Johnny Evans left a couple of weeks ago for around £3.5 million, in what looks like one of the bargains of the summer for Leicester. Many in the local media, and also fans after reading the rationale, were frustrated but understood the reasons why the club put the option in the contract, as it allowed us to sign a top class centre half who was used to winning things in his career.
We have however since found out that at least 4 players have these relegation release clauses in their contracts and this is now resulting in a real period of uncertainty, as the club know that these players could leave on the final day of the window with us having no power to stop them, but equally they might all end up having to stay and we may have spent a lot of money on replacements, going over budget and hurting our FFP position.
Due to the lack of structure at the club, and the continued poor recruitment by Lai's administration (Terraneo being the latest example), it is hard to imagine that the club are going to pull a few rabbits out of the hat in the final month of the window and somehow clear the decks while recruiting a number of successful replacements.
It has got me thinking about the apparant recent culture at the club to offer release clauses in players contracts, and if this was a wise decision. Now some will argue that we had to offer it to get these players (including the local media), but as far as I can see, neither Swansea nor Stoke are in this position and yet they also signed a number of very good players in recent years, so clearly release clauses were not something we HAD to offer so freely.
Instead, it appears this was a risky choice the club chose to include in players contracts in the Tony Pulis era, possibly even driven by Pulis himself. Pulis after all had a lot of power at the club (if the reports are true), and he would have known that if we were to be relegated, he would have been sacked anyway so would not have needed to deal with the risk associated with these contracts. He would only get the benefits, ie, getting the players over the line without letting negotiations drag on.
It is this short term thinking which puts the club in the long term in a dangerous position, and proves just how important a director of football or technical director is.
A manager only thinks about his (or her) short reign (average 2 years). They don't care about the bigger picture, just their own success. Had a competent director of football been in place and had the final say, I doubt that so many players would have had these release clauses as the director of football would have recognised the position the club may have been put in should we get relegated.
Now however, we sit here in the final 4-5 weeks of the transfer window, with 3 ticking time bombs on our books in Hegazi, Rondon and Chadli, all with a 50-60% chance of having their release clause met, and others like Dawson putting in transfer requests. We probably need 1 back up goalkeeper, atleast 1 more centre back (but equally we might need 2 or 3 if Hegazi and Dawson go), another wide man, another central midfielder and maybe 2 more strikers. All of this because we do not have full control of our own destiny this window.
Next time you think "why do we need a director of football", remember the short term thinking of the Tony Pulis era, and remember the position we sit it now, feeling very unstable and unable to plan. Directors of football are vital.
