Lets all give thanks to uncle Mike....

[NG32]

Personally I find it cold comfort that Ashley might have inadvertantly ridden the credit crunch less close to the knuckle than other Premier league chairmen....none of who's clubs have actually gone under....yet.

 

It's like thanking Josef Fritzl for keeping Elizabeth out of danger all those years, if you ask me.

 

agreed on the analogy mind

 

question for you HF - what would you have MA do?  honestly, taking a balanced view of things as you seem able to do

 

 

Sorry to butt in but

 

Not allow our most consistent proformers to leave and only get the moneny back in installments while at the sametime doing our own rule of thumb of only buying players out right.

 

This rule AT the moment is going to f***ing f*** us.

 

you mean performer, singular; shay given...oh sorry yeah there was milner who was consistently average and worthless on the pitch

 

 

 

Still pulled in 12 mil for milner tho

 

4 or 5 mill

for n'zogbia

 

and 5 mil for Given from the richest club owners in the world.

 

 

[mrmojorisin75]

Personally I find it cold comfort that Ashley might have inadvertantly ridden the credit crunch less close to the knuckle than other Premier league chairmen....none of who's clubs have actually gone under....yet.

 

It's like thanking Josef Fritzl for keeping Elizabeth out of danger all those years, if you ask me.

 

agreed on the analogy mind

 

question for you HF - what would you have MA do?  honestly, taking a balanced view of things as you seem able to do

 

 

Sorry to butt in but

 

Not allow our most consistent proformers to leave and only get the moneny back in installments while at the sametime doing our own rule of thumb of only buying players out right.

 

This rule AT the moment is going to f***ing f*** us.

 

you mean performer, singular; shay given...oh sorry yeah there was milner who was consistently average and worthless on the pitch

 

 

 

Still pulled in 12 mil for milner tho

 

4 or 5 mill

for n'zogbia

 

and 5 mil for Given from the richest club owners in the world.

 

 

 

not disputed

 

 

[NG32]

Personally I find it cold comfort that Ashley might have inadvertantly ridden the credit crunch less close to the knuckle than other Premier league chairmen....none of who's clubs have actually gone under....yet.

 

It's like thanking Josef Fritzl for keeping Elizabeth out of danger all those years, if you ask me.

 

agreed on the analogy mind

 

question for you HF - what would you have MA do?  honestly, taking a balanced view of things as you seem able to do

 

 

Sorry to butt in but

 

Not allow our most consistent proformers to leave and only get the moneny back in installments while at the sametime doing our own rule of thumb of only buying players out right.

 

This rule AT the moment is going to f***ing f*** us.

 

you mean performer, singular; shay given...oh sorry yeah there was milner who was consistently average and worthless on the pitch

 

 

 

Still pulled in 12 mil for milner tho

 

4 or 5 mill

for n'zogbia

 

and 5 mil for Given from the richest club owners in the world.

 

 

 

not disputed

 

 

 

 

 

So what i'm saying is, his business plan makes no sense at the moment, I'm all for a well structured NUFC but when the club is on the brink he should maybe but his plan on the back burner until we are safe.

 

Ie not remove the chance of buying a player over installments.

 

Put that plan into place when we know we have a squad that can finish in a safe position.

[Happy Face]

Personally I find it cold comfort that Ashley might have inadvertantly ridden the credit crunch less close to the knuckle than other Premier league chairmen....none of who's clubs have actually gone under....yet.

 

It's like thanking Josef Fritzl for keeping Elizabeth out of danger all those years, if you ask me.

 

agreed on the analogy mind

 

question for you HF - what would you have MA do?  honestly, taking a balanced view of things as you seem able to do

 

I was perfectly happy with Ashley, even after Keegan walked I stood up for him, so I think I am balanced.  I thought he might have been petulant and was at it again....but what's happened since has convinced me otherwise (the payout will confirm it).  There's not much I'd need to give Ashley another chance...

 

1.  The least controversial.  Joe Kinnear has to go.  5 wins in 24 games is worse than Souness.  Worse than Roeder.  Worse than Allardyce.  Worse than Ozzie Ardiles.  Worse than Richard Dinnis, Bill Mcgarry or Jack Charlton.  He has no management pedigree whatsoever and has proven a complete flop.  Offering him a new contract is insane.  It wouldn't be expensive to get rid of him on his current short term deal and no matter how far this club sinks, we can attract better.  It doesn't need to be a top foreign man either.  The lower leagues have a lot better.  Why won't it happen?  Because he's a yes man.  They love him at the club because he tows the line, backs them in the press and has no qualms about getting on with whichever players they give him/leave him with.

 

2. Give the new man a budget and autonomy.  That's not to say he has to get the keys to the safe and enjoy himself.  But a Premier league football club needs to keep buying players year after year.  Whatever money that comes in from selling players should go straight back to the manager to spend on his first team targets.  Also a percentage of the TV money, gate receipts, commercial income etc. needs to go on players that will maintain that level of income.  Isn't it worth investing say £10M to guarantee £20M of TV money.  Very simplistic view I know but basically, that's exactly where we were at in January.

 

3. Employ a director of football who will delegate responsibility and and have confidence in his employees to do the job.  If Dennis Wise doesn't have faith in Kevin Keegan spotting a player he wants in his team, or dismissing one he doesn't, then he shouldn't have him in the job.  He should take on someone else who he does have that faith in and leave him to do it.  Similarly at the academy.  If he wants to be the one with final say in recruitment  in either of those areas then it's up to Ashley to say he can do the job himself, not to support him in running a puppet regime from behind the scenes.

 

4.  Stop the bullshit (see my sig).

 

[mrmojorisin75]

i agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment in the last 2 posts from HF & NG, however i have to say they are rather simplistic and both would involve either ashley finding more of his own money or increasing the club debt given the amount of turnover that is currently being eaten by wages

 

it's alright saying find 10m to guarantee 20m tv money but the 10m spent on players probably doubles with wages over the life of a contract and is basically what has led us to here...the 30-40m tv money we're already getting can't pay the fucking shithouses we've got so until they're gone i see no hope unless ashley pays, which he won't

 

anyway the point from HF about kinnear i could not agree more with, what a fucking disgrace...still it should truly blow away the myth ashley is only in it to make money 

[Dave]

  Well first of all we don't have to thank Ashley for anything, he didn't buy the club to save it, or to make the fans happy, he bought it because he thought it was a good piece of business at that time, which of course turned out to be a false assumption, but he only has himself to blame for not doing due diligence before buying. He paid off the debts because it would have been bad business to pay the interest, and since he owns the club it was essentially putting money from one of his pockets to another. On the same note, people complaining that he is taking money out of the club or asset strippig, are clearly complete idiots, it has been stated a thousand times that he had put in a considerable amount of cash just to keep the club running, and it wouldn't make any sense to take money out of a business which he owns 100% and generates big losses every year.

 

While it can't be debated that we're on a much stronger financial footing than we would've been without the takeover, I'm pretty concerned about Ashley's style of running the club, both from a financial and footballing standpoint. On the pitch we're in the worst position we've been since getting promoted, and Ashely's approach and especially the events of the last transfer window suggest that we won't be getting much better in the coming years, and I'm not sure that Ashley himself, or most people on this board for that matter, realise the potential consequences of that.

 

If we continue to operate the way we have been in the last two seasons the best we can hope for is to fight off relegation in the coming seasons, and even if we won't get relegated, this will greatly hurt the club's already dreadful finances. In the 05/06 season we had an average attendance of 52032, last season it was 51321, this season it's 48094 so far. If we continue to play the way we are right now, i can see this number declining further, especially under the current financial and economic climate, which means that our revenue will fall 1-2 millions every year (until we hit a low where only the hardcore fans remain, who doesn't give a toss about how bad the team is, just because it's their team). This would also mean a fall in merchandise I guess, especially since we won't have a Shearer/Owen type of big name player, whose name alone would sell a few thousand extra shirts every year.

 

Another financial issue with being shit on the pitch is sponsorship. The good thing is, that we can't get any less than we're getting this term because it has been spent already, the bad thing is that I can't see us finding a proper sponsor once the northern rock deal is up (economic situation etc.), in fact I won't be suprised at all to see a sport direct logo on our shirt in the near future, for free of course. That's probably another good 4-5 mill/year down the drain.

What makes it even worse is that we're already making a loss of 20m/y (at least on paper), and even if we'd manage to cut back on the wages considerably, well, i think it would be the greatest achievement in sport management history ever if we could decrease the wage bill, break even on transfers, and at the same time increase the depth and quality of the squad (esp. with Joe Kinnear as manager).

 

We might save around 9-10m on wages next year if Viduka and Owen departs in the summer, maybe 5-6m more if we get rid of a few other wasters, but we will have to replace them, pay with cash upfront for all those replacements and pay their wages, so we won't be able to save a lot. We could of course if we wouldn't replace them, in that case we'll go down, simple as that. Even if we'll be able to "achieve" the 7m loss next year that Llambias was talking about, it's still quite a few years until we can spend properly and bring in some quality, and in the meantime we will be fighting for our premiership status. And that's not taking into account the clown we have for manager. 

 

And to all those who think relegation wouldn't be a disaster, just think about the fact that we would lose ~22.5m of TV money, and that's including the parachute payments and championship tv revenue, and we would surely lose at least 50% of our gate receipts if not more, that's another 15-16m, so that means that we'd have to find 20+22.5+15= 57.5m somewhere to break even financially, which effectively means that we'd have to sell the whole fucking lot and field the reserves plus Shola Ameobi.

 

I might be a bit pessimistic about these things, but all in all the only way to generate income in football is by success on the field, and while I agree that the priority should be to keep down the spending and the wage bill, this is a very dangerous road we took. I hope MA will prove me wrong btw. 

 

Top post.

[Happy Face]

i agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment in the last 2 posts from HF & NG, however i have to say they are rather simplistic and both would involve either ashley finding more of his own money or increasing the club debt given the amount of turnover that is currently being eaten by wages

 

it's alright saying find 10m to guarantee 20m tv money but the 10m spent on players probably doubles with wages over the life of a contract and is basically what has led us to here...the 30-40m tv money we're already getting can't pay the fucking shithouses we've got so until they're gone i see no hope unless ashley pays, which he won't

 

But we were told the money was there to spend in January.  We had bids totalling £40m+ knocked back according to Llambias.

 

And if there's an expensive player the manager doesn't think is good enough....why can't he be loaned out?  Even on a percentage of his wage we'd save money.  It's a step not taken with an underperforming first teamer since Keegan loaned out Rozenhal and Ameobi.

[mrmojorisin75]

it is a top post but states facts without tackling the issue at hand, the OP pointed to 2 stories - one about valencia being fucked 'cause of debt and the other how hard sponsorship is to find for clubs, as gekkotime points out himself

 

we're in a world recession ffs, so i'll again ask the question; where is the money supposed to come from?  who is gonna loan it to us even if we wanted to

 

if we look back in 3-4 years and a number of clubs in debt haven't hit shit street i'll be amazed...i just don't see how it CAN'T happen

[mrmojorisin75]

i agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment in the last 2 posts from HF & NG, however i have to say they are rather simplistic and both would involve either ashley finding more of his own money or increasing the club debt given the amount of turnover that is currently being eaten by wages

 

it's alright saying find 10m to guarantee 20m tv money but the 10m spent on players probably doubles with wages over the life of a contract and is basically what has led us to here...the 30-40m tv money we're already getting can't pay the fucking shithouses we've got so until they're gone i see no hope unless ashley pays, which he won't

 

But we were told the money was there to spend in January.  We had bids totalling £40m+ knocked back according to Llambias.

 

And if there's an expensive player the manager doesn't think is good enough....why can't he be loaned out?  Even on a percentage of his wage we'd save money.  It's a step not taken with an underperforming first teamer since Keegan loaned out Rozenhal and Ameobi.

 

look i'm not tackling their fuckin lies, no point

 

as for loaning you can't make clubs take players, who'd take duff or smith on even a fraction of their wages?  jesus...at least rozenthal was considered a decent defender and ameobi had to drop a division and was shite...wonder why no-ones been back for him since?

[themanupstairs]

 

double :thup: for both posts mojorisin

[Happy Face]

i agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment in the last 2 posts from HF & NG, however i have to say they are rather simplistic and both would involve either ashley finding more of his own money or increasing the club debt given the amount of turnover that is currently being eaten by wages

 

it's alright saying find 10m to guarantee 20m tv money but the 10m spent on players probably doubles with wages over the life of a contract and is basically what has led us to here...the 30-40m tv money we're already getting can't pay the fucking shithouses we've got so until they're gone i see no hope unless ashley pays, which he won't

 

But we were told the money was there to spend in January.  We had bids totalling £40m+ knocked back according to Llambias.

 

And if there's an expensive player the manager doesn't think is good enough....why can't he be loaned out?  Even on a percentage of his wage we'd save money.  It's a step not taken with an underperforming first teamer since Keegan loaned out Rozenhal and Ameobi.

 

look i'm not tackling their fuckin lies, no point

 

as for loaning you can't make clubs take players, who'd take duff or smith on even a fraction of their wages?  jesus...at least rozenthal was considered a decent defender and ameobi had to drop a division and was shite...wonder why no-ones been back for him since?

 

It was more rhetorical than a dig mate.

 

Ameobi is the best we have avaiable at the moment so I wouldn't want to lose him now 

[mrmojorisin75]

i agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment in the last 2 posts from HF & NG, however i have to say they are rather simplistic and both would involve either ashley finding more of his own money or increasing the club debt given the amount of turnover that is currently being eaten by wages

 

it's alright saying find 10m to guarantee 20m tv money but the 10m spent on players probably doubles with wages over the life of a contract and is basically what has led us to here...the 30-40m tv money we're already getting can't pay the fucking shithouses we've got so until they're gone i see no hope unless ashley pays, which he won't

 

But we were told the money was there to spend in January.  We had bids totalling £40m+ knocked back according to Llambias.

 

And if there's an expensive player the manager doesn't think is good enough....why can't he be loaned out?  Even on a percentage of his wage we'd save money.  It's a step not taken with an underperforming first teamer since Keegan loaned out Rozenhal and Ameobi.

 

look i'm not tackling their fuckin lies, no point

 

as for loaning you can't make clubs take players, who'd take duff or smith on even a fraction of their wages?  jesus...at least rozenthal was considered a decent defender and ameobi had to drop a division and was shite...wonder why no-ones been back for him since?

 

It was more rhetorical than a dig mate.

 

Ameobi is the best we have avaiable at the moment so I wouldn't want to lose him now 

 

  didn't it as dig actually dude, just read back that way...fuckin lyin bastards though eh?

[ikri]

i agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment in the last 2 posts from HF & NG, however i have to say they are rather simplistic and both would involve either ashley finding more of his own money or increasing the club debt given the amount of turnover that is currently being eaten by wages

 

it's alright saying find 10m to guarantee 20m tv money but the 10m spent on players probably doubles with wages over the life of a contract and is basically what has led us to here...the 30-40m tv money we're already getting can't pay the fucking shithouses we've got so until they're gone i see no hope unless ashley pays, which he won't

 

But we were told the money was there to spend in January.  We had bids totalling £40m+ knocked back according to Llambias.

 

And if there's an expensive player the manager doesn't think is good enough....why can't he be loaned out?  Even on a percentage of his wage we'd save money.  It's a step not taken with an underperforming first teamer since Keegan loaned out Rozenhal and Ameobi.

 

With the exception of Duff & Owen, our high-earning low-performing players have also been crocked most of the season too.

 

Who is going to pay Alan Smith's £60000 per week wages knowing that he hasn't played in a competitive game for 8-9 months?  Who is going to give Viduka his £80000 per week wages knowing that he's never more than 10 minutes away from yet another niggling injury that'll keep him out for the season?

 

If it weren't for the transfer windows we may have been able to shift some of the garbage out on loan but that's a whole different thread.

[Happy Face]

i agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment in the last 2 posts from HF & NG, however i have to say they are rather simplistic and both would involve either ashley finding more of his own money or increasing the club debt given the amount of turnover that is currently being eaten by wages

 

it's alright saying find 10m to guarantee 20m tv money but the 10m spent on players probably doubles with wages over the life of a contract and is basically what has led us to here...the 30-40m tv money we're already getting can't pay the fucking shithouses we've got so until they're gone i see no hope unless ashley pays, which he won't

 

But we were told the money was there to spend in January.  We had bids totalling £40m+ knocked back according to Llambias.

 

And if there's an expensive player the manager doesn't think is good enough....why can't he be loaned out?  Even on a percentage of his wage we'd save money.  It's a step not taken with an underperforming first teamer since Keegan loaned out Rozenhal and Ameobi.

 

With the exception of Duff & Owen, our high-earning low-performing players have also been crocked most of the season too.

 

Who is going to pay Alan Smith's £60000 per week wages knowing that he hasn't played in a competitive game for 8-9 months?  Who is going to give Viduka his £80000 per week wages knowing that he's never more than 10 minutes away from yet another niggling injury that'll keep him out for the season?

 

If it weren't for the transfer windows we may have been able to shift some of the garbage out on loan but that's a whole different thread.

 

Frightening innit.

 

The squad already lacks the depth needed.

 

We're just letting the contracts run out on Cacapa, Owen and Viduka.

 

Gonna keep paying Duff, Geremi, Smith and Xisco to play in the reserves because no-one wants them.

 

Carroll and Edgar are the only "reserves" with first ream experience so there's no-one to come through and replace them.

 

...and we're spending fuck all because there's a credit crunch.

[Cronky]

 

I might be a bit pessimistic about these things, but all in all the only way to generate income in football is by success on the field, and while I agree that the priority should be to keep down the spending and the wage bill, this is a very dangerous road we took. I hope MA will prove me wrong btw. 

 

 

This final paragraph kind of hints at the alternative to Ashley's strategy, which is a speculate-to-accumulate policy of forking out for established players in the hope that you can then recoup the outlay by success on the field.

 

Aside from the fact that we have Leeds as an example of what can happen with a run of bad results, is this a strategy that can work in the present climate ? With the gap between the top four and the rest being so large, and the huge cost, in fees and wages, of attracting the best players to a non-Champions League team, you could easily end up spending £50 million and end up with a team that's in the relegation zone.

 

Even a few years ago, it was a risky strategy, but now it seems completely unrealistic.

[Wallace]

i agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment in the last 2 posts from HF & NG, however i have to say they are rather simplistic and both would involve either ashley finding more of his own money or increasing the club debt given the amount of turnover that is currently being eaten by wages

 

it's alright saying find 10m to guarantee 20m tv money but the 10m spent on players probably doubles with wages over the life of a contract and is basically what has led us to here...the 30-40m tv money we're already getting can't pay the f***ing shithouses we've got so until they're gone i see no hope unless ashley pays, which he won't

 

But we were told the money was there to spend in January.  We had bids totalling £40m+ knocked back according to Llambias.

 

And if there's an expensive player the manager doesn't think is good enough....why can't he be loaned out?  Even on a percentage of his wage we'd save money.  It's a step not taken with an underperforming first teamer since Keegan loaned out Rozenhal and Ameobi.

 

With the exception of Duff & Owen, our high-earning low-performing players have also been crocked most of the season too.

 

Who is going to pay Alan Smith's £60000 per week wages knowing that he hasn't played in a competitive game for 8-9 months?  Who is going to give Viduka his £80000 per week wages knowing that he's never more than 10 minutes away from yet another niggling injury that'll keep him out for the season?

 

If it weren't for the transfer windows we may have been able to shift some of the garbage out on loan but that's a whole different thread.

 

Frightening innit.

 

The squad already lacks the depth needed.

 

We're just letting the contracts run out on Cacapa, Owen and Viduka.

 

Gonna keep paying Duff, Geremi, Smith and Xisco to play in the reserves because no-one wants them.

 

Carroll and Edgar are the only "reserves" with first ream experience so there's no-one to come through and replace them.

 

...and we're spending f*** all because there's a credit crunch.

 

Getting back to the paying up front for players thing.  If we have to buy replacements for Cacapa, Owen and Viduka for a start and then possibly Bassong, Barton etc.  The first 3 will all be leaving on a free so no transfer fee will be coming in just a saving on wages but if we are only going to receive fees in instalments for the other players leaving and we need to buy 6 or more players, how on earth are we going to pay for them if we insist on paying for them in full?

[ikri]

i agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment in the last 2 posts from HF & NG, however i have to say they are rather simplistic and both would involve either ashley finding more of his own money or increasing the club debt given the amount of turnover that is currently being eaten by wages

 

it's alright saying find 10m to guarantee 20m tv money but the 10m spent on players probably doubles with wages over the life of a contract and is basically what has led us to here...the 30-40m tv money we're already getting can't pay the fucking shithouses we've got so until they're gone i see no hope unless ashley pays, which he won't

 

But we were told the money was there to spend in January.  We had bids totalling £40m+ knocked back according to Llambias.

 

And if there's an expensive player the manager doesn't think is good enough....why can't he be loaned out?  Even on a percentage of his wage we'd save money.  It's a step not taken with an underperforming first teamer since Keegan loaned out Rozenhal and Ameobi.

 

With the exception of Duff & Owen, our high-earning low-performing players have also been crocked most of the season too.

 

Who is going to pay Alan Smith's £60000 per week wages knowing that he hasn't played in a competitive game for 8-9 months?  Who is going to give Viduka his £80000 per week wages knowing that he's never more than 10 minutes away from yet another niggling injury that'll keep him out for the season?

 

If it weren't for the transfer windows we may have been able to shift some of the garbage out on loan but that's a whole different thread.

 

Frightening innit.

 

The squad already lacks the depth needed.

 

We're just letting the contracts run out on Cacapa, Owen and Viduka.

 

Gonna keep paying Duff, Geremi, Smith and Xisco to play in the reserves because no-one wants them.

 

Carroll and Edgar are the only "reserves" with first ream experience so there's no-one to come through and replace them.

 

...and we're spending fuck all because there's a credit crunch.

 

I mentioned my idea for Cacapa, Viduka, Owen, Duff, Geremi & Smith a while back.  It mostly involved the Otterburn training grounds, a live fire exercise, a "team building" session & a missing mini-bus.

 

Those 6 players are costing us somewhere in the region of £20 million per season.  Owen & Duff are the only ones who have really featured in the first team this season & they've managed to justify their wages when they have featured only sporadically.

 

Joey Barton can probably be added to the list too.  He's looked good when he's been out of jail & fit but that hasn't happened often enough.  Plus there seemed to be a real desire last summer to either cut his wages drastically or get shot of him, too much money, too much bad press & too few games.

[Happy Face]

 

I might be a bit pessimistic about these things, but all in all the only way to generate income in football is by success on the field, and while I agree that the priority should be to keep down the spending and the wage bill, this is a very dangerous road we took. I hope MA will prove me wrong btw. 

 

 

This final paragraph kind of hints at the alternative to Ashley's strategy, which is a speculate-to-accumulate policy of forking out for established players in the hope that you can then recoup the outlay by success on the field.

 

Aside from the fact that we have Leeds as an example of what can happen with a run of bad results, is this a strategy that can work in the present climate ? With the gap between the top four and the rest being so large, and the huge cost, in fees and wages, of attracting the best players to a non-Champions League team, you could easily end up spending £50 million and end up with a team that's in the relegation zone.

 

Even a few years ago, it was a risky strategy, but now it seems completely unrealistic.

 

I get bored of Leeds being trotted out as a cautionary tale to everyone in the league.  One example of a club that speculated and failed....but let's not forget they are still living to tell the tale.  "Doing a Leeds" isn't the end of a club.  It's highly likely they'll be in the same division as us next year ffs, even with all our frugality.

 

What we did in the 90's shows that speculation works.  The same as Villa are doing now.

 

Look at the bottom five....

 

Newcastle

Portsmouth

Blackburn

Middlesbrough

West Brom

 

What have they got in common?  None of them have a net spend of more than £6m over the past two years.

 

Look at the next nine up...

 

West Ham

Man City

Wigan

Fulham

Bolton

Tottenham

Sunderland

Hull

Stoke

 

Only Bolton and Wigan have managed to get in this position with a net spend less than £10m in 2 years.

 

In football, the speculators DO accumulate.

[Frazzle]

i agree wholeheartedly with the sentiment in the last 2 posts from HF & NG, however i have to say they are rather simplistic and both would involve either ashley finding more of his own money or increasing the club debt given the amount of turnover that is currently being eaten by wages

 

it's alright saying find 10m to guarantee 20m tv money but the 10m spent on players probably doubles with wages over the life of a contract and is basically what has led us to here...the 30-40m tv money we're already getting can't pay the f***ing shithouses we've got so until they're gone i see no hope unless ashley pays, which he won't

 

Carroll and Edgar are the only "reserves" with first ream experience so there's no-one to come through and replace them.

 

This doesn't even make sense, you can only come into the first team if you have first team experience?  How are you supposed to get first team experience if you aren't allowed to step up?  I thought the whole point was the 'reserves' come into the first team to prove themselves.

[Happy Face]

Carroll and Edgar are the only "reserves" with first ream experience so there's no-one to come through and replace them.

 

This doesn't even make sense, you can only come into the first team if you have first team experience?  How are you supposed to get first team experience if you aren't allowed to step up?  I thought the whole point was the 'reserves' come into the first team to prove themselves.

 

The plan we've been sold is that talented youth will replace expensive flops.

 

My point is that none of the youth brought in over the last 2 years are anywhere near ready to step up to be first team regulars.

 

The only two that have made the starting 11 this year made their first team debut's almost 3 years back.  And they've only managed a few starts between them.

[relámpago blanco]

Carroll and Edgar are the only "reserves" with first ream experience so there's no-one to come through and replace them.

 

This doesn't even make sense, you can only come into the first team if you have first team experience?  How are you supposed to get first team experience if you aren't allowed to step up?  I thought the whole point was the 'reserves' come into the first team to prove themselves.

 

The plan we've been sold is that talented youth will replace expensive flops.

 

My point is that none of the youth brought in over the last 2 years are anywhere near ready to step up to be first team regulars.

 

The only two that have made the starting 11 this year made their first team debut's almost 3 years back.  And they've only managed a few starts between them.

Is Bassong not ready?

[Happy Face]

Carroll and Edgar are the only "reserves" with first ream experience so there's no-one to come through and replace them.

 

This doesn't even make sense, you can only come into the first team if you have first team experience?  How are you supposed to get first team experience if you aren't allowed to step up?  I thought the whole point was the 'reserves' come into the first team to prove themselves.

 

The plan we've been sold is that talented youth will replace expensive flops.

 

My point is that none of the youth brought in over the last 2 years are anywhere near ready to step up to be first team regulars.

 

The only two that have made the starting 11 this year made their first team debut's almost 3 years back.  And they've only managed a few starts between them.

Is Bassong not ready?

 

Bassong is a godlike blessing.

 

There's no more of him.

[TRon]

 

I might be a bit pessimistic about these things, but all in all the only way to generate income in football is by success on the field, and while I agree that the priority should be to keep down the spending and the wage bill, this is a very dangerous road we took. I hope MA will prove me wrong btw. 

 

 

This final paragraph kind of hints at the alternative to Ashley's strategy, which is a speculate-to-accumulate policy of forking out for established players in the hope that you can then recoup the outlay by success on the field.

 

Aside from the fact that we have Leeds as an example of what can happen with a run of bad results, is this a strategy that can work in the present climate ? With the gap between the top four and the rest being so large, and the huge cost, in fees and wages, of attracting the best players to a non-Champions League team, you could easily end up spending £50 million and end up with a team that's in the relegation zone.

 

Even a few years ago, it was a risky strategy, but now it seems completely unrealistic.

 

I get bored of Leeds being trotted out as a cautionary tale to everyone in the league.  One example of a club that speculated and failed....but let's not forget they are still living to tell the tale.  "Doing a Leeds" isn't the end of a club.  It's highly likely they'll be in the same division as us next year ffs, even with all our frugality.

 

What we did in the 90's shows that speculation works.  The same as Villa are doing now.

 

Look at the bottom five....

 

Newcastle

Portsmouth

Blackburn

Middlesbrough

West Brom

 

What have they got in common?  None of them have a net spend of more than £6m over the past two years.

 

Look at the next nine up...

 

West Ham

Man City

Wigan

Fulham

Bolton

Tottenham

Sunderland

Hull

Stoke

 

Only Bolton and Wigan have managed to get in this position with a net spend less than £10m in 2 years.

 

In football, the speculators DO accumulate.

 

Why aren't we 5th in the table then seeing as we are the fifth biggest spenders on footballer salaries? Even without any handy facts and figures at hand, I know before Ashley came here we weren't getting anything like the results our spending warranted. Please, no one mention X number of seasons in Europe, this isn't a pissing contest, let's just debate with some honesty about whether we were performing well considering money outlaid. Then we can compare it with what's happening now.

[ikri]

Carroll and Edgar are the only "reserves" with first ream experience so there's no-one to come through and replace them.

 

This doesn't even make sense, you can only come into the first team if you have first team experience?  How are you supposed to get first team experience if you aren't allowed to step up?  I thought the whole point was the 'reserves' come into the first team to prove themselves.

 

The plan we've been sold is that talented youth will replace expensive flops.

 

My point is that none of the youth brought in over the last 2 years are anywhere near ready to step up to be first team regulars.

 

The only two that have made the starting 11 this year made their first team debut's almost 3 years back.  And they've only managed a few starts between them.

 

That's the problem with youth players, they take time to develop.

 

I'd really like to see the club send those players getting close to the first team out on loan to Hartlepool & Darlo.  Middlesbrough, who have an enviable youth record, have sent their best & brightest out on loan to clubs like Darlo for a while and everyone involved has benefited from it.  The players get the first team experience they need, Boro get experienced youth players & Darlo get players for free.

 

We should be setting up agreements with League One & Two teams and perhaps a couple of foreign teams to get the players the experience they're not going to get in the reserves here.

[Happy Face]

 

I might be a bit pessimistic about these things, but all in all the only way to generate income in football is by success on the field, and while I agree that the priority should be to keep down the spending and the wage bill, this is a very dangerous road we took. I hope MA will prove me wrong btw. 

 

 

This final paragraph kind of hints at the alternative to Ashley's strategy, which is a speculate-to-accumulate policy of forking out for established players in the hope that you can then recoup the outlay by success on the field.

 

Aside from the fact that we have Leeds as an example of what can happen with a run of bad results, is this a strategy that can work in the present climate ? With the gap between the top four and the rest being so large, and the huge cost, in fees and wages, of attracting the best players to a non-Champions League team, you could easily end up spending £50 million and end up with a team that's in the relegation zone.

 

Even a few years ago, it was a risky strategy, but now it seems completely unrealistic.

 

I get bored of Leeds being trotted out as a cautionary tale to everyone in the league.  One example of a club that speculated and failed....but let's not forget they are still living to tell the tale.  "Doing a Leeds" isn't the end of a club.  It's highly likely they'll be in the same division as us next year ffs, even with all our frugality.

 

What we did in the 90's shows that speculation works.  The same as Villa are doing now.

 

Look at the bottom five....

 

Newcastle

Portsmouth

Blackburn

Middlesbrough

West Brom

 

What have they got in common?  None of them have a net spend of more than £6m over the past two years.

 

Look at the next nine up...

 

West Ham

Man City

Wigan

Fulham

Bolton

Tottenham

Sunderland

Hull

Stoke

 

Only Bolton and Wigan have managed to get in this position with a net spend less than £10m in 2 years.

 

In football, the speculators DO accumulate.

 

Why aren't we 5th in the table then seeing as we are the fifth biggest spenders on footballer salaries? Even without any handy facts and figures at hand, I know before Ashley came here we weren't getting anything like the results our spending warranted. Please, no one mention X number of seasons in Europe, this isn't a pissing contest, let's just debate with some honesty about whether we were performing well considering money outlaid. Then we can compare it with what's happening now.

 

Same reason Leeds went down.

 

Spending guarantees nothing.  Just improves your chances dramatically.

 

....and we were never in the bottom five, one point off relegation....