Why only 2 year deals?

[sbell1875]

As happy as I am with our recruitment so far this close season I'm a little bit disappointed in the majority of the deals announced only being for 2 years.

Whilst I understand a lot of the players probably have aspirations above and beyond Hibs I'm disappointed the club didn't push more for 3 or 4 years deals. That way we have security over the player for longer and can play hardball with potential suitors.

Thoughts?

[scoopyboy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As happy as I am with our recruitment so far this close season I'm a little bit disappointed in the majority of the deals announced only being for 2 years.

Whilst I understand a lot of the players probably have aspirations above and beyond Hibs I'm disappointed the club didn't push more for 3 or 4 years deals. That way we have security over the player for longer and can play hardball with potential suitors.

Thoughts?

Cos if they're duffers you're stuck paying wages for years unnecessarily.

Sad but true.

[woodythehibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As happy as I am with our recruitment so far this close season I'm a little bit disappointed in the majority of the deals announced only being for 2 years.

Whilst I understand a lot of the players probably have aspirations above and beyond Hibs I'm disappointed the club didn't push more for 3 or 4 years deals. That way we have security over the player for longer and can play hardball with potential suitors.

Thoughts?

Hibs seem to have had this policy in place for a while now. Perhaps even back to when Yogi was in charge,

They obviously feel that it is the best for both parties.

[greenlex]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Cos if they're duffers you're stuck paying wages for years unnecessarily.

Sad but true.

We know what we're getting with most of them tho.

[stokesmessiah]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As happy as I am with our recruitment so far this close season I'm a little bit disappointed in the majority of the deals announced only being for 2 years.

Whilst I understand a lot of the players probably have aspirations above and beyond Hibs I'm disappointed the club didn't push more for 3 or 4 years deals. That way we have security over the player for longer and can play hardball with potential suitors.

Thoughts?

I have actually quite liked the 2 year deals for everyone, if we have another season like last you would have to think that there would be interest in players so we will at least get money for them, should we decide to sell. Also, if we don't make it out of this league this year, you would have to think it's because Der Hun has gone up, if we kept most of this team together for 2 years we will P**S all over what is left behind!?

[Greencore]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As happy as I am with our recruitment so far this close season I'm a little bit disappointed in the majority of the deals announced only being for 2 years.

Whilst I understand a lot of the players probably have aspirations above and beyond Hibs I'm disappointed the club didn't push more for 3 or 4 years deals. That way we have security over the player for longer and can play hardball with potential suitors.

Thoughts?

The same reason Scott Allan has not extended his current deal. We are in fact a championship club. Players want to be playing at the highest level. Maybe if we go up this season players will sign extensions who knows.

[greenlex]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Hibs seem to have had this policy in place for a while now. Perhaps even back to when Yogi was in charge,

They obviously feel that it is the best for both parties.

Danny Handling. Actually this is possibly the reason when Ithink about it.

[J-C]

I think we've been stung too often with long term deals for players then can't get shot off, 2 years allows Stubbs and the players enough scope to do what they have to do, get us up and longer more lucrative deals will follow.

[Smartie]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Cos if they're duffers you're stuck paying wages for years unnecessarily.

Sad but true.

The "Martin Scott" effect.

It does get on my nerves a bit. It is good to back your instincts, sign the right players and build a team that is likely to stay together for a bit, maybe even let them play through a bad patch of form instead of having to drop players when it gets a bit sticky for them.

Maybe players don't want to sign long contracts any more? Maybe they all see themselves at a higher level than us within 2 years?

Maybe it is a bad idea for us to be doling out long contracts whilst we're in this league and we can't be too sure of our income streams going forward?

[matty_f]

I think they're a good fit for both parties, if the player doesn't work out then it's no big deal moving them on, if the player's unhappy then it's not too long to see out, and if the player's good we can extend the term within their contract.

[scoopyboy]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We know what we're getting with most of them tho.

Every manager will tell you they know what they are getting.

However we know to our cost that managers sometimes don't stay long and the next manager is left with players on long contracts they are stuck with.

Another consideration is players might not want to commit to more than two years, especially if they think they are good enough to move on to better things.

[Brightside]

This place goes mental when players are given 4 yr deals!

[Tha Cabbage Kid]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This place goes mental when players are given 4 yr deals!

I will take the optomistic view and say, in two years time we will be fighting for a european space in the league and will will need a better type of player for when that time comes.

[southern hibby]

I'm going to play devils advocate here. If AS gets an extension and did leave to join a championship or Div 1 team he could in theory take our best players in one swoop for nothing.
Alternatively if these players all leave in 2 years time we will have to bring in virtually 6-8 players to cover players leaving.
I believe we are setting ourselves up for a possible almighty fall that may set us back a season or two to recover. If this does happen then will this Site go into meltdown? Not sure but it will be another excuse for bed wetters to wet some more beds.

If it does or doesn't happen I for one will still be at ER supporting whoever plays for us.

GGTTH

[silverhibee]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This place goes mental when players are given 4 yr deals!

How many players have we gave 4 year deals too, I can only think of one, and that was the 4 year deal Handling got and Stubbs at the time must have seen something in the lad to give him that deal.

The 2 year deals being handed out just now are the right thing for the club to do while we are in this league, wouldn't surprise me if there is a wee clause in these deals that if the players get promotion the season coming up that there basic wage will rise if we get in to the top flight again and gives us the chance of holding on to them and possibly extending there contracts in 18 months if the manager feels they deserve it, if not then they can look for a new club.

[B.H.F.C]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

This place goes mental when players are given 4 yr deals!

Depends who the player is

[Jamesie]

I would say, as depressing as it is, that we can only give two year deals at this stage as it is probably too much of a risk to maintain the kind of wages we're paying at the moment in the Championship in the long term and as much as we wouldn't like it to be, there is a risk that two years from now we could remain outwith the SPL. We're playing a gambling game at the moment in terms of speculating to accumulate in the longer term and that can only go on for so long.

[Deansy]

Maybe it's a case of hoping most of the players signed are good enough to help us win the league and once back in the SPL a % are kept on with the budget (hopefully) increased to enable higher/better quality replacements for the ones let go ?. Tbh, I feel 2 year-deals are the best for both the club and the player.

[3pm]

I don't mind 2 year deals if we renew them sharp enough. While we are unsure how the Allan scenario will pan out, the example of giving him an additional year after the 1st year of his contract is the way I'd like to see us going.

For too long, we waited until the tail end of contracts before offering terms. I always thinking we should have been more proactive offering Doyle a deal for example. Not waiting til the end of his deal and losing him to Chesterfield.

[Onion]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As happy as I am with our recruitment so far this close season I'm a little bit disappointed in the majority of the deals announced only being for 2 years.

Whilst I understand a lot of the players probably have aspirations above and beyond Hibs I'm disappointed the club didn't push more for 3 or 4 years deals. That way we have security over the player for longer and can play hardball with potential suitors.

Thoughts?

It will be the players who have limited it to 2 yrs, makes sense.

[jacomo]

People talk about as just a Hibs issue. The whole financial model of football is changing. Players have much more power. Transfer fees are becoming less common further down the food chain, while becoming astronomical (as with salaries) at the very top.

Hibs, like most clubs, are trying to reduce their risk while protecting their interests.

[bill the hibby]

I don't see any problem with it in all honesty, it might also make players work harder to either earn a new contract with us or impress in the hope of a bigger club coming in for them.

[Nutmegged]

The two year deal is convenient for both club and player upon arrival, it gives a player an opportunity to move on again in a pretty short period of time, hopefully to better themselves as a player and as a wage, it also gives the club security that they dont need to pay a player for 3/4/5 years if it doesn't work for one reason or another, paying up a 3-5 year contract is a killer just to get rid of someone.

You have to remember, clubs like Hibs can't compete with these players ambition of getting that 5figure a week sum that every player probably dreams of earning so a two year deal is a shop window oportunity for these players which is fair enough

You can't pay peanuts for players and expect them to sit on long term contracts

[TheHarpy76]

you'll be hard pushed to see a club like ours handing out 4 or 5 year deals. 2 year deals are safe for the club.

Could you imagine some of the players that came in during the Calderwood era picking up a 5 year deal? That thought is going to keep me awake tonight.

[overdrive]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

you'll be hard pushed to see a club like ours handing out 4 or 5 year deals. 2 year deals are safe for the club.

Could you imagine some of the players that came in during the Calderwood era picking up a 5 year deal? That thought is going to keep me awake tonight.

We might still have Griffiths if that had happened mind you.

[Mikey09]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

As happy as I am with our recruitment so far this close season I'm a little bit disappointed in the majority of the deals announced only being for 2 years.

Whilst I understand a lot of the players probably have aspirations above and beyond Hibs I'm disappointed the club didn't push more for 3 or 4 years deals. That way we have security over the player for longer and can play hardball with potential suitors.

Thoughts?

Basically if the club wanted say Fyvie for 4 years he would probably demand more per week. Signing him for 2 years brings those demands down. I would imagine if you looked round most transfers in scottish football clubs won't be handing out contracts longer than 2 years. But let's be honest... Isn't it refreshing our club are doing this as opposed to a squad full of loan players?!

[TheHarpy76]

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

We might still have Griffiths if that had happened mind you.

5 year loan deal? I somehow doubt it.