
Millwall Of Oz
Well-known member
we've had 3 or 4 kids aged 14 who were no where near the first team get poached. I dont think it matters if they are in the first team shop window or not - they watch all age level matches and take what they want sadly
Saxon Lion
Well-known member
I think we gave the prem, with all the other efl clubs, the right to poach our youngsters for nothing by taking their thirty pieces of silver a few years ago.
I saw him play against Charlton U23’s and he looked no better than the other players. In fact the 2 who stood out for us were in defence. Charlton had some useful players too especially their no.7. Had Lovelace not been given a spot on the bench for the first team I would not even have known who he was. I hope that he has some sort of agreement that he is signing for us so we ultimately get some dough if he goes.
Saxon Lion
Well-known member
hope that he has some sort of agreement that he is signing for us so we ultimately get some dough if he goes.
21, we are Millwall, we don’t do things that make us money later. We just take what we can and run.
21, we are Millwall, we don’t do things that make us money later. We just take what we can and run.
Bexleyheath_lion
Well-known member
We will get compensation as we have offered him a professional deal. His dad is rejecting the Millwall contract, he feels and is probably right, Zac could earn a lot more elsewhere.
Irish Millwall
Well-known member
Hopefully he might decide that he's better off staying with us for a bit. If he does, he'll stay in a familiar setting where he has a real chance of progression. He could easily get lost in a Premier league set up whereas at Millwall he'll most likely regular appearances. Anyway, a Prem team would probably loan him out so in terms of experience, he'll do just as well with Millwall as elsewhere.
One of the problems is that the big clubs sign up absolutely everyone they can even though there's very little chance that they'll get a starting spot. Look at Ojo. He's 24. Does he have a realistic chance of making the Liverpool first team? I doubt it, much as he's improved in the last couple of matches. However, instead of selling players who don't make the grade, the big clubs hang on to them just in case they improve or perhaps hoping they'll get a bigger transfer fee at some point. So we'll most likely lose Ojo in the summer and Liverpool will loan him out elsewhere. Even if we do get him for next year, we couldn't build a team around him because we can never be sure how long we'll have him. Some teams have whole squads out on loan - Chelsea have 22 players out on loan. How is this good for either the players or football? The obvious solution would be to cap the number of players that a team can have on their books. That would reduce the amount of poaching from lower league clubs and players would have better careers too. Of course, the current set up obviously suits the big clubs so no chance of anything like that happening.
One of the problems is that the big clubs sign up absolutely everyone they can even though there's very little chance that they'll get a starting spot. Look at Ojo. He's 24. Does he have a realistic chance of making the Liverpool first team? I doubt it, much as he's improved in the last couple of matches. However, instead of selling players who don't make the grade, the big clubs hang on to them just in case they improve or perhaps hoping they'll get a bigger transfer fee at some point. So we'll most likely lose Ojo in the summer and Liverpool will loan him out elsewhere. Even if we do get him for next year, we couldn't build a team around him because we can never be sure how long we'll have him. Some teams have whole squads out on loan - Chelsea have 22 players out on loan. How is this good for either the players or football? The obvious solution would be to cap the number of players that a team can have on their books. That would reduce the amount of poaching from lower league clubs and players would have better careers too. Of course, the current set up obviously suits the big clubs so no chance of anything like that happening.
mfcjohn
Well-known member
I said almost the same thing on another thread
Spot on
Risky approach to reject a deal as he’s already been let go by a couple of clubs. On that basis it makes sense as Ilderton says above that Rowett is letting him see what the first team looks like. Surely he’s better off staying near his family and friends and a club where he is more likely to make it and establishing himself and moving on later.
We offered him one 3 months ago, for when he turns 17. 2 and a half year deal. Don’t think it’s been signed yet.
Life with the Lions
Well-known member
Personally, I think there’s one thing that the bosses of both the PL and the EFL should agree on, and it’s this:
As soon as a youth player from any club (U18’s/U23’s), is given a professional contract by that club, that contract becomes binding and cannot end before the player hits the age of 18. If the club in question is willing to take a chance on an up and coming player, and put in time and money to develop him, then the player should be willing to commit himself to that club for a maximum of 3 years! There could also be a clause in every contract that says these youth players will be guaranteed to play a minimum number of 1st team games every season (similar to agreeing the same for loan players.)
By doing that, it gives the player a chance to be around and part of the 1st team, and it also tells him that the club is giving him a chance to show what he can do in actual games! For too long have we had players who should have made the step up from the U18’s/U23’s, and for one reason or another, are never given a chance to show what they can do (George Alexander being a perfect example of this!)
If that agreement (law) was in place now, then those teams that are sniffing round Lovelace, wouldn’t be allowed to, and his agent wouldn’t be allowed to fill his player’s head with daft notions of playing for Man City, and scoring the winner for them in the FA Cup final!
As soon as a youth player from any club (U18’s/U23’s), is given a professional contract by that club, that contract becomes binding and cannot end before the player hits the age of 18. If the club in question is willing to take a chance on an up and coming player, and put in time and money to develop him, then the player should be willing to commit himself to that club for a maximum of 3 years! There could also be a clause in every contract that says these youth players will be guaranteed to play a minimum number of 1st team games every season (similar to agreeing the same for loan players.)
By doing that, it gives the player a chance to be around and part of the 1st team, and it also tells him that the club is giving him a chance to show what he can do in actual games! For too long have we had players who should have made the step up from the U18’s/U23’s, and for one reason or another, are never given a chance to show what they can do (George Alexander being a perfect example of this!)
If that agreement (law) was in place now, then those teams that are sniffing round Lovelace, wouldn’t be allowed to, and his agent wouldn’t be allowed to fill his player’s head with daft notions of playing for Man City, and scoring the winner for them in the FA Cup final!
