KingsbayYHPE

I have a policy of signing in literally dozens of players(every mothers' son scouted, btw) on trials, loans, frees and short term contracts as long as we're still Lower League (Crap, as opposed to in Lower Divisions).

I'd say 90% of these are discarded on frees (very expensive and annoying to the Board) or let go at the end of the contract (trial or short term).

I may even release a good MC if it's a DL I need, or vice versa, but eventually a balance is reached.

The beauty of this "method" is that I usually have players with the Club for several seasons out of this first batch. We can "grow" together [IMG]/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif" alt="wink[/IMG] [IMG]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif" alt="big grin[/IMG]

retired_holden

I tend to sign youth players by the bucketload in the lower divisions and then have trouble offloading the runts of the litter later because they are so crap no-one wants them. Leading to squad bloating and a wage bill blowout etc... So I've started offering shorter contracts but not sure if it makes a difference.

Really I just need to sign less crap players [IMG]/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif" alt="big grin[/IMG]

I tend to struggle in the transfer market once I make it to the top divisions because I waste my cash on second rate players, a habit I can't break for some reason.

retired_acs874

my biggest transfer thing so far has been these two incidences:

first a big club wanted to buy my star teenager, captain of thesquad, best player, etc. and they were gonna give me 1 million for him and I was trn in half cause he was awesome and only 19, I ended up taking the money lol

the second was like the first, a young up and coming starter for my club was bid on and they were giving like three times what he was worth. I endedup takin the money again cause I was sitting last and wanted some immediate help and I had no money.

retired_pmetzger1

Which is worse? The player naming or reviving a 23 month old thread.

retired_sara maria

In this instance I'll go with reviving.

retired_andrec

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by mkus:
Which is worse? The player naming or reviving a 23 month old thread. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

May be some guys are not around since before 23 months...
May be some of the 'old' members want this forum to be more like a club with a very strict membership...
May be...

So, worse is to name a player. For me...

retired_sargent

Right then, all you people who were not registered when this thread started, consider yourselves roundly abused. :p

retired_pmetzger1

The difficulty, Alexx, is getting the balance right.

Start a new thread when a recent thread on the same subject exists, and we'll flame you.

Dig up an "old" thread on the right subject when you should have started a new one, and we'll flame you.

Either way, we win

retired_mrsjb

The problem with your argument Alexx, is that digging up threads that the regulars posted in two years ago will only reinforce the perception that there is a club with strict membership. I would concur that this is a less heinous sin than player naming though.

That and what mkus said. Some folks round here just like barbeques

retired_sara maria

It is almost lunch time.