Fop 1 Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Tbf though surely if you want to run a sustainable fooball club there isn't much else in the way of options but to run a transfer policy such as this?Of course going behind your managers back isn't the way to go but unless you have an owner willing to put in £100m+ of his own money (which if Ashely isn't prepared to do that's up to him, it's his money not ours) you can't afford to spunk out all of this money on transfer fees and wages without getting massively into debt like we were starting to do under Shepherd and Leeds did dramatically under Ridsdale. If you want to spend more money you have to make that money by either buying players young and cheap and selling them on at big profits or gaining more tv/prize money by doing better in the league/Europe. Maybe you can run a "sustainable" football club that way, but crack the "Top 4" (soon to be Top 5) I very much doubt it. The idea Ashley was peddling was slow sustained development, not infinite mediocrity and a nice profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 The idea Ashley was peddling was slow sustained development, not infinite mediocrity and a nice profit. But we've now sustained that Ashley is a liar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NJS 3960 Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I've no objection to not going stupid but think the least we should expect is for all net income via STs and TV to be spent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Kelly 1115 Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 Tbf though surely if you want to run a sustainable fooball club there isn't much else in the way of options but to run a transfer policy such as this?Of course going behind your managers back isn't the way to go but unless you have an owner willing to put in £100m+ of his own money (which if Ashely isn't prepared to do that's up to him, it's his money not ours) you can't afford to spunk out all of this money on transfer fees and wages without getting massively into debt like we were starting to do under Shepherd and Leeds did dramatically under Ridsdale. If you want to spend more money you have to make that money by either buying players young and cheap and selling them on at big profits or gaining more tv/prize money by doing better in the league/Europe. Maybe you can run a "sustainable" football club that way, but crack the "Top 4" (soon to be Top 5) I very much doubt it. The idea Ashley was peddling was slow sustained development, not infinite mediocrity and a nice profit. Very true, but very soon you will see that there is no way you can get past the money of Manure, Chelski and Citeh (provding everything is as it seems). This leaves Arsenal and the bin dippers, and it may be possible to surpass one of these if they stay under their current ownership and one of them misses out on the champions league a couple of years in a row and starts to feel the pinch financially. But I think we will soon see the senario that no one will be able to seriously challenge those top few spots without a cash imput that comes from outside of their normal revenue. On that basis if Ashely isn't willing/able to provide this additional imput then the only way to run the club is with the transfer policy they are following and try to win that second league behind the rich five. This may be disapointing senario and could be classed as a mediocrity of sorts (although if we were able to move to the top of the second tier of the permiership that would certainly be progress) but I'm not sure how else we can hope to go without additional/alternative backing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Kelly 1115 Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I've no objection to not going stupid but think the least we should expect is for all net income via STs and TV to be spent. I agree with that but do we have any idea what that is? £12m might be a realistic figure given our overheads. You would like to hope it's more and hope we can find ways to increase profits overseas (which I think was what we were supposed to be doing with Steve McMahon) but I couldn't say whether that is realistic or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AmericanMag 0 Posted September 9, 2008 Share Posted September 9, 2008 I wonder what that group McMahon is a part of is thinking about all of this... This can't make their jobs of promoting the club overseas any easier... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo 133 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Roeder gives his opinion on the "director of football" culture. "the club is a disaster" "Sherperd signed Duff, not me" http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/7597677.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom 13811 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 All aboard the bandwagon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Roeder gives his opinion on the "director of football" culture. "the club is a disaster" "Sherperd signed Duff, not me" http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/7597677.stm Aye he's definitely talking about FFS long before he's even asked about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Face 29 Posted September 11, 2008 Share Posted September 11, 2008 Bobby Robson had the same problem....and I assume others who've not come out and said so. None of them walked away of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Bobby Robson had the same problem....and I assume others who've not come out and said so. None of them walked away of course. From what Robson said it's pretty amazing he didn't, especially in that last 9 month. But I guess that went to show what happens when a manager is being ruthlessly undermined and doesn't just tell them to fuck off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Bobby Robson had the same problem....and I assume others who've not come out and said so. None of them walked away of course. From what Robson said it's pretty amazing he didn't, especially in that last 9 month. But I guess that went to show what happens when a manager is being ruthlessly undermined and doesn't just tell them to fuck off. I love Robson but it is in his interests to make it seem like he was being completely undermined at a time when he'd lost the plot and discipline had totally disintegrated. Thanks to some cuntish players too btw. Although the buck stops with the manager (who signed a lot of them in any case). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted September 12, 2008 Share Posted September 12, 2008 Bobby Robson had the same problem....and I assume others who've not come out and said so. None of them walked away of course. From what Robson said it's pretty amazing he didn't, especially in that last 9 month. But I guess that went to show what happens when a manager is being ruthlessly undermined and doesn't just tell them to fuck off. I love Robson but it is in his interests to make it seem like he was being completely undermined at a time when he'd lost the plot and discipline had totally disintegrated. Thanks to some cuntish players too btw. Although the buck stops with the manager (who signed a lot of them in any case). Undoubtedly. But equally he was undoubtedly being marginalised and undermined from several directions at the club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now