Guest neesy111 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I don't get you neesy, I just start thinking you're a reasonable poster then you go on a couple of days of unmitigated nonsense. Just like yourself then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I don't get you neesy, I just start thinking you're a reasonable poster then you go on a couple of days of unmitigated nonsense. Just like yourself then. OK. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
loki679 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 If the new TV deal gives us an extra £25m then our revenue should be around £120m. With wages of £64m that puts us at about 52% turnover/wages. Not too shabby at all. We broke even last season as I recall so should be on course to post a £25m or so profit this season, money that could and should go towards strengthening the first team. We could spend £20m and still post a decent profit. Fuck it, i'm gonna wank myself silly because some cockney billionaire I don't know is making lots of money instead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 If the new TV deal gives us an extra £25m then our revenue should be around £120m. With wages of £64m that puts us at about 52% turnover/wages. Not too shabby at all. We broke even last season as I recall so should be on course to post a £25m or so profit this season, money that could and should go towards strengthening the first team. We could spend £20m and still post a decent profit. Fuck it, i'm gonna wank myself silly because some cockney billionaire I don't know is making lots of money instead. We broke even in 11/12, including paying back Ashley 12M. Suspect we were fine last season as well. It's pretty clear what's going on, Ashley is trying to claw back as much as possible with keeping us in the PL each season. It's probably been to the detriment of Pardew and the team they finished 5th as he expects it again on a shoestring budget. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 what the fuck happened in here man? i'm in the ian w camp for once, we're not totally fucked or anything...if the remy and gomis deals both come off, which is very possible, then we transform instantly into something looking very different indeed we're on a knife edge though, if neither deal comes off then as dave says we might well be headed down a bad path again,but i honestly think we'll start the season with at least one of gomis or remy and cisse then it's all down to our incompetent coward of a manager, cool as ice Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmk Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 On the whole who is to blame issue, I'm of the opinion that it's more the quality of the squad than the manager. So, I'm happy to keep Pardew providing the squad is improved. Keep telling yourself you're only smoking it! There was a Fink Tank article a while back that looked at the impact of replacing "under performing" managers which found that there was a honeymoon period for the "upgrade" before results reverted to how they were previously. Ergo, squad quality is far more significant than the manager. Obviously there will be some miracle worker managers out there, but what is the likelihood that we get that lucky. How many clubs get that lucky? Players are in general much more important than managers, the managers job is basically not to do too much damage. Last season Pardew did a bit, but I wouldn't say he always will. In the right circumstances he can sustain a positive environment and a good run, as we saw the season before. If I thought we would bring in someone of genuine quality then obviously I would want him replaced, but I don't think Ashley is very likely to do that. I don't believe that for a second, you seriously think that? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 By the way, all I was responding to was 'we're fucked if Gouffran starts' claim by Wullie. I wasn't making any sweeping statements about the squad in general, although I do think it's fairly good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 The manager is always the most important person of a club. There's a reason why clubs sack them and can pay big compo for new one's. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 On the whole who is to blame issue, I'm of the opinion that it's more the quality of the squad than the manager. So, I'm happy to keep Pardew providing the squad is improved. Keep telling yourself you're only smoking it! There was a Fink Tank article a while back that looked at the impact of replacing "under performing" managers which found that there was a honeymoon period for the "upgrade" before results reverted to how they were previously. Ergo, squad quality is far more significant than the manager. Obviously there will be some miracle worker managers out there, but what is the likelihood that we get that lucky. How many clubs get that lucky? Players are in general much more important than managers, the managers job is basically not to do too much damage. Last season Pardew did a bit, but I wouldn't say he always will. In the right circumstances he can sustain a positive environment and a good run, as we saw the season before. If I thought we would bring in someone of genuine quality then obviously I would want him replaced, but I don't think Ashley is very likely to do that. I don't believe that for a second, you seriously think that? It's obviously not quite as simple as that, but ultimately yes. The best group of players is much more important than the best manager. He has to just set them up with a plan and let them do their thing. Maybe that's not the best way to phrase it, but I do think the importance of the manager is often overemphasised. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDT Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I didn't think we'd react so badly to a failed bid for Darren Bent. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmk Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Fair play man, not the way I look at it at all. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 The manager is always the most important person of a club. There's a reason why clubs sack them and can pay big compo for new one's. He's more important than any individual player (with a few exceptions e.g. Bale for Spurs), but he's not more important the sum total of the players. Obviously pretty hard to prove either way, but that's my belief. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishmael Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 The manager is always the most important person of a club. There's a reason why clubs sack them and can pay big compo for new one's. He's more important than any individual player (with a few exceptions e.g. Bale for Spurs), but he's not more important the sum total of the players. Obviously pretty hard to prove either way, but that's my belief. Erm, the Fink Tank research. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishmael Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I didn't think we'd react so badly to a failed bid for Darren Bent. Best is, we didn't even bid Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest neesy111 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 The manager is always the most important person of a club. There's a reason why clubs sack them and can pay big compo for new one's. He's more important than any individual player (with a few exceptions e.g. Bale for Spurs), but he's not more important the sum total of the players. Obviously pretty hard to prove either way, but that's my belief. I think the way we sacked Bobby for Souness which saw us go from 5th to 13th, might be an argument against that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 The manager is always the most important person of a club. There's a reason why clubs sack them and can pay big compo for new one's. He's more important than any individual player (with a few exceptions e.g. Bale for Spurs), but he's not more important the sum total of the players. Obviously pretty hard to prove either way, but that's my belief. I think the way we sacked Bobby for Souness which saw us go from 5th to 13th, might be an argument against that. It might be, yes. But it's only one example. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmk Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 C'mon Ian there is about a million examples in history where a manager has come in and improved a team's fortunes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 C'mon Ian there is about a million examples in history where a manager has come in and improved a team's fortunes. Course there is, but also ones where a manager has improved a team for a while then failed, where he has made no difference, where he has made things worse, where he has done 'a good job' but a bad set of players still got relegated, etc etc. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 i think what ian says only applies for teams stuck in mediocrity, if you want to win something or successfully fight relegation then the manager is everything Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishmael Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 C'mon Ian there is about a million examples in history where a manager has come in and improved a team's fortunes. And yet the research shows that most of the time it's a short term improvement only. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmk Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 C'mon Ian there is about a million examples in history where a manager has come in and improved a team's fortunes. And yet the research shows that most of the time it's a short term improvement only. Is that not because there are a load of average managers about compared to the really good ones? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ishmael Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Most managers are deemed "average", there are few managers capable of making that significant, sustained improvement and that the quality of the players is the most significant factor. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Bailey Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 I guess you pays your money and you takes your choice. I can see what Ian and "the positives" are thinking , whilst personally being more in the "pessimists" corner. On paper the squad we have, the talent at our disposal, is more than enough to secure premiership status and survival. A half competent manager should easily be able to get that squad safe and maybe pushing the top half , say 12th and upwards (not anywhere near top 4 obvs)... Given 2/3 or hey lets be totally optimistic 4, signings that we need, in the right postions and the top 7 upwards is a realistic shout (much nearer to top 4 as well imo). The problem lies in not the lack of transfer activity, although that is frustrating enough, but in the lack of clarity and vision in it for me. I have no faith in the ownership of our club. He wants out imo, and is merely treading water. I also am in the camp of he wants to make us, the fans hurt. he wants to pay us back for the insults, the acrimony and the general fact that a lot of us, maybe not the majority, but a sizeable minority want him gone and do not care for him and his cronies one jot. He will do just enough, just enough to try and protect our PL status, whilst clawing his dosh back. TBH thats all by the by. The JK appointment is not just bizarre, its malicious imo: will it impact on the season?? Some say no, not onto the players and the team on the filed. Im not so sure. How many of us are distarcetdby managerial changes and wranglings at work? How many of us take the foot off the pedal when a change is imminent or confusion reigns?? , hands up, I know I do. Will some of our players maybe be affected similarly? A bad start and the morale crashes?? The lack of vision in the transfer in of players in respect of team building is the heart of the on field problems. Our manager is a poor one. I dont think hes capable of change, of learning from mistakes made last season, of the ultra negative approach being changed to a more free flowing and attack minded style. I think hes limited. Couple his limitations with the disoragnised recruitment that appears to be pervaiding the club and its a potential car crash. The cheapest option isn't always the right option.nor is it always the wrong option, imo we should be targetting players to enhance a particular style of play. I know people mock Liverpool and Rodgers with his "project", but that kind of thing, in the long term, and if folllowed up on, is the way to go imo. Having a plan, a long term vision and a particular style of play, getting the right players to fit the right postions, to get the right balance. Seems obvious. The right pegs for the right holes. Whats the point of Bent for insatnce if we dont improve our supply from wide areas? We arent "massivley f***ed". Thats a fair point. But.... I can envisage a scenario wherbys given a poor start , given some rumblings and further "odd" or plain malicious decisions by our owner we could be in for a very tricky season. I wouldnt bet against it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Thanks George, good post. I can envisage a tricky season as well, if we start really badly or get loads of injuries. But overall I'm of the view that this season is likely to be quite a bit better than last. (I don't believe Ashley is doing anything to hurt the fans, he just doesn't care either way. But that's kind of a side discussion) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colinmk Posted August 1, 2013 Share Posted August 1, 2013 Most managers are deemed "average", there are few managers capable of making that significant, sustained improvement and that the quality of the players is the most significant factor. There are also plenty of managers who do a shit job too though, with an average or good set of players. If the quality of players were the most significant factor then why would the team be doing so shit? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts