Ex Player Mark Sykes goes to Bristol City.

[Marked Ox]

Just some random angry t**t on the internet. Most here would have been appalled if he’d been given a longer contract ages ago.

It also ignores the interview he did when he signed for us where he made it pretty clear we were a stepping stone. I have no problem with that as long as they give their all whilst with us.

 

[Wallop]

I do find it annoying when we let players go for free who we could have got a decent fee for. If we’d sold Sykes in the summer we’d still be in League One next season but with hundreds of thousands more in the bank.

I don’t think we’d have hundreds of thousands more in the bank, it wasn’t until this season that he became a first team regular. In the previous three seasons, he made an average of 16 league appearances per season and had scored just 1 league goal.

I reckon we’d have got c.£200k for what was at the time a bang average L1 squad player. You also have to then replace him of course and that is rarely free.

 

[Wallop]

I don’t think we’d have hundreds of thousands more in the bank, it wasn’t until this season that he became a first team regular. In the previous three seasons, he made an average of 16 league appearances per season and had scored just 1 league goal.

I reckon we’d have got c.£200k for what was at the time a bang average L1 squad player. You also have to then replace him of course and that is rarely free.

Just seen @Scotchegg post exactly the same! We are different people and there was no collusion!

 

[Gregortheox]

Im sorry, I don’t see Sykes as a championship player. I’m very surprised that Bristol city believe he will improve them….

 

[IsleofWightYellow]

I guess FGR will probably say the same when Nicky Cadden moves for nothing very shortly... swings and roundabouts.

Well yes, but in the same way as with late goals or missed penalties I don’t like it when it happens to us, but I do when it comes in our favour. The fact that it happens to other clubs doesn’t mean it’s fine when it happens to us…?

Sykes would have gone for maybe £200k last summer, little more. But we would have then spent the same or more to get a replacement. So our bank balance would have been no better off.

Yes but we would have the replacement, so we’d be a player up on where we are now; with no Sykes, and no replacement

I don’t think we’d have hundreds of thousands more in the bank, it wasn’t until this season that he became a first team regular. In the previous three seasons, he made an average of 16 league appearances per season and had scored just 1 league goal.

I reckon we’d have got c.£200k for what was at the time a bang average L1 squad player. You also have to then replace him of course and that is rarely free.

Is £200k not hundreds of thousands? We also still have to replace him if he leaves for nothing and that is still rarely free!

I’m confused as to how ‘Well we’d have to buy a replacement’ is a justification of why it’s better to not sell a player but instead let them leave on a free. In both cases you have to buy a replacement but at least if you sell them you get the money to do so!

 

[Sarge]

may be wrong on this, but wasnt Oisin Smyth ( currently training with full NI squad) bought in as a potential replacement for Sykes?

 

[beyondthefourth]

Well yes, but in the same way as with late goals or missed penalties I don’t like it when it happens to us, but I do when it comes in our favour. The fact that it happens to other clubs doesn’t mean it’s fine when it happens to us…?

Yes but we would have the replacement, so we’d be a player up on where we are now; with no Sykes, and no replacement

Is £200k not hundreds of thousands? We also still have to replace him if he leaves for nothing and that is still rarely free!

I’m confused as to how ‘Well we’d have to buy a replacement’ is a justification of why it’s better to not sell a player but instead let them leave on a free. In both cases you have to buy a replacement but at least if you sell them you get the money to do so!

Because his contribution in the first half of last season was worth more than 100-200k

 

[WokinghamYellow]

Pretty soon Sykes will be forgotten about as he spends 3 years in Bristol city reserves doing nowt before he turns up in league 2 to restart his career

 

[IsleofWightYellow]

Because his contribution in the first half of last season was worth more than 100-200k

Was it? In what way? We wouldn’t have gone down without it and we didn’t finish in the playoffs.

 

[ECYellow]

Well yes, but in the same way as with late goals or missed penalties I don’t like it when it happens to us, but I do when it comes in our favour. The fact that it happens to other clubs doesn’t mean it’s fine when it happens to us…?

Yes but we would have the replacement, so we’d be a player up on where we are now; with no Sykes, and no replacement

Is £200k not hundreds of thousands? We also still have to replace him if he leaves for nothing and that is still rarely free!

I’m confused as to how ‘Well we’d have to buy a replacement’ is a justification of why it’s better to not sell a player but instead let them leave on a free. In both cases you have to buy a replacement but at least if you sell them you get the money to do so!

You’re being a little idealistic here. Player trading happens at every football club and at our level, you will not always make a return on the initial investment.

We haven’t lost anything substantial on Sykes. Has he gone before, we’d have had to replace him which in turn would have cost ££.

OUFC won’t make a return on Sykes but our ever growing reputation of buying, developing and producing opportunities to players will be further enhanced.

Not all is lost here on a player that was for large parts of his time here, average.

 

[The mighty Aldo]

Pretty soon Sykes will be forgotten about as he spends 3 years in Bristol city reserves doing nowt before he turns up in league 2 to restart his career

Bit like Matty Taylor but he came back to a League 1 Club
8 goals in 2 seasons

 

[IsleofWightYellow]

You’re being a little idealistic here. Player trading happens at every football club and at our level, you will not always make a return on the initial investment.

We haven’t lost anything substantial on Sykes. Has he gone before, we’d have had to replace him which in turn would have cost ££

OUFC won’t make a return on Sykes but our ever growing reputation of buying, developing and producing opportunities to players will be further enhanced.

Not all is lost here on a player that was for large parts of his time here, average.

I agree it’s not a big deal, I was never suggesting it was, just a little bit annoying losing a player who is worth a few hundred thousand on a free, when we could have sold him 6-12 months ago, had some cash and not been any worse off.

I’m really confused by this ‘Had he gone before, we’d have had to replace him which in turn would have cost ££’ argument I keep seeing though! It doesn’t make sense!

Scenario 1: We sell Sykes for £250k a year ago, and spend that money on a replacement player. OUFC has: £0 money, 0 Sykes, 1 x replacement player worth £250k.

Scenario 2: Sykes signs a new deal. OUFC has: £0 money, 1 x Sykes (worth £250k), 0 replacement player.

Scenario 3: We let Sykes leave on a free. OUFC has: £0 money, 0 Sykes, 0 replacement player.

OUFC are currently looking at scenario 3. That is clearly worse than scenario 1!

 

[DannyW]

He's gone we move on

 

[WokinghamYellow]

Bit like Matty Taylor but he came back to a League 1 Club
8 goals in 2 seasons

Which proves he should have signed for us the first time!

 

[PottersRightBoot]

Pretty soon Sykes will be forgotten about as he spends 3 years in Bristol city reserves doing nowt before he turns up in league 2 to restart his career

We’ll see. We got good service from Sykes. A signing that worked.

 

[Swaby39]

Think the club got this one right in all honesty. At a time you’d typically offer a player you want to keep a new contract, he didn’t really deserve one. He’s played out the final year and done better than expected to the point we’d like to keep him but equally there’s interest elsewhere. He’s earned the right to a choice and we have to accept. I like Sykes and think he deserves more credit from our fans for his performances but I wouldn’t say he’s irreplaceable by any stretch. Even in January if he had 2 years on his contract, we are not getting a 7 figure sum for him.

 

[Orkney Islands Yellow]

Given recent history I wouldn't be surprised if Sykes joins us on loan in January 2024!

 

[unification]

I agree it’s not a big deal, I was never suggesting it was, just a little bit annoying losing a player who is worth a few hundred thousand on a free, when we could have sold him 6-12 months ago, had some cash and not been any worse off.

I’m really confused by this ‘Had he gone before, we’d have had to replace him which in turn would have cost ££’ argument I keep seeing though! It doesn’t make sense!

Scenario 1: We sell Sykes for £250k a year ago, and spend that money on a replacement player. OUFC has: £0 money, 0 Sykes, 1 x replacement player worth £250k.

Scenario 2: Sykes signs a new deal. OUFC has: £0 money, 1 x Sykes (worth £250k), 0 replacement player.

Scenario 3: We let Sykes leave on a free. OUFC has: £0 money, 0 Sykes, 0 replacement player.

OUFC are currently looking at scenario 3. That is clearly worse than scenario 1!

This is all easy to say in the here and now though, isn't it?

If we're sat here awaiting our upcoming playoff final, we'd hardly be talking about Mark Sykes departing at all. If we were treading water and going nowhere and sold him for £200k, we'd probably say 'decent business'. As it is, we were still in the playoff hunt and decided to see if Sykes could get us there. A gamble but in the general scheme of things a marginal one.

Also, there's more to football finance than the transfer fee. Sell Sykes in January for the £200k we're using as a realistic benchmark and we have to go find someone who may command a transfer fee, would certainly require a signing on fee and would need paying a salary and bonuses. Any number of those eat into the £200k paid for Sykes. Bearing in mind what we have sold players for in recent years and we're looking at a profit from the sale of player and purchase of another not really worth chasing.

Since we knew he was off fairly recently, we must have stepped up the search for a replacement. It's all part and parcel of the game.

 

[Oxford1996]

We’ve replaced players like Dickie, Nelson, Ledson, Lundstram, Roofe in the past.

Sykes is a nobody compared to them.

Good riddance.

 

[Followtheox1]

I agree it’s not a big deal, I was never suggesting it was, just a little bit annoying losing a player who is worth a few hundred thousand on a free, when we could have sold him 6-12 months ago, had some cash and not been any worse off.

I’m really confused by this ‘Had he gone before, we’d have had to replace him which in turn would have cost ££’ argument I keep seeing though! It doesn’t make sense!

Scenario 1: We sell Sykes for £250k a year ago, and spend that money on a replacement player. OUFC has: £0 money, 0 Sykes, 1 x replacement player worth £250k.

Scenario 2: Sykes signs a new deal. OUFC has: £0 money, 1 x Sykes (worth £250k), 0 replacement player.

Scenario 3: We let Sykes leave on a free. OUFC has: £0 money, 0 Sykes, 0 replacement player.

OUFC are currently looking at scenario 3. That is clearly worse than scenario 1!

If we had sold him then, you and others would be saying you were just a little annoyed that we sold a player for a few hundred thousand who could of got us into the playoffs.