Yeah, it's more about resale. When you buy someone who is younger, say 23, if you have them on a 5 yr deal, you can sell them on after 4 years of it and they'd be 27 and around their peak so you could still make a lot of money back. When you are 28 and you are sold after 4 years, you'll be 32 and you will not make nearly as much as they were bought for. For a club like ours, every penny counts so resale is important, which is why we save big money for younger players.
A lot of that may well be exhaustion as much as anything. Bruce needs to give him a few matches off, and uses him as a sub in a few more to have Donovan ready for the playoffs. 26, maybe, not quite 24. On the other side, it's possible that Donovan's vision and passing could have improved with more time in the Premier League with better teammates and against better competition.
One thing that has to be considered in the mix of factors about spend/don't spend is what Landon's presence for a whole season or for several whole seasons would do to the finances of the club. For example, if his presence meant 2 more wins that would have been ties and 2 more ties that would have been losses (for a 6 pt total boost in the standings), that would me a lot more money for Everton. For what it is worth, Everton averaged 2 pts in the standings per game in which Donovan appeared and only 1.46 pts/game in the rest of the season (28 games). Not that it would have happened, but extrapolation gives Everton a total of 76 points for last season if LD had played in all games. That would have put Everton in third place and generated a sizable chunk-O-change fully enabling Everton to afford the asking price of MLS, even for only 1 season.
Everton were a mess in the first half of the season, largely due to a slew of injuries. Landon's loan coincided with the return of several key players. You can extrapolate Everton's form with Landon in the lineup to the end of the season, but anything before his loan spell is failing to take into account way too many factors.
Yeah - I think it's more about the quality (or lack there of) around him... LA started the first half of season strong, but they have looked woeful of late... LD has been playing OK but he has been making a lot of good passes that are simply botched and or not reciprocated on pass and go runs... Gordon just isn't good enough to work well consistently with LD... Baret is inconsistent... I think he has to go too... He's frustrated and needs a better level of play to suit his talent...
And the loss of others. It goes both ways. Also, Everton's schedule with Landon was absolutely brutal. They played every team that made the CL (and got 7 points!), plus 2 that qualified for the Europe League.
Sure, but I'm not sure it balances out. Cahill and Saha were both out for only 1 or 2 of the games Landon started. The loss of Fellaini was the only real significant one, but he did still start against Arsenal, Man City, Sunderland, Wigan, and Liverpool, while Donovan was there. There were a couple other losses that didn't matter much because they wouldn't have started anyways during that period. In the first half of the season, Everton lost Neville, Arteta, Distin, Jagielka, Osman, and Pienaar for a significant chunk of games. Probably more players I'm forgetting too. Those are all players I'd expect to start with everyone available (minus Donovan who would probably replace Osman). And Jagielka was the only one that didn't return near the beginning of the loan spell. You're right about the schedule though. That was a real murderer's row, and extrapolating from that would ignore how much tougher the average level of opposition in those games were compared to the season as a whole.
this buy/resale thing about transfers is what I just don't completely understand. I get that teams want to make a profit on their purchase down the line via resale. But what I don't get is while you've got that player, you're having to "groom" him, he has to have a settling in time, which can take from 6 months to 2 years, and in some cases never. So all that time, you're getting way below value output from the guy and he's not helping your team win. You're taking a gamble on the purchase. Whereas with LD, he didn't require the grooming, the settling in. He can produce from the moment he got off the plane and help the team win from the get-go. You're getting value from day one. Better chance of finishing higher up, thus qualifying for CL and bigger bucks. To me, the value isn't "only" in the resale. How about the value on the field? My lack of understanding of the transfer process is probably what keeps me from being a successful EPL manager.
You are right, in a way. On field (and off field) points are valuable too. Landon fits well and everyone here loves him. Resale is not the only value but when you look at it from Moyes viewpoint, for the money MLS want for Landon, he could go out and get say 2 or 3 really good young players with high levels of potential, they may not make as such an immediate impact as Donovan. But in the long term, should they progress rightly, a club like ours which has to be careful with money, could make a decent profit off these 2 or 3 players and we can then go and spend this money on some other new players. If we go out and buy Landon for say £10-12m, we get him at his peak now, but say in 3 or 4 years, we'd struggle to make anywhere near that. Sure, on the pitch we might have won a few trophies, but that doesn't generate huge income that we can go and spend money on players. Someone like Bilyaletdinov, now he was signed for about £9m aged 24. Last season, he wasn't all that great, but we could probably sell him now and make a profit as he's still only 25 and has his peak ahead of him. Whereas we signed James Beattie, who at the time was at his peak, he was here for 2 and a half years, we made a loss of £2.5m when we sold him because he was on his way down at that point. A lot of our transfer budget comes from selling players, the bigger the profit we make on players, the bigger our budget. When we signed Yakubu, we had just sold 3 players to fund it basically. When we signed Fellaini, we sold Johnson and McFadden. For other clubs, resale value is not so important. For a club like us, it is (along with the other values he gives too). I've probably confused the whole thing and people still might not see it as valid but honestly, I think I even saw or heard Moyes saying it too. I mean, I'm not saying he isn't worth buying at all. Moyes just has to weigh up everything and see if he thinks the deal as a whole is the best he can give to the club. He will not pay over what he feels is the right price for someone, he will try his best to get them down, but ultimately he'll move on if he doesn't think it is the right deal for the club. If we were almost any other club in this league, even a Stoke/Sunderland/Birmingham...we'd pay what MLS wants now, because they can afford it. We can't afford to do it. To us, every penny is important.
If I were Everton, I'd suggest a deal like this: "We pay only $8M but over the next three years, we'll offer 3 young players each year for a one year loan (corresponding to the MLS season). MLS picks which one of the three offered they want each year. We pay their wages, except for the minimum salary that is part of the Union contract." MLS gets young EPL Academy talent cheaply, likely getting an small increase in in MLS viewing/following in England as Evertonians will want to follow how the lads do. Give them all to the Galaxy and the Gals may become the "favored MLS team" of Evertonians, resulting in some jersey sales, etc. Perhaps even a pre-(MLS) season friendly thrown in around March, at Everton. In the big scheme of things, the MLS needs exposure and legitimacy more than any individual team needs victories. IMO, at this point in time, having the MLS viewed as a good place to send young players from EPL teams on loans for PT (as opposed to Championship or lesser EPL clubs) would be a good place to be. Hopefully in 5-7 years, the MLS will grow beyond that level, but for the immediate future, it would be a good strategic move, IMO.
Well, we do actually have a number of young fringe players looking to go out on loan...I'm sure they wouldn't mind going to LA for a while, haha. To name a few, James Vaughan, Jose Baxter and Shane Duffy.
Did this get posted? http://sports.yahoo.com/soccer/news..._SkvrYF?slug=goal-losangelesgalaxyslandondono LD being coy as always, but talks about a "preliminary" offer (or something). What's he hinting at?
Not really. For starters, the calendars make it highly unlikely that loans to MLS clubs will be preferred to loans to smaller clubs in Europe. Then there is the reality that young players who are not ready to play a role at Everton are no sure thing to be ready to play a role in MLS. I would imagine that most young players in Europe see loans to smaller clubs as not only a way to prove to the club that owns their rights they are good enough to play for them when they return, but also a way to put themselves in the shop window for other clubs. Off the top of my head, it seems as though more young players end up being sold to new clubs after their loan spells than those who actually go back to the original club and claim a place in the first team. While MLS is definitely scouted by European clubs, a kid would get far more exposure playing in the Championship (or even the first division).
He's not hinting at anything, I don't believe. He's saying, as he has repeatedly recently, that there has been interest but no formal offer, and that he will deal with those if and when they come.
not to mention with the new rules in England you need your young players in the country to qualify as homegrown players so they are going to be unlikely to start loaning players outside of Britain. another thing is the mls season isn't as long and the style of play is different, slower in the heat and ball movement is slower. so there could be a question by some managers as to it's ability to prepare english players for english football. there is also a financial issue of Donovan's age. At his age they are unlikely to recoup any of the purchase price on a sale as he'd likely be around 32 i think at the end of a 4 year contract. Everton tend to buy younger so they can make money off a selling a player getting to their prime.
We'll I am meant to be enjoying my holiday right now but I had to come on and say this. Martin O'Neill has just quit as Aston Villa's manager and the leading candidate early, which makes perfect sense with the American links is Bob Bradley...If he gets that job I could see Landon following not far after...but I really, really, really hope he doesn't...no offence Villa fans... EDIT: I mean he is one of the consistently mentioned names amongst fans right now and on bets. NOT a leading candidate according to Randy Lerner. Ok?!
, Lerner might hire Bradley, but I have to believe that its because he believes he is strong man for the job. Being American is afterthought, and not really relevant in the grand scheme of things. I doubt Lerner bought Aston Villa in order to promote American soccer.
WHAT!?!? Lerner and his advisers really are idiots if Bob Bradley is their immediate favorite for Aston Villa. And I'm a pretty big Bob Bradley advocate. Aston Villa is a big step up from Fulham. They must think they can control Bradley, which I actually doubt,
I'm not saying it's because he is American. I just meant in that it's an obvious help, that's all. There is other people being mentioned but it's still really early, confirmed less than an hour ago.
Noo, I'm not saying he is their favourite. I'm just meant he is one at the forefront of people's radars. Martin Jol has dropped from 25-1 to 5-1 to take over within the last half hour! Noone knows, just he is being strongly mentioned. Slooow down people! I should have been more clear! I apologise!