All the talk in the press this week is about how Luke Shaw has already made his mind up about joining at least three clubs, but if he does Saints supporters should not see this as a backward step but progression.

All the talk on Saints message boards and social media sites has been about how it will be doom and gloom if Saints lose Luke Shaw who has already agreed to sign for Chelsea, Man Utd & Man City according to those ever reliable national media reports as well as Luke's postman who will confirm that he now needs a van to deliver all the estate agent house details that he is now pouring over in either the Surrey Stockbroker belt or the footballers golden mile in Cheshire.

Some supporter are crying that should Saints let Luke Shaw leave then this shows that Katharina Liebherr and her board have no ambition and that Cortese would never have allowed this to happen.

The reality of the situation is that in the modern game, the star players have all the power, yes Liverpool and Manchester United held firm over uarez and Rooney respectively last summer and showed that contracts can be adhered to, but Spurs were a prime example with Gareth Bale, the player holding the club to ransom to get his desired move to Real Madrid, or a bit further back when Tevez held Man City to ransom, if a club like Spurs or manchester City cannot hold on to a player then what hope for Saints.

But if Shaw does go then Saints are only continuing what made them so successful from the 1960's onwards in the first place, the foundations of the club were built on producing good young talent and knowing when to cash in at the optimum moment to generate funds to develop the squad further, when Martin Chivers was sold there was uproar but he was replaced by Mick Channon who was replaced by Phil Boyer who in turn found himself followed by Steve Moran, I could go on through the ages right up to the point where we replaced James Beattie with Peter Crouch, yes we got relegated but Crouch had a great season himself and was one of the players least to blame.

So if Saints do sell Luke Shaw it doesnt show lack of ambition but of being realistic and juggling the finances alongside buying in players.

This season Saints have fallen away because the squad lacks both quality in certain areas and depth in general, ideally perhaps Shaw would stay another year to allow Matt Targett to show he is up to the job of replacing him, but if he did go and he went for £30 million then I would throw into the equation that spent wisely as a squad overall we could perhaps be much improved.

Forgetting Targett for a minute we could sign three quality additions to the squad for that £30 million before we even invested any other money we may receive from either the Premier League pot or if we can offload Osvaldo or Ramirex for instance.

Last summer we made three key signings of which Osvaldo turned out to be the only poor one, another three key signings could ensure we stay in the top ten and take a step nearer the top six or seven.

Luke Shaw is a good player but he is still a work in progress, as i say I would not want to see him leave, but I can see many reasons why we would perhaps want to sell him whilst his stock is high rather than wait a year or two, yes we may get more money, but with key signings and a good replacement for Shaw I would hazard a guess than in terms of points we would get more from an improved squad than we would from one individual ie Shaw.

Ralph Krueger is used to running sports teams in the USA & Canada where they take a far more scientific approach, over there as pioneered by Billy Beane and the Oakland A's, for those who have read Moneyball: The Art Of Winning An Unfair Game, the concept will be familiar and make sense, for those who haven't its all about knowing what each individual is worth to the team and exactly the strategy Saints used to great success, bring through a player via the ranks or buy cheaply and sell at the top price.

Saints now need to re adopt this strategy now for perhaps the first time in a decade in that whilst we were languishing in the lower leagues we had no choice but to sell our young talent, now we have to harvest them but know when to sell and when to hold on, it will be all about management both on and off the pitch, in fairness to Cortese he was adopting many of Moneyball's philosophy's, he had just not been tested on implementing them, now could be that time.

Many teams with players as good as Luke Shaw in them have been relegated due to bad management and squad rotation and conversely many poor teams have stayed up due to the reverse, one player doesn't make a team, nor do four players come to that, but you have a better team with say four very good players, four good players and 3 average players than you do with one excellent player, four good players and six average, the point is its a team game, Spurs are doing no worse or no better than they did last year with Gareth Bale, the problem they have is that their last manager did not use the money wisely and there is the trick.

So Luke Shaw going should be seen as nothing other than an event that happens throughout football be you Chelsea, Man Utd or City or Liverpool its all about building a team as a whole and not round one player.

I hope Luke Shaw stays but if he does in some respects I would fear for the squad as a whole, but if Shaw should leave we may just be that much stronger as a squad for it, wherever Luke Shaw is I wish him luck, he is yet another Southampton grown star who has progressed along the conveyor belt, the only sure thing is that one day he will leave, all of his predecessors bar Matt Le Tiss did and we became stronger for it until Harry Redknapp came along, but that is another story.

Photo: Action Images

slynch added 11:24 - Apr 17 Clyne's a better LB than most LBs in the EPL.
1

danvaughan89 added 12:23 - Apr 17 I agree. Shaw, thought good, is only currently an extremely talented kid. We could replace him with some equally, if not more, competent than him and allow us to grow another one... Personally, I think we could replace him with someone a bit older who is currently better than Shaw - what we would miss is being able to say: 'this kid WILL be amazing in a few years. £30m - that would break the world record transfer fee for a fullback - which would actually help our prestige. The only concern I have is that if he goes, one or two others could start to have their heads turned. Adam Lallana is crucial to our growth, as is Schneiderlin and Lovren. All of these need to stay or we rist stagnating, or worse.

0

halftimeorange added 12:29 - Apr 17 What makes you believe that only Shaw is likely to leave? If he does go then others are likely to become unsettled and gee'd up by their agents will seek their own pots of gold, either for their banks or their display cabinets. I do agree that Shaw is far from the finished article and he's nowhere near as good as Bale and, possibly, not as good as either Clyne or Chambers, at least defensively. £30M does buy a couple of good players but doen't necessarily retain team spirit which is very evident at Saints as they are.

0

Whatsforpud added 13:12 - Apr 17 The whole of the media circus has been talking-up Shaw in an exaggerated way. He is good, and I hope we can persuade him to stay for another season. However, I think both Clyne and Chambers are equally as good, but (luckily) they seem to have slipped under the media radar. There are times when Shaw is trying to push on down the wing, he will stop and make a sideways pass, whereas I feel he could have dropped his shoulder and tried passing the player.

1

no7saint added 13:14 - Apr 17 I think you hit the nail on the head mentioning Spurs and spending wisely, reinvesting a big transfer fee for a player does not gurantee you can adequately replace what you've lost. Our big money buys the last couple of years have been a mixed bag for various reasons, in the main our key performers have either grown with the club through the youth system or lower leagues, or been astute bargains like Clyne and Lovren. My main concern with losing one player would be the message it might send to others, after all they are a tight bunch. But let's not panic and have faith our board will do the right thing. Whatever happens we've been here countless times before and we're currently stronger than ever. COYR!!!

1

montecristo added 14:52 - Apr 17 I am sorry but this article epitomizes what has been wrong with Saints for years until the Liebherrs took over. This obsession with letting players go, that we were somehow second best , automatically meant that we would be unable to hold on to players. Such rubbish. You need to get one thing straight in your head ; players sign contracts, and they are there to be honoured and protect the interests of the club.If players dont like it and moan they can always go and play for the reserves until they understand which way their bread is buttered. I am not saying there is a problem at Saints, but for christ sake dont let the arrogance of the fans of the so called big clubs bully you into accepting a situation which needs to be despatched to the days of old,if we are to be successful, there needs to be a new perception at the club, and thank god I think the powers that be at Saints are made of sterner stuff than the author of this article. So long as the board does its bit and acquires the players we need to progress up the table and challenge for the champions league, then there will be no reason for players to want to leave, and that is the essential equation. And I believe that the club will do exactly that this summer. Exciting times at Saints next season for sure. The likes of Shaw, Chambers Ward Prowse, the list is endless , will improve, we have never had so much potential at any one time at the club and it would be criminal to waste the opportunity for real success.

4

thegeneral added 14:54 - Apr 17 A large reason for our success is a group of players that have come a long way playing together and the younger academy players that have come through to the first team. Manchester United built a team of enormous success through the class of 92 and we are in a similar position now. I don't agree that selling one player for 30 million means we can then buy 3, yes of course technically we can but they rarely tick all the boxes and fail to knit into the team, do you really think that three new players will be as effective as someone that has come through the ranks and played with those around him for many years, in fact in Shaws case never known it any other way? our transfer track record would suggest not. I also don't really see how selling Walcott and Oxo benefited the club, although i do have a poor memory. There is of course another theory. It is in the interests of the top four clubs to disassemble any successful or potentially successful teams, with the huge amounts of money involved and the open chequebooks that are certainly available at Chelsea and Man City, x million from one club for Lallana, x million from another for Shaw, x million for Schniederlein etc etc is money well spent to destroy a threat, whether or not the player really ever performs for the new club is irrelevant because the loss of players from the parent club has destabilised them enough to stop them knocking on the door of the top 4 and champions league football. I know that Southampton football club intend to use the academy as a revenue stream, but we need to keep our best players at the moment. Any two of our current first team leaving could send us tumbling down the league, this has been shown many times this season just by looking at the bench and the recent loss of JRod in our performance against Cardiff. Its also all very well having say 50 million from the sale of two players but how do we tempt good players to come and play for us? Lallana, Shaw etc being at the club is a bigger pull for a world class striker than a bunch of no names and mercenaries. I think it is absolutely vital that this squad stays together.

1

ExiledSupporter added 19:05 - Apr 17 I agree if we invest wisely... then selling Shaw for £30m might be a good deal for Saints. But the evidence that we can invest wisely is not all that good when it comes to overseas players and marquee signings. Little firm ground on which to base any trust in Reed as Director of Football, in my opinion
0

Jesus_02 added 00:55 - Apr 18 Am I the only one that disagrees that the Osvaldo signing was a mistake... It showed real ambition and probably kept players at the club... how muchwill we lose on him? 2m maybe? I would consider it good business if we paid 2m just to prove to our young exiting squad we meant business. That's befrore the chance that the gamble paid off and he was any good.
1

Blogs 31 bloggers

Leicester City Polls