It is hugely frustrating to finish last season on such a high only to see Olise and possibly Eze move on by activating release clauses. Could this have been avoided? Probably not. Both were successful in the Championship, obviously talented, and clearly ambitious. Release clauses gave them control over their future and I doubt they would have signed for us without them. We find ourselves in a catch 22 . Players of their ability won’t sign for us without a release clause or stay at Palace unless we qualify for Europe, but without them Europe is beyond our grasp. It’s a measure of where we are as a club currently.

We need DF to find new gems each season, the academy to produce our own young talent, and most of all Oliver Glasner to build a successful top half team using both if we are to move to “the next level”, which for us is being in the hunt for Conference and Europa League places each season. Meantime we will have to get used to losing our best players each summer. How well we spend the money that generates will determine our future success. You only have to look at the Weed to see how precarious being in this position can be.

Edited by Palacesince64 (10 Jul 2024 12.26pm)

They are seemingly a necessary evil to convince these types of players to pick us over more successful clubs.

As gut-wrenching as it was to see Olise leave for that fee, ask yourself when we signed him whether you'd accept three brilliant seasons and a £30m+ profit at the end of it. The answer is surely yes.

The trick is that we need to push on ourselves, move up the table, try and get into a European competition and therefore we become a more attractive proposition automatically and our bargaining position becomes stronger.

Easier said than done but we have a good manager and a head of recruitment in place, if that is backed up with the required investment (it hasn't always in the past) we can keep moving up.

We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold...

We are stuck in a bit of a catch 22 situation right now.

Big enough to almighty at be an established Premier League side with the attraction that goes with it. Certainly big enough to lure players from abroad and the lower leagues and to be attractive enough to a younger player at one of the bigger sides where they struggle for game time.

But not a huge fish in the pond so when we do unearth these nuggets someone else is always watching and will come in and pick off the best.

Having a release clause is part of that an indicator that we will not stand in a players way when the big clubs come knocking. This probably gives is an edge in attracting the talent.

Big trick is keeping finding the players but as we do sell on at profit we have the opportunity to re invest.

It all depends who inserts a buyout clause. If it’s done by the club, no problem, we are protecting our interest . If the player does, not good, as they are protecting themselves with a view to move on.

No other player at the club has a buyout clause, unless someone has hard proof they have and who’s favour is it in.

By the same token, nobody on here can prove that players’ contracts don’t include such clauses in the absence of the visibility of the contracts.

I’m not in favour of them in principle , even though I understand the counter arguments .

If we have to have them ,it seems preposterous that Olise has been able to leave almost before the ink on his long term contract is dry.

Perhaps, to avoid running the risk of losing a few at the same time the clauses should be staggered to avoid such upheaval e.g Olise kicks in this summer, but Eze’s couldn’t be triggered until next summer , Wharton’s the following summer (unless the clu choose otherwise).
This assumes there are such clauses in contracts of other players.

At least that way the club retains some sort of control over future planning.

It isn't a 100% certainty that each young prospect we bring in has to have a release clause. It really depends upon a number of circumstances. Often when a player is plucked from the Championship he is so keen on the move that he will agree to no release clause if the buying club wont agree to one. Wharton is an example. The club also added a layer of protection to his value by signing him to a 5 year contract. With Wharton's potential he he likey to be highly sought after in the first three years of that contract. Thats when you offer him a new deal (without a release clause/with one that's stupid money). He accepts and its happy days. If he rejects it the club will be in a Marc Guehi situation. Reluctantly selling him but on the club's terms and for his true value.
Olise and Eze (IF true-we do not know for sure he has a release clause, only media speculation)are isolated cases. The club probably knew Olise certainly was looking for a stepping stone. Somewhere to learn and improve before he moved to a top club but did not want to be tied to hard to that club. This is a business at the end of the day and the arrangement suited both parties. Lets not forget he had the opportunity to walk a year ago but decided he was still happy where he is and in exchange for a higher release figure agreed to stay put.
There will undoubtedly be more cases like this in the future but I dont believe they will become the rule but will remain the exception.