Will free transfers and running down contracts become the norm?

[dontcallme]

Just pondering the future of transfers.

Arsenal have released 5 high earning players on free transfers this calendar year after failing to find a buyer. They currently have 5 players in the last year of their contracts in Lacazette, Kolasniac, Nketiah, Chambers and Elneny. Lacazette aside I can't see anyone who can afford their wages being interested in paying for any of them.

Aurer was in the last year of his contract and we have agreed a deal to end the contract early, assuming it was cheaper for us than paying a full year's salary.

Players must know they can command higher signing on fees and wages in there is no transfer fee involved.

Everytime a big team buys a player on a high salary and the player flops it is difficult to sell. The teams below them generally can't pay the salaries so if the teams with similar turnovers aren't interested then options are low.

Football fans often still make the mistake of thinking failure to sell is purely about the transfer fee.

In a post-pandemic world with teams seemingly having less cash flow it is very possible that transfer fees will change.

Any predictions for changes in the near future?

 

[SandroClegane]

To be honest I'm shocked we haven't started seeing a shift towards more of an American "free agency" model, where players pick the best fit for them on a contract with terms they decide are best. You could see Barcelona sign Messi for 10 years at 50m per year, while another player could take a two year "prove it" deal with a smaller club, hoping they could move to a bigger one when their contract is up.

Shorter contracts are obviously more of a risk to the player as an injury could tank future earnings but it would protect their ability to move.

 

[EQP]

Once we started seeing players going for 100+ million on transfer deals, I'm sure agents and players started to figure out that they could in effect phase out the middle man (clubs) and take a larger portion of money from any prospective deals. I get it. You can literally make enough money to ensure that your grandkids, grandkids are set for life. We'll definitely see more players running down their contracts and getting higher sign-on bonus & wages in lieu of transfer fees.

 

[Japhet]

I think ultimately players and agents will start trying to reduce the length of contracts. Of course, that's difficult to do when eye-watering amounts of money are up for grabs, but then signing on fees are also spiralling and agents are always up for a slice of a transfer fee and would probably love a deal every few years. Longer contracts don't seem to mean much now anyway since players act up to get their own way more and more regularly (even in the middle of a long contact *cough* Harry Kane). It will be a battleground though because transfers are a major part of most clubs income.

 

[Tucker]

Honestly surprised this hasn’t been a trend sooner, how long since the Bosman ruling came in? 25 years?

 

['O Zio]

To be honest I'm shocked we haven't started seeing a shift towards more of an American "free agency" model, where players pick the best fit for them on a contract with terms they decide are best. You could see Barcelona sign Messi for 10 years at 50m per year, while another player could take a two year "prove it" deal with a smaller club, hoping they could move to a bigger one when their contract is up.

Not sure what you mean by the "American free agency model". A "free agent" in American terms is just a player who is out of a contract. If anything, players here are even "freer" because there are various restrictions in place in some American leagues where the club controls you even after your contract is up.

 

[dontcallme]

Lingaard appears another player who is going to run his contract out then get a signing on fee for his next deal instead of a club getting a transfer fee.

I think we're going to see this happening much more regularly.

 

[Dillspur]

I think ultimately players and agents will start trying to reduce the length of contracts. Of course, that's difficult to do when eye-watering amounts of money are up for grabs, but then signing on fees are also spiralling and agents are always up for a slice of a transfer fee and would probably love a deal every few years. Longer contracts don't seem to mean much now anyway since players act up to get their own way more and more regularly (even in the middle of a long contact *cough* Harry Kane). It will be a battleground though because transfers are a major part of most clubs income.

Not sure we would see shorter contracts, if transfer fees and huge sign on fees (for free agents) are still involved. As an example, Real wouldn't pay 190m for Mbappe to only sign him on a 2 year contract.

 

[Tucker]

Lingaard appears another player who is going to run his contract out then get a signing on fee for his next deal instead of a club getting a transfer fee.

I think we're going to see this happening much more regularly.

I was surprised that he was willing to stay at United just to do that. He’s not getting any younger and this will just be another year of playing reserve football.

 

[dontcallme]

I was surprised that he was willing to stay at United just to do that. He’s not getting any younger and this will just be another year of playing reserve football.

It seems most players put finances over playing. He could have gone on loan or had Utd pay off part of his contract like Aurier.

But in the real world few footballers seem to put playing at the expense of less money. I really see free transfers becoming more normal.

 

[CanadaSpurs]

Not sure what you mean by the "American free agency model". A "free agent" in American terms is just a player who is out of a contract. If anything, players here are even "freer" because there are various restrictions in place in some American leagues where the club controls you even after your contract is up.

Can you give an example? I’m NA-based and can’t think of anything like this.

 

['O Zio]

Can you give an example? I’m NA-based and can’t think of anything like this.

The specific example I had in mind was the team control shenanigans that go on in MLB.

My main point was that I don't really see what the other posters means by "American free agency model" because the free agency works differently in each league/sport so there is no single model to compare. Likewise k don't get why he thinks that the players are more "free" in the US. If anything id say the opposite is true. If a young player for a PL club gets released, they're a free agent and can do whatever they want. The same is not true in baseball for example, where you're still bound by all the service time rule stuff until you've completed 6 years of service in the majors, which often ends up being 7 in real terms because the teams screw them over by conveniently not letting them hit the threshold for a "years worth of service"

 

[dontcallme]

I think the bigger clubs are going to dominate the free transfer market. Teams generally get good sell on values for players moving up. The top teams will generally sell down so they lose money on transfer fees anyway.

So I think the free transfers will be dominated by the top clubs.

Are there any examples of players being bought on free transfers then being sold for big profits?