Do you back our transfer policy?
It's a hotly debated topic at the moment, which is entirely understandable given that we sit smack bang in the middle of a transfer window.
Our transfer policy is one that has benefits and pitfalls and has fans pretty well divided. Do you back it though? Or are you against it? To help establish the point from both camps we need to have a good old debate about it all with reasoned points for and against. I'll make a start on that then....
I suppose the best place to start is by looking at what our policy actually is. From the outset, and remember I'm looking objectively, there seems to be two camps and which one you feel is closer to the truth depends on which side of the fence you sit. Lets take a look at how it's going so far.
Purchasing.
It's been said that Newcastle are after younger players with potential. We'll grow our own players essentially, and that extends to the first team aswell. Generally speaking, 25 is about the cut-off point in terms of age of incoming transfers with the focus being on youth and hunger. We are no longer a free meal ticket for older players looking for one final pay day.
It's pretty clear that a lot of research goes into our signings. Since the arrival of Graham Carr we've seen Dan Gosling, Hatem Ben Arfa, Cheik Tiote, Yohan Cabaye, Demba Ba and Sylvain Marveaux arrive for less that what it cost Liverpool to buy Jordan Henderson. Essentially it's about getting the biggest bang for the buck.
However there does seem to be a limit. Take Danny Sturridge as an example. No doubt he is a talented player, and no doubt he will improve, yet would Newcastle stump up the cash for him? Probably not. Why not though? I mean he does fit the criteria of being young and hungry. It's also likely that we wouldn't lose out on the transfer fee either so essentially it's a no-brainer. Bigger risk, bigger reward, yet I get the sense that Newcastle are only willing to take smaller risks at the moment.
Sales.
As with almost everything there is an opposite. The opposite of buying is......... selling, and this is where I think the crux of the issue is. I'm pretty sure that people don't really mind the fact that we are picking up cheaper players, providing that they are of the same calibre if Cheik Tiote and Hatem Ben Arfa of course.
The problem arises when these players arrive, play, then flourish. What happens then? Well previous experience would suggest that they will be sold, but they won't be sold cheaply. Andy Carroll went for £35 million which is huge money. Kevin Nolan went for a fee believed to be £4 million, with add-ons. Not bad for a 29-year-old midfielder that has struggled to do much for the last six months. People will say £4 million is cheap, and comparatively it is, but remember that is what we paid for him when he was 26-years-old. Three years on and the club have not lost a penny.
The feeling I get is that everyone has a price. It may be a stupidly high price, but if somebody is willing to pay it then Newcastle will accept it. In truth that is part down to the board and part down to the player. If a bigger club that plays in Europe comes in then you can be almost certain that the player will want out. Mind you, if that is the case then it will mean that said player in question will have had to do the business for us first.
In conclusion...
So what can we take from this then? This is where I want you guys to come in and give me what you think.
I'm reasonably happy with the way things are going at the moment. Would I like us to take a bit more of a risk with certain players? Yes, wouldn't we all, but can you really argue with the quality that we've brought in for what is essentially a nominal cost? I can't.....
However it becomes a vicious circle when you sell your best players or allow them an easy way out. Sooner or later we are going to need stability on the playing front, and that means keeping hold of what we have got and adding to them bit by bit.
Are you happy or unhappy with our transfer policy? Do you think it differs from my interpretation? Let me know folks!