Dean McDonald not offered new deal

Cuffy · Post by **Cuffy** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:44 am

Town have told Dean McDonald that he will not be offered a new deal when his current contract expires in the summer. McDonald, 20, signed a 12-month deal a year ago having been on a short-term contract towards the end of the previous season.

Boss Joe Royle told the club site: "I have spoken to Dean and told him we won't be offering him a new contract.

"We have a number of young strikers at the club now who are breaking through, the likes of Danny Haynes and Billy Clarke, with Darryl Knights in the wings as well.

Source: TWTD

Right so we turn down hard cash in January, but let him go for free in the summer

Just can't see the sense in it.

truefan2005 · Post by **truefan2005** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:51 am

i know stupid as init

Post by **Earl Blue** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:03 am

Well I am going to be honest in that from the very beginning,
I heard some good friends of mine as well as other rave about Mini Mac..

I accepted their views and dont doubt for one moment that at the time
they watched Mini Mac playing he was probably very exciting..

However, Maybe I have missed a couple of games where he has played,
but I honestly cannot think of a time where I have been that impressed by him, but that is purely my opinion and as always I respect others.

However..

Joe talks about the future being the likes of Haynes, Billy Clarke etc etc..

So why if that is the case Mr. Royle did you pack Billy Clarke off to
Colchester on loan, when you have no intention of offering a contract
to Mini Mac who you played on Saturday.

My head tells me that with the seasons rewards over for 2005/2006
that we should NOT be allowing playings like young Billy Clarke (assuming
you mean to keep him here) to go out on loan instead
of installing them into the current team and gaining more valuable
experience.

I feel this is total utter craziness at a time where the club is trying its
level best to impress the fans of ITFC to buy new season tickets.

I am disillusioned..

Bluebird · Post by **Bluebird** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:16 am

Joe talks about the future being the likes of Haynes, Billy Clarke etc etc..

So why if that is the case Mr. Royle did you pack Billy Clarke off to
Colchester on loan, when you have no intention of offering a contract
to Mini Mac who you played on Saturday.

My head tells me that with the seasons reqrads over for 2005/2006
that we should be allowing playings like young Billy Clarke (assuming
you mean to keep him here) to go out on loan instead
of installing them into the current team and gaining more valuable
experience.

Agreed, why does Joe insist in playing one up front against sh*te teams like Millwall and Hull? Clarke and Haynes should have had a half each up front with Lee, great experience building for next season.
Unless his decision to play these tactics is due to his desire to accomodate the failings of Currie, by having four in midield to carry the passenger?

Cuffy · Post by **Cuffy** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:16 am

Good Point Earl

I don't particuarly question the decision to let him go, but why on earth did we turn down 75k, which was a more than reasonable price for an unproven player, only to let him leave for nothing 6 months down the line.

hallamblue · Post by **hallamblue** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:18 am

Cuffy wrote:
Town have told Dean McDonald that he will not be offered a new deal when his current contract expires in the summer. McDonald, 20, signed a 12-month deal a year ago having been on a short-term contract towards the end of the previous season.

Boss Joe Royle told the club site: "I have spoken to Dean and told him we won't be offering him a new contract.

"We have a number of young strikers at the club now who are breaking through, the likes of Danny Haynes and Billy Clarke, with Darryl Knights in the wings as well.

Source: TWTD
Right so we turn down hard cash in January, but let him go for free in the summer Just can't see the sense in it.

who would be likely to buy him..when if they wait until the summer can get him for nought !...also allowing him to leave early means he's probably got more chance of fixing himself up with another club before the unemployment rush in the summer !

Cuffy · Post by **Cuffy** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:20 am

hallamblue wrote:
Cuffy wrote:
Town have told Dean McDonald that he will not be offered a new deal when his current contract expires in the summer. McDonald, 20, signed a 12-month deal a year ago having been on a short-term contract towards the end of the previous season.

Boss Joe Royle told the club site: "I have spoken to Dean and told him we won't be offering him a new contract.

"We have a number of young strikers at the club now who are breaking through, the likes of Danny Haynes and Billy Clarke, with Darryl Knights in the wings as well.

Source: TWTD
Right so we turn down hard cash in January, but let him go for free in the summer Just can't see the sense in it.
who would be likely to buy him..when if they wait until the summer can get him for nought !...also allowing him to leave early means he's probably got more chance of fixing himself up with another club before the unemployment rush in the summer !

Hartlepool offered 75k back in January just before his loan there was due to finish.

hallamblue · Post by **hallamblue** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:26 am

Earl Blue wrote:Well I am going to be honest in that from the very beginning,
I heard some good friends of mine as well as other rave about Mini Mac..

I accepted their views and dont doubt for one moment that at the time
they watched Mini Mac playing he was probably very exciting..

However, Maybe I have missed a couple of games where he has played,
but I honestly cannot think of a time where I have been that impressed by him, but that is purely my opinion and as always I respect others.

However..

Joe talks about the future being the likes of Haynes, Billy Clarke etc etc..

So why if that is the case Mr. Royle did you pack Billy Clarke off to
Colchester on loan, when you have no intention of offering a contract
to Mini Mac who you played on Saturday.

My head tells me that with the seasons rewards over for 2005/2006
that we should NOT be allowing playings like young Billy Clarke (assuming
you mean to keep him here) to go out on loan instead
of installing them into the current team and gaining more valuable
experience.

I feel this is total utter craziness at a time where the club is trying its
level best to impress the fans of ITFC to buy new season tickets.

I am disillusioned..

I see where you're coming from Earl...and the only thing I can think of is that the likes of Clarke can play regular 1st team footy at a slightly lower level that is better than resereve footy...but equally offers less pressure to perform at the fxzzy league level....so he can develop at the next stage in his development.
It's a big ask of some of these kids to perform week in / out at fizzy league level - when the pressure to maintain a push for a top six spot has until recently , still been on. These youngsters have a big enough task just adjusting to the huge step up form res footy to fizzy league ....an extended run out on a regular basis at league one level might be just what is required for Clarke at this stage in his development !

hallamblue · Post by **hallamblue** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:31 am

Cuffy wrote:
hallamblue wrote:
Cuffy wrote: Right so we turn down hard cash in January, but let him go for free in the summer Just can't see the sense in it.
who would be likely to buy him..when if they wait until the summer can get him for nought !...also allowing him to leave early means he's probably got more chance of fixing himself up with another club before the unemployment rush in the summer !
Hartlepool offered 75k back in January just before his loan there was due to finish.

Oh yes sorry I did forget about that !...the only thing I canthink of was at that time they were still considering him as a potential developer at ITFC....also we didnt have Fuller on board then and it looks like we are going to try and sign him in the summer - Hartlepool may well have sorted their own striker situation out ..but whatever, it looks like Mini Mac is on his way .

Town do appear to be clearing the decks quickly with a view to freeing up Ã‚Â£Ã‚Â£ to allow Joe to move quickly to secure already identified targets !

the-mole · Post by **the-mole** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:14 am

Am I missing something here or what????

So we can't sell a player for Ã‚Â£75,000 because Hartlepool didn't match our valuation??? Well quite obviously their estimation wiped the floor with ours. That is Alan Lee pretty much paid for. Talk about complete waste of everybodies time, and potential extra finance for the club.

Ok he hasn't exactly set the world alight constantly - but no-one can deny that at times young mini-mac has been awesome. So what is it Joe was doing with him?? Sends him out on loan - doesn't give him much of a chnace here, turns down an offer for him, then ships him out for free???

Sorry - someone at the club needs to be held accountable for the total mis-management of this situation - BOLLOX!!!

Shed on tour · Post by **Shed on tour** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:21 am

All I will say on this subject is this club never ceases to amaze me.

Perhaps Hartlepool will now come in for him as they have saved themselves Ã‚Â£75,000. Earl, as for the Clarke situation I was saying the same thing to several people the other day.

Post by **Earl Blue** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:25 am

Shed on tour wrote:All I will say on this subject is this club never ceases to amaze me.
Perhaps Hartlepool will now come in for him as they have saved themselves Ã‚Â£75,000. Earl, as for the Clarke situation I was saying the same thing to several people the other day.

Well Shed you know you and I tend to think the same..

''There were 10 german bombers........

lol

Shed on tour · Post by **Shed on tour** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 8:31 am

Earl Blue wrote:
Shed on tour wrote:All I will say on this subject is this club never ceases to amaze me.
Perhaps Hartlepool will now come in for him as they have saved themselves Ã‚Â£75,000. Earl, as for the Clarke situation I was saying the same thing to several people the other day.

Well Shed you know you and I tend to think the same..

''There were 10 german bombers........

lol

Yeah and perhaps their first mission should be the board room at Portman Road!!!!

What odds Jamie Peters is the next one to be released? Did you see Derek Bowden outside the main entrance on saturday talking to fans? Hopefully he will be there for the Brighton game as there are a few questions I would like to ask him.

Jonno · Post by **Jonno** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:05 am

Im glad hes going, hes not that good at all, he does have alot of skill and pace, but he just doesnt know when to pass the ball

Shed on tour · Post by **Shed on tour** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:29 am

Jonno
I think what has upset a lot of people (well at least me!

) is that it's not so much that he is going but the fact that we could have got Ã‚Â£75,000 for him such a short time ago.
However, apparently that did not match our valuation of him at that time but now he can go on a free. Just don't seem to make sense to me.

Riviera · Post by **Riviera** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:36 am

obviously 75k is peanuts to a club with our financial clout!!:shock:

Dubai Blue · Post by **Dubai Blue** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:01 am

Amazing how short memories some here have got.

I may have got it wrong but i reckon every 5th post on here is a complaint that our board sells our young talent off too cheap and now apparently we are happy happy to accept a measly 75k for someone that many were impressed with.

Okay so now he's going to go for nothing in the Summer because nobody came in for him at more than 75k. Well all I can say is that hindsight is 20:20 boys.

We obviously don't need McDonald next year. I suspect that if we are honest even Bowditch is better. We have Lee, Forster, Parkin, Haynes, Clarke, Bowditch & McDonald I would personally like to see the last two go and the budget used to bring in another striker from the lower leagues. Perhaps someone a bit bigger

As I understand it Peters is a midfielder that can be used in a forward role, a little like Currie. So we should count them both as midfielders.

Come on guys we are an aspiring premiership team we need to have a steady churn in our fringe players so that we can steadily improve the quality of the squad. Only one in 10 make the grade at best so lets keep the other 9 moving.

Shed on tour · Post by **Shed on tour** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:03 pm

Dubai
Surely it would have been better to accept Ã‚Â£75,000 a couple of months ago than letting him go on a free now.
I have my doubts that Joe even rated the lad when he went out on loan (especially as this was granted at a time when we had injury problems with strikers and Bowditch was not performing and he also then allowed Mcdonald to become cup-tied).
As for short memories, I think it is more of a case of people having long memories and not forgetting the many mistakes made by our board since 2001-2002.

Post by **Dazza** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:14 pm

This is a shocking bit of business by the club! We should of taken the Ã‚Â£75k instead he'll just go there on a free now.

Cant believe it.

MMJR67 · Post by **MMJR67** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 2:35 pm

what does 75 grand buy in professional fgooty today ,other than gas to run the clubs bus....and at the time we didn't take the money because we were in injury hell......IMHO good call ,to small,cant pass,and at 20 he wont get any bigger will he.....good luck to him though

Cuffy · Post by **Cuffy** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:00 pm

MMJR67 wrote: what does 75 grand buy in professional fgooty today ,other than gas to run the clubs bus....and at the time we didn't take the money because we were in injury hell......IMHO good call ,to small,cant pass,and at 20 he wont get any bigger will he.....good luck to him though

75 Grand = 3/4 of Alan Lee.

75 Grand more to next seasons transfer budget.

nieros · Post by **nieros** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 5:03 pm

wow.

just...wow

vaalae · Post by **vaalae** » Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:16 pm

Im with Dubai and MMJR on this one, we didnt sell him at the time as we hoped he'd kick on (as Barron as done since then) and there would have been an outcry if he went for that fee at the time - its unfortunate for sure now, but thats hindsight.

Would however have been nice for BFJ to have either been honest in his assessment of Dean M (i.e. Take the $$) or to have taken him on for another season and put him out on loan (we benefit from the expected improvement of him playing week in week out when we try to sell him on hopefully)

Dubai Blue · Post by **Dubai Blue** » Wed Mar 29, 2006 7:25 am

Shed. I agree that it is a shame that now he goes for nothing and I'm sure JR would have taken te 75k if he knew in the window that noone would trump the 75k offer.

Agree with Valaee though except that we don't know how much salary was being paid while on loan. Maybe not much.

Tractor-Boys.com

Dean McDonald not offered new deal

Dean McDonald not offered new deal

Re: Dean McDonald not offered new deal

Re: Dean McDonald not offered new deal

Re: Dean McDonald not offered new deal