Let me first preface this by saying I have the greatest respect for what Southampton achieved last season, and since they have returned to the PL in general. I was one of the first to say they would go down last year, and I ended up looking very silly.
However. Despite their achievements last season, they have moved on some of their key players again this year. Mane now looks to have been approached by Man Utd.
So, is this model sustainable? They've done terrifically so far in replacing the outgoing players, with the new arrivals fairing largely better than the players they replace.
However, a look at the players they've moved on shows the extent of the young talent they've leaving the club:
Rickie Lambert, Adam Lallana, Dejan Lovren, Luke Shaw, Callum Chambers, Jack Cork last year, followed by Morgan Schneiderlin, Nathaniel Clyne and possibly Saido Mane this.
That's 10 players in two years who were arguably key, first team players for Saints. this isn't really discussing the individual players and their respective fortunes since, more is it actually possible to keep selling your best players at this rate and remain successful, relatively? Or will this eventually mean a drop back down the divisions for Saints?
Honestly, I can't see it working long term. What it essentially means is a huge rebuilding process every year. It is testament to Southampton's ability to build a team and make a player, but possibly a lack of ambition on display from the club hierarchy.
Is being a selling club really sustainable?
posted on 19/8/15
My apologies,I thought he'd been in the Saints youth policy. I stand corrected.
JimmyTheRed
posted on 19/8/15
True, there are some examples of teams doing it well.
I can't imagine how frustrating it must be as a Saints fan though.
posted on 19/8/15
Bale, Walcott and Chamberlain. Just imagine.
I don't think you'll find many gutted Saints fans arm though.
posted on 19/8/15
Selling Bale and then the rights to a percentage of his future fees helped keep Southampton afloat from what I understand. A necessary move, as it is for many clubs.
The question of what is sustainable begs a follow up question of... sustainable to achieve what?
Gone are the days when a team can challenge for the league from nowhere. Even top 6 is hard enough. So what do clubs like Southampton aspire to? Consistent growth? Cup runs?
If the question is can they grow as a club whilst selling their best players then the answer is yes. They need outstanding youth development and scouting to pick
future talents but it's clearly possible. The last couple of years have, I would imagine, secured Southampton's financial future and made them a solid mid-table EPL side.
Success breeds success in whatever form it comes, if you're a youth player now wouldn't you consider Southampton an attractive prospect?
Fans of big clubs tend to view success as trophies but they're actually in a minority. Most clubs and fans view success in very different terms. I play football with a couple of Saints fans and I can confirm, they're a pretty happy bunch right now.
posted on 19/8/15
comment by Ttliv87 (U11882)
posted 1 hour, 43 minutes ago
Think they'll be found out this year. 9th-10th at best.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
If they finish 9th-10th I wouldn't really class it as being found out.....
posted on 20/8/15
It's sustainable to stay around mid table, as you can pick up players around the same level as those you sell. Not sustainable if you want to break in or stay in the top four as those players to replace those you've sold are difficult to sign as other clubs above you or on your level want to sign them also and may be more attractive to the player.
posted on 20/8/15
If it works for them & sustains their survival in the top flight all power to the club.
Transfer activity varies from the top of the PL to the bottom.
Successfully negotiating this minefield can make or break 'smaller' clubs - the Saints have got it right so far.
More relevant would be to consider the plight of the 'buying clubs' when their transfer targets constantly appear to elude them.....or they acquire ridiculously over-priced players who prove totally ineffective. Or clubs that are more concerned with finances than proper success on the pitch with a manager reluctant to play the market when he could afford practically any player.
Are their respective 'approaches' sustainable or a model that achieves long-term success?
posted on 20/8/15
In the long term no it isn't sustainable.
I have seen it with my local club Peterborough. They bought non league and lower league players had a bit of success and sold them on for big profits.
What has happened is that every team now looks in the same markets they were looking in so it's harder and harder to get those players first so the quality of the team eventually diminishes.
This will happen to Southampton. They will find it harder and harder to replace the departures with more competition in the same markets, other teams will poach their scouts/coaches and copy their methods and they will find their quality dilutes.
They key for them to avoid this almost inevitable future decline will be if they can qualify for the CL via the EL or League in one freak season and so get into a new level of wages and fees and get a big reputation abroad like Sevilla have done.
If they can't do that then sooner or later they will drift back to relegation battles like the 90's.
posted on 20/8/15
Its not like they havent spent either, they make solid purchases and loansfor replacements. Mane tadic pelle classie etc, the loans of ellia, alderweireld. Wanyama, foster cost a pretty penny too, the only bad purchase I recall being osvaldo.
posted on 24/10/15
Hoping Southampton smash Liverpool, they deserved better in the 2 games last season. GD wise Saints were much better then Liverpool and Spurs and it was a shame they didn't qualify from the europa league qualifiers but I still think they have a small chance of 4th spot this season if they go on a good run of form they did at start of last season.