Current Player #23 Josh Murphy

[SirAndyOfCrosby]

I think it's fine for us to sign one of our three talented, mercurial but unreliable (in terms of actually being on the field) wingers - Browne, Murphy, Edwards.

Devil's advocate - why do we have to sign any of them?

Seriously, I keep reading 'you can't have Browne, Edwards and Murphy' - as if it's compulsory to have a minimum of one. If, as you say, they're 'unreliable' - maybe don't sign any of them?

Would take retaining Murphy for an extra year over keeping McGuane, Browne and Henry (who are all out of contract this season, even if McGuane and Browne both have optional extensions).

That's one way to balance the books.

Again. Let them all go if you don't want them?

By all means keep any of these in their own right if they tick all the boxes, but they should do just that - tick all the boxes vs the wider market (and not just be the lesser of 2 or 3 evils).

It's like we're still weaning ourselves off Karl Robinson's addiction to high risk signings, and we still need a little Tyler Burey here or an extension for Marcus Browne there.

I'd really rather we just went cold turkey.

 

[chromeyellow]

Surely we’re all grown up enough to know that those who properly honour the length of a contract in football are a complete minority? In fact, most clubs don’t want you to and would rather get a fee…

The staff thing is such a bizarre complaint to have. Wrong thread for this though.

Murphy owes the club a lot more than Manning.

nonsense

Murphy has fulfilled his contract. If he had broken it he would no longer be an employee of the club. Inducing others to break their contracts is illegal, and I'm surprised to see you defending a man who lied to players staff and supporters.

 

[Scrongo]

If he carries on the form he's on till the end of the season. Maybe we could offer him a new contract,on half his current wages .
Leaving up the other half of his wages on, an up & coming youngster.
If not ,they have to seriously think about saying cheerio.....

 

[Common Villager]

I would only offer Murphy a heavily incentivised deal (which he would probably reject). As others have said, we should be prioritising robust, reliable players who can deliver consistently over a full season.

 

[bazzer9461]

If he goes off to the championship for more money, will he get labelled a snake?

But if he is out of contract and no one form OUFC has spoken to him about a new contract and another club comes in with a 2 possibly 3 year contract at a decent wage at his age, he would be silly to pass it up unless of course he is loyal and wants to commit himself to us.

 

[Osei Yaw]

But if he is out of contract and no one form OUFC has spoken to him about a new contract and another club comes in with a 2 possibly 3 year contract at a decent wage at his age, he would be silly to pass it up unless of course he is loyal and wants to commit himself to us.

If anyone is giving Josh Murphy a 3 year contract then I'd like them to consider me on a 1 year deal. I have no pace and can't beat a man, but I would turn up to training every day and be a good lad around the training ground.

 

[Swaby39]

nonsense

Murphy has fulfilled his contract. If he had broken it he would no longer be an employee of the club. Inducing others to break their contracts is illegal, and I'm surprised to see you defending a man who lied to players staff and supporters.

Fulfilled his contract? He has in duration, but not in contribution. A bloody charitable contract it was too. He owes us a little more than a little run of games as it draws to a conclusion don’t you think? I appreciate that’s all he can do from here, he can’t rewrite history, but I can’t believe how many people are happy for the club to make the same mistakes again and again.

Manning at least gave us maximum commitment every day he was here and had a hugely positive impact on my club. Murphy has been what, an £800k+ expense to date? Roughly £20k per league game give or take. About £100k per goal contribution. What assurances can you give me that he’ll do better than that if we give him another 2 years? What if Des gets sacked and a less doe-eyed manager arrives? It’s about the club.

If Murphy walks away at the end of the season then I won’t be in any way gutted or surprised. If he wants to compromise in a big way to play for the club then OK, let’s talk. But I want a break clause in January 2025 no strings attached. If he doesn’t like it, no problem. I also wouldn’t let Des anywhere near this negotiation, it should be a business deal, not an emotional one.

Manning didn’t breach his contract, he was bought out of it. What’s illegal about that? Baffles me that we’re still unpacking that.

Is Murphy is such a fantastic character, isn’t it odd that nobody came for him when Manning wanted him out at all costs? If I’m picking a side, it’s a non-debate, I trust Manning.

He appears to have got some motivation from somewhere and I personally don’t believe (based on history, sorry, I need more convincing) that it’s because he wants to fire Oxford to the championship.

 

[werthersoriginal]

Fulfilled his contract? He has in duration, but not in contribution. A bloody charitable contract it was too. He owes us a little more than a little run of games as it draws to a conclusion don’t you think? I appreciate that’s all he can do from here, he can’t rewrite history, but I can’t believe how many people are happy for the club to make the same mistakes again and again.

Manning at least gave us maximum commitment every day he was here and had a hugely positive impact on my club. Murphy has been what, an £800k+ expense to date? Roughly £20k per league game give or take. About £100k per goal contribution. What assurances can you give me that he’ll do better than that if we give him another 2 years? What if Des gets sacked and a less doe-eyed manager arrives? It’s about the club.

If Murphy walks away at the end of the season then I won’t be in any way gutted or surprised. If he wants to compromise in a big way to play for the club then OK, let’s talk. But I want a break clause in January 2025 no strings attached. If he doesn’t like it, no problem. I also wouldn’t let Des anywhere near this negotiation, it should be a business deal, not an emotional one.

Manning didn’t breach his contract, he was bought out of it. What’s illegal about that? Baffles me that we’re still unpacking that.

Is Murphy is such a fantastic character, isn’t it odd that nobody came for him when Manning wanted him out at all costs? If I’m picking a side, it’s a non-debate, I trust Manning.

He appears to have got some motivation from somewhere and I personally don’t believe (based on history, sorry, I need more convincing) that it’s because he wants to fire Oxford to the championship.

He seems to have a good attitude and to be popular with the other players. He was injured or otherwise unfit quite a lot last season, we don't reliably know the details.

 

[Swaby39]

He seems to have a good attitude and to be popular with the other players. He was injured or otherwise unfit quite a lot last season, we don't reliably know the details.

Popular with a group of players that’s now shown itself to have a bit of petulance among it and a proneness to throwing the towel in. Speculation on my part but I’m not taking that as a reason to keep him as we can’t be sure he isn’t part of the problem.

As you say, we don’t reliably know the details so it’s little more than a gut feeling. But I haven’t seen anything near enough to forget his first 18 months.

 

[chromeyellow]

Fulfilled his contract? He has in duration, but not in contribution. A bloody charitable contract it was too. He owes us a little more than a little run of games as it draws to a conclusion don’t you think? I appreciate that’s all he can do from here, he can’t rewrite history, but I can’t believe how many people are happy for the club to make the same mistakes again and again.

Manning at least gave us maximum commitment every day he was here and had a hugely positive impact on my club. Murphy has been what, an £800k+ expense to date? Roughly £20k per league game give or take. About £100k per goal contribution. What assurances can you give me that he’ll do better than that if we give him another 2 years? What if Des gets sacked and a less doe-eyed manager arrives? It’s about the club.

If Murphy walks away at the end of the season then I won’t be in any way gutted or surprised. If he wants to compromise in a big way to play for the club then OK, let’s talk. But I want a break clause in January 2025 no strings attached. If he doesn’t like it, no problem. I also wouldn’t let Des anywhere near this negotiation, it should be a business deal, not an emotional one.

Manning didn’t breach his contract, he was bought out of it. What’s illegal about that? Baffles me that we’re still unpacking that.

Is Murphy is such a fantastic character, isn’t it odd that nobody came for him when Manning wanted him out at all costs? If I’m picking a side, it’s a non-debate, I trust Manning.

He appears to have got some motivation from somewhere and I personally don’t believe (based on history, sorry, I need more convincing) that it’s because he wants to fire Oxford to the championship.

You trust Manning? Based on his assertion that he was staying with Oxford two days before his press conference at Bristol City. There’s no accounting for taste I suppose.

I don’t think you can blame Murphy if Manning didn’t pick hin since he‘s shown that he definitely has something to contribute at this level when fit.

I understand you don’t like Murphy or Buckingham, but there’s no reason to use terms like „doe eyed“ or „emotional „

Buckingham didn’t bring Murphy here , he’s the first manager to pick him regularly-and he get match winning performances out of him.

Only a fool would consider that a bad thing

 

[Nadi-]

No question snap him up.
There’s others who should be gone, long before him.

 

[chromeyellow]

If anyone is giving Josh Murphy a 3 year contract then I'd like them to consider me on a 1 year deal. I have no pace and can't beat a man, but I would turn up to training every day and be a good lad around the training ground.

Have you also scored 4 goals in 8 games and been regularly voted man of the match by yellows forum too?

 

[Swaby39]

You trust Manning? Based on his assertion that he was staying with Oxford two days before his press conference at Bristol City. There’s no accounting for taste I suppose.

I don’t think you can blame Murphy if Manning didn’t pick hin since he‘s shown that he definitely has something to contribute at this level when fit.

I understand you don’t like Murphy or Buckingham, but there’s no reason to use terms like „doe eyed“ or „emotional „

Buckingham didn’t bring Murphy here , he’s the first manager to pick him regularly-and he get match winning performances out of him.

Only a fool would consider that a bad thing

I trust him as much as I can from having no direct dealing with him. The product of his work suggests he wasn’t that bad a bloke. Ruthless maybe, but there’s a place for that in football and I’m thankful for where that took us in such a short time.

Not sure what you expect him to say when asked if he’s leaving. “Yes, ideally I’ll be off in a few days”. Said nobody, ever. I’ve just left a job in what look like sudden circumstances to my old employer but it was 3 months in the making. Nobody in their right mind tells them they’re going before you have something binding. Least of all people in public positions.

Nothing I said is offensive. I can’t rule out that someone like Des might be a bit in awe of someone like Murphy. I think a manager should be limited to saying who stays and who goes but the nuances of the contract should be handled by somebody more distant - like a Waldron. If it makes no sense for the club the player leaves to be replaced.

I haven’t discredited Des for what he’s got out of Murphy, if indeed he is the reason Murphy has suddenly found his mojo. I’m questioning whether his motives might be more selfish that’s all.

 

[windmill]

I would only offer Murphy a heavily incentivised deal (which he would probably reject). As others have said, we should be prioritising robust, reliable players who can deliver consistently over a full season.

That narrows the field somewhat. Harris has stayed consistently fit to play.

 

[Chippy]

Devil's advocate - why do we have to sign any of them?

Seriously, I keep reading 'you can't have Browne, Edwards and Murphy' - as if it's compulsory to have a minimum of one. If, as you say, they're 'unreliable' - maybe don't sign any of them?



Again. Let them all go if you don't want them?

By all means keep any of these in their own right if they tick all the boxes, but they should do just that - tick all the boxes vs the wider market (and not just be the lesser of 2 or 3 evils).

It's like we're still weaning ourselves off Karl Robinson's addiction to high risk signings, and we still need a little Tyler Burey here or an extension for Marcus Browne there.

I'd really rather we just went cold turkey.

Maybe the answer to all this is to go really modern and have Browne, Edwards and Murphy in a job sharing role.

We split one salary between the 3 of them and hope that each week at least one of them is able to work. That way there is a small possibility that between them all we can have the equivalent of one full-time employee for a season?

 

[BicesterU]

When he's been interviewed recently in the OM, Murphy has spoken about how having a little one has changed him, and I'm sure I rememeber seeing somewhere that he feels more settled now than he did a year ago. That might play a part in his thinking if he were offered a new deal on reduced terms.

Foolish to rule extending him altogether, but it can't be on the same money he's on now, and should be linked to his fitness/availability (an extra wedge if/when he hits 25 starts, or something?) and G/A output.

 

[tonyw]

Devil's advocate - why do we have to sign any of them?

Seriously, I keep reading 'you can't have Browne, Edwards and Murphy' - as if it's compulsory to have a minimum of one. If, as you say, they're 'unreliable' - maybe don't sign any of them?

Again. Let them all go if you don't want them?

By all means keep any of these in their own right if they tick all the boxes, but they should do just that - tick all the boxes vs the wider market (and not just be the lesser of 2 or 3 evils).

It's like we're still weaning ourselves off Karl Robinson's addiction to high risk signings, and we still need a little Tyler Burey here or an extension for Marcus Browne there.

I'd really rather we just went cold turkey.

It's a fair point. But there is a bit of a quality vs. reliability equation here.

When he is on his game, Murphy has a skill set to play at a higher level than League One - as does Browne and Edwards and McGuane.
And if they could actually reliably reproduce that throughout the course of a season, they'd be playing at a higher level. But for whatever reason, they can't, so they end up dropping down to us.

If you decide as a matter of policy to not sign any of that sort of player, and will only sign players that you've high confidence you'll get 50 peak games a season from, then you are ruling out signing anyone with that type of established skill set (though you can of course take other risks, and sign younger players in the hope that they will develop them). Raises your floor, certainly, but probably limits your ceiling as well.

A bit of calculated risk in squad construction is OK in my book. KR just took it to absurd extremes.....

 

[Yellowecky]

Is Murphy is such a fantastic character, isn’t it odd that nobody came for him when Manning wanted him out at all costs? If I’m picking a side, it’s a non-debate, I trust Manning.

He appears to have got some motivation from somewhere and I personally don’t believe (based on history, sorry, I need more convincing) that it’s because he wants to fire Oxford to the championship.

How can you trust a man who quit before the going got tough. How can you trust a man who decimated our backroom staff. How can you trust a man who lied to our supporters. How can you trust a man who (I'm led to believe) avoided saying goodbye to the players!

 

[bazzer9461]

If anyone is giving Josh Murphy a 3 year contract then I'd like them to consider me on a 1 year deal. I have no pace and can't beat a man, but I would turn up to training every day and be a good lad around the training ground.

If he continues the way he is and has been for the last few weeks then give him a contract 2 years with and option less pay but decent bonuses to see if he can continue the way he has.

 

[SirAndyOfCrosby]

It's a fair point. But there is a bit of a quality vs. reliability equation here.

When he is on his game, Murphy has a skill set to play at a higher level than League One - as does Browne and Edwards and McGuane.
And if they could actually reliably reproduce that throughout the course of a season, they'd be playing at a higher level. But for whatever reason, they can't, so they end up dropping down to us.

If you decide as a matter of policy to not sign any of that sort of player, and will only sign players that you've high confidence you'll get 50 peak games a season from, then you are ruling out signing anyone with that type of established skill set (though you can of course take other risks, and sign younger players in the hope that they will develop them). Raises your floor, certainly, but probably limits your ceiling as well.

A bit of calculated risk in squad construction is OK in my book. KR just took it to absurd extremes.....

I've heard that argument plenty, but I still haven't seen the evidence to actually back it up. How many of these 'calculated risks' actually pay off?

I don't believe that quality and reliability are on competing sliding scales either. You really can have both.

As you say, it could be those on the way up. Who's to say Goodrham, Rodrigues and Dale are not more naturally gifted than Murphy, Edwards and Browne? It feels like there's always the assumption that because a player has played at a higher level already that they are inherently more gifted and therefore some sort of luxury. There was nothing luxurious about Jamie Hanson, or about Yanic Wildschut.

It could also still be those on the way down too - we have a perfect case in point in James Henry. However, the crucial difference with his signing is that he had been historically reliable and a regular throughout his career. No gamble. A sensible signing of quality.

And I know it was in jest, but a policy of making signings based on appearance records is no bad idea.The evidence is almost always there.

It's why I'll continue to be sceptical whenever we sign a Tyler Burey, and why I'll always be reassured when we sign an Owen Dale.