|
Post by FullerMagic on Aug 16, 2022 21:02:14 GMT
He doesn’t have it especially tougher than many of the other non-parachute teams in the league. Personally I’m not interested in any other club. I asked a serious question about SCFC and a manager with particular reference to the last 40 years (and I can go back further). MON (only because he is the present manager) has, and is having to deal with circumstances that I can’t remember any other having to face. Perhaps my perception of the past to present is wrong, quite willing for others to educate or prove me wrong. It's relevant when the context is a league full of cash-strapped clubs scrambling around in the bargain bucket too though, isn't it? Especially when he's still got a top half wage budget.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Aug 16, 2022 21:07:25 GMT
Your wasting your breath mate. There's a real trumpism aurora amongst some supporters and the manager is their Hilary Clinton. With the amount of fake news on here, I'm surprised nobody has claimed Michael has an underground tunnel filled with babies, whose blood he drinks, yet. He doesn’t have it especially tougher than many of the other non-parachute teams in the league. I wasn't referring to you btw as you have good discussion. I mean more those who sling insults. Huddersfield are an excellent example though and I think they've got a low wage budget too. Which in some ways surprises me as they were recently in the premiership. They seemed to manage to sell off alot of their assets at a good price though too. Imagine if we had signed Lee Nicholls on a free transfer though. I think our fortunes would be much different
|
|
|
Post by bagnallboothen on Aug 16, 2022 21:11:55 GMT
A question not for yourself but all. In the last 40 years when have SCFC or a SCFC Manager started a game with a match day squad of 18 players (Huddersfield - accepting the permissible size of the squad has increased ) consisting of; 7 free agent signings two which are 33 and 39 respectively. 2 loan players aged 22 with less than 20 competitive games at the particular league standard (Championship in this case) 4 players through the youth ranks with an average age of 21 and a total of Championship appearances (not games) of 52 between them Moving on from the Huddersfield game to our 1st team squad who are currently injured (total) we have; Powell - free agent Souttar - £200k signing Fox - free agent Dulhaney - free agent McCarron - undisclosed transfer fee Clarke - loan Added todayFosu - loan Genuine QuestionWhat SCFC manager has had to deal with the same constraints in the transfer market to produce a match day squad worthy of promotion? Your wasting your breath mate. There's a real trumpism aurora amongst some supporters and the manager is their Hilary Clinton. With the amount of fake news on here, I'm surprised nobody has claimed Michael has an underground tunnel filled with babies, whose blood he drinks, yet. Maybe some people just want to see the team play about on par with it's budget compared to the opponents. Football isn't that simple, but to keep missing it by a mile and blaming finances is starting to take the piss. He's no one but himself to blame this season and he's not started well.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 16, 2022 21:13:17 GMT
He doesn’t have it especially tougher than many of the other non-parachute teams in the league. Personally I’m not interested in any other club. I asked a serious question about SCFC and a manager with particular reference to the last 40 years (and I can go back further). MON (only because he is the present manager) has, and is having to deal with circumstances that I can’t remember any other having to face. Perhaps my perception of the past to present is wrong, quite willing for others to educate or prove me wrong. So you’d rather ignore a relevant context to focus on an irrelevant one that’s more convenient, basically…
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 16, 2022 21:14:13 GMT
He doesn’t have it especially tougher than many of the other non-parachute teams in the league. I wasn't referring to you btw as you have good discussion. I mean more those who sling insults. Huddersfield are an excellent example though and I think they've got a low wage budget too. Which in some ways surprises me as they were recently in the premiership. They seemed to manage to sell off alot of their assets at a good price though too. Imagine if we had signed Lee Nicholls on a free transfer though. I think our fortunes would be much different Yep. If we’d been savvier with our recruitment things could be different, no argument there.
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie2 on Aug 16, 2022 21:14:23 GMT
Personally I’m not interested in any other club. I asked a serious question about SCFC and a manager with particular reference to the last 40 years (and I can go back further). MON (only because he is the present manager) has, and is having to deal with circumstances that I can’t remember any other having to face. Perhaps my perception of the past to present is wrong, quite willing for others to educate or prove me wrong. It's relevant when the context is a league full of cash-strapped clubs scrambling around in the bargain bucket too though, isn't it? Especially when he's still got a top half wage budget. I’m more interested (concerned) in the current position (not league) of SCFC rather than an individual. I’ll await responses to my original comments, requests for the record to be put right for the last 40 years. If MON is the anti christ who are the saviours waiting in the wings who can take on the mantle to get SCFC promoted under the present and foreseeable circumstances. Let’s take MON out of the picture and call him Smith….otherwise I’ll get labelled as an MON apologist.
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Aug 16, 2022 21:23:26 GMT
He doesn’t have it especially tougher than many of the other non-parachute teams in the league. Personally I’m not interested in any other club. I asked a serious question about SCFC and a manager with particular reference to the last 40 years (and I can go back further). MON (only because he is the present manager) has, and is having to deal with circumstances that I can’t remember any other having to face. Perhaps my perception of the past to present is wrong, quite willing for others to educate or prove me wrong. I think it's an interesting discussion because there's an argument to be made both ways. In one sense I believe we still have a larger budget than alot of other clubs so I can see why some argue this case. On the other hand though the size of the budget is irrelevant when you have to decrease it year on year. By that I mean: - A huddersfield manager who can bring in new signings and increase the wage budget slightly has more options than. - Michael who may already have a larger budget but that budget is eaten up by decisions of previous managers and he has to reduce it while also improving the squad. The wages of Allen, Davies, Ince, Baath and Smith were only 10k short of Huddersfield overall budget Source - salarysport.com/football/sky-bet-championship/stoke-city/salarysport.com/football/sky-bet-championship/huddersfield-town/Then with the hindrance of Edwards and Etebo both also having large contracts further ties our hands. So yes Huddersfield are an example of how close you can get to promotion with a small budget. However I don't think they're a fair comparison because while their manager is also shopping in the free transfer market; he's not having to reduce the wage budget by 30% at the same time. The funny thing is alot of the biggest critics who say the manager can't be trusted in the transfer market. They're the same ones saying that the squad he's built on a shoe string is playoff quality.
|
|
|
Post by stokiejoe on Aug 16, 2022 21:29:38 GMT
It's relevant when the context is a league full of cash-strapped clubs scrambling around in the bargain bucket too though, isn't it? Especially when he's still got a top half wage budget. I’m more interested (concerned) in the current position (not league) of SCFC rather than an individual. I’ll await responses to my original comments, requests for the record to be put right for the last 40 years. If MON is the anti christ who are the saviours waiting in the wings who can take on the mantle to get SCFC promoted under the present and foreseeable circumstances. Let’s take MON out of the picture and call him Smith….otherwise I’ll get labelled as an MON apologist. I think you are conflating two issues 1 bringing in new players on a restricted at the same time getting rid of expensive ones 2 getting a group of decent quality players to play as a team, play attractive or at least show effort but if unable to win games at least stop giving away easy goals At 1 MON has done a superb job and deserves credit At 2 we don't appear to have moved on from last season and give no appearance of being in contention for a top 6 finish. Early days of course but how much longer do you give someone who doent appear to be tactically sound?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 16, 2022 21:36:16 GMT
It's relevant when the context is a league full of cash-strapped clubs scrambling around in the bargain bucket too though, isn't it? Especially when he's still got a top half wage budget. I’m more interested (concerned) in the current position (not league) of SCFC rather than an individual. I’ll await responses to my original comments, requests for the record to be put right for the last 40 years. If MON is the anti christ who are the saviours waiting in the wings who can take on the mantle to get SCFC promoted under the present and foreseeable circumstances. Let’s take MON out of the picture and call him Smith….otherwise I’ll get labelled as an MON apologist. So again, just to confirm, you’re awaiting responses to the pointless question you asked rather than the one framed in the here and now that you don’t really want to engage with because it weakens your argument?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 16, 2022 21:37:51 GMT
Personally I’m not interested in any other club. I asked a serious question about SCFC and a manager with particular reference to the last 40 years (and I can go back further). MON (only because he is the present manager) has, and is having to deal with circumstances that I can’t remember any other having to face. Perhaps my perception of the past to present is wrong, quite willing for others to educate or prove me wrong. I think it's an interesting discussion because there's an argument to be made both ways. In one sense I believe we still have a larger budget than alot of other clubs so I can see why some argue this case. On the other hand though the size of the budget is irrelevant when you have to decrease it year on year. By that I mean: - A huddersfield manager who can bring in new signings and increase the wage budget slightly has more options than. - Michael who may already have a larger budget but that budget is eaten up by decisions of previous managers and he has to reduce it while also improving the squad. The wages of Allen, Davies, Ince, Baath and Smith were only 10k short of Huddersfield overall budget Source - salarysport.com/football/sky-bet-championship/stoke-city/salarysport.com/football/sky-bet-championship/huddersfield-town/Then with the hindrance of Edwards and Etebo both also having large contracts further ties our hands. So yes Huddersfield are an example of how close you can get to promotion with a small budget. However I don't think they're a fair comparison because while their manager is also shopping in the free transfer market; he's not having to reduce the wage budget by 30% at the same time. The funny thing is alot of the biggest critics who say the manager can't be trusted in the transfer market. They're the same ones saying that the squad he's built on a shoe string is playoff quality. Huddersfield won’t have a big wage budget either though will they? Are we not just reducing our wage budget so it’s more in line with the rest of the division?
|
|
|
Post by FullerMagic on Aug 16, 2022 21:40:28 GMT
Personally I’m not interested in any other club. I asked a serious question about SCFC and a manager with particular reference to the last 40 years (and I can go back further). MON (only because he is the present manager) has, and is having to deal with circumstances that I can’t remember any other having to face. Perhaps my perception of the past to present is wrong, quite willing for others to educate or prove me wrong. I think it's an interesting discussion because there's an argument to be made both ways. In one sense I believe we still have a larger budget than alot of other clubs so I can see why some argue this case. On the other hand though the size of the budget is irrelevant when you have to decrease it year on year. By that I mean: - A huddersfield manager who can bring in new signings and increase the wage budget slightly has more options than. - Michael who may already have a larger budget but that budget is eaten up by decisions of previous managers and he has to reduce it while also improving the squad. The wages of Allen, Davies, Ince, Baath and Smith were only 10k short of Huddersfield overall budget Source - salarysport.com/football/sky-bet-championship/stoke-city/salarysport.com/football/sky-bet-championship/huddersfield-town/Then with the hindrance of Edwards and Etebo both also having large contracts further ties our hands. So yes Huddersfield are an example of how close you can get to promotion with a small budget. However I don't think they're a fair comparison because while their manager is also shopping in the free transfer market; he's not having to reduce the wage budget by 30% at the same time. The funny thing is alot of the biggest critics who say the manager can't be trusted in the transfer market. They're the same ones saying that the squad he's built on a shoe string is playoff quality. I'm very sceptical about every claimed wage on the internet. I think they're all complete guesswork. I notice the alleged wages on fbref (a reputable site normally) have been pretty widely ridiculed as finger-in-the-air stuff, and they've basically had to admit it. The only real guide is the club accounts and they're always playing catch-up about the real situation which is ever-changing. But just go through the clubs and there's no way there are 12 spending more on wages than us - with only really Powell and Etebo legacy overpays now And our wage reductions aren't us losing a certain tier of quality, and having to replace on an uncompetitive budget, are they? At every point in the rebuild, such as it is, the allotted chunk of salary available for a new player, whether permanent or good standard of loanee, will have been very competitive for the next player on our recruitment list. It's a case of us losing a waster who's normally been on the books for 3-4 years who added nothing while on gargantuan wages, then having some flexibility to replace him on a still competitive budget for this league Apart from the parachute teams, nobody has got 2 pennies to rub together He's probably bought in 5 players in each position now in his tenure as the 4th longest-serving manager in the division, and he hasn't managed to get anything to stick yet
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Aug 16, 2022 21:44:46 GMT
I think it's an interesting discussion because there's an argument to be made both ways. In one sense I believe we still have a larger budget than alot of other clubs so I can see why some argue this case. On the other hand though the size of the budget is irrelevant when you have to decrease it year on year. By that I mean: - A huddersfield manager who can bring in new signings and increase the wage budget slightly has more options than. - Michael who may already have a larger budget but that budget is eaten up by decisions of previous managers and he has to reduce it while also improving the squad. The wages of Allen, Davies, Ince, Baath and Smith were only 10k short of Huddersfield overall budget Source - salarysport.com/football/sky-bet-championship/stoke-city/salarysport.com/football/sky-bet-championship/huddersfield-town/Then with the hindrance of Edwards and Etebo both also having large contracts further ties our hands. So yes Huddersfield are an example of how close you can get to promotion with a small budget. However I don't think they're a fair comparison because while their manager is also shopping in the free transfer market; he's not having to reduce the wage budget by 30% at the same time. The funny thing is alot of the biggest critics who say the manager can't be trusted in the transfer market. They're the same ones saying that the squad he's built on a shoe string is playoff quality. Huddersfield won’t have a big wage budget either though will they? Are we not just reducing our wage budget so it’s more in line with the rest of the division? Nah that's what I'm saying theirs is already in line. While for the last 3 years ours has been high but a large percentage of that was used up by the players listed above. Alot of which have only been moved on in the last 8 months. I doubt those coming in are on like for like wages, or even half of the total of those to go since January.
|
|
|
Post by gaznandi on Aug 16, 2022 21:45:58 GMT
I think it's an interesting discussion because there's an argument to be made both ways. In one sense I believe we still have a larger budget than alot of other clubs so I can see why some argue this case. On the other hand though the size of the budget is irrelevant when you have to decrease it year on year. By that I mean: - A huddersfield manager who can bring in new signings and increase the wage budget slightly has more options than. - Michael who may already have a larger budget but that budget is eaten up by decisions of previous managers and he has to reduce it while also improving the squad. The wages of Allen, Davies, Ince, Baath and Smith were only 10k short of Huddersfield overall budget Source - salarysport.com/football/sky-bet-championship/stoke-city/salarysport.com/football/sky-bet-championship/huddersfield-town/Then with the hindrance of Edwards and Etebo both also having large contracts further ties our hands. So yes Huddersfield are an example of how close you can get to promotion with a small budget. However I don't think they're a fair comparison because while their manager is also shopping in the free transfer market; he's not having to reduce the wage budget by 30% at the same time. The funny thing is alot of the biggest critics who say the manager can't be trusted in the transfer market. They're the same ones saying that the squad he's built on a shoe string is playoff quality. I'm very sceptical about every claimed wage on the internet. I think they're all complete guesswork. I notice the alleged wages on fbref (a reputable site normally) have been pretty widely ridiculed as finger-in-the-air stuff, and they've basically had to admit it. The only real guide is the club accounts and they're always playing catch-up about the real situation which is ever-changing. But just go through the clubs and there's no way there are 12 spending more on wages than us - with only really Powell and Etebo legacy overpays now And our wage reductions aren't us losing a certain tier of quality, and having to replace on an uncompetitive budget, are they? At every point in the rebuild, such as it is, the allotted chunk of salary available for a new player, whether permanent or good standard of loanee, will have been very competitive for the next player on our recruitment list. It's a case of us losing a waster who's normally been on the books for 3-4 years who added nothing while on gargantuan wages, then having some flexibility to replace him on a still competitive budget for this league Apart from the parachute teams, nobody has got 2 pennies to rub together He's probably bought in 5 players in each position now in his tenure as the 4th longest-serving manager in the division, and he hasn't managed to get anything to stick yet Putting out fires with gasoline, as the saying goes.
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie2 on Aug 16, 2022 21:49:08 GMT
I’m more interested (concerned) in the current position (not league) of SCFC rather than an individual. I’ll await responses to my original comments, requests for the record to be put right for the last 40 years. If MON is the anti christ who are the saviours waiting in the wings who can take on the mantle to get SCFC promoted under the present and foreseeable circumstances. Let’s take MON out of the picture and call him Smith….otherwise I’ll get labelled as an MON apologist. I think you are conflating two issues 1 bringing in new players on a restricted at the same time getting rid of expensive ones 2 getting a group of decent quality players to play as a team, play attractive or at least show effort but if unable to win games at least stop giving away easy goals At 1 MON has done a superb job and deserves credit At 2 we don't appear to have moved on from last season and give no appearance of being in contention for a top 6 finish. Early days of course but how much longer do you give someone who doent appear to be tactically sound? I'm not conflicting two issues. What is factual is that not in my lifetime have I witnessed an SCFC match day squad so lacking in quality and experience through the recruitment of free agents, inexperienced loan players and inexperienced home grown players. Point No2. With respect we are 3 games into the season. However I’d be extremely surprised and ecstatic if the core of such players highlighted in the previous paragraph are capable of taking us into the play off positions and sustain such progress. MON dammed if he doesn’t, gets an Oscar if he does All I’m trying to highlight is what I believe to be factual. That is I can’t remember a squad which contains so many free agents, inexperienced loan players and home grown young inexperienced players being the core to the clubs chase for success, nor which manager has faced and continues to face such restrictions in the last 40 years. Please someone tell me I’m wrong!!!
|
|
|
Post by gawa on Aug 16, 2022 22:02:53 GMT
I think it's an interesting discussion because there's an argument to be made both ways. In one sense I believe we still have a larger budget than alot of other clubs so I can see why some argue this case. On the other hand though the size of the budget is irrelevant when you have to decrease it year on year. By that I mean: - A huddersfield manager who can bring in new signings and increase the wage budget slightly has more options than. - Michael who may already have a larger budget but that budget is eaten up by decisions of previous managers and he has to reduce it while also improving the squad. The wages of Allen, Davies, Ince, Baath and Smith were only 10k short of Huddersfield overall budget Source - salarysport.com/football/sky-bet-championship/stoke-city/salarysport.com/football/sky-bet-championship/huddersfield-town/Then with the hindrance of Edwards and Etebo both also having large contracts further ties our hands. So yes Huddersfield are an example of how close you can get to promotion with a small budget. However I don't think they're a fair comparison because while their manager is also shopping in the free transfer market; he's not having to reduce the wage budget by 30% at the same time. The funny thing is alot of the biggest critics who say the manager can't be trusted in the transfer market. They're the same ones saying that the squad he's built on a shoe string is playoff quality. I'm very sceptical about every claimed wage on the internet. I think they're all complete guesswork. I notice the alleged wages on fbref (a reputable site normally) have been pretty widely ridiculed as finger-in-the-air stuff, and they've basically had to admit it. The only real guide is the club accounts and they're always playing catch-up about the real situation which is ever-changing. But just go through the clubs and there's no way there are 12 spending more on wages than us - with only really Powell and Etebo legacy overpays now And our wage reductions aren't us losing a certain tier of quality, and having to replace on an uncompetitive budget, are they? At every point in the rebuild, such as it is, the allotted chunk of salary available for a new player, whether permanent or good standard of loanee, will have been very competitive for the next player on our recruitment list. It's a case of us losing a waster who's normally been on the books for 3-4 years who added nothing while on gargantuan wages, then having some flexibility to replace him on a still competitive budget for this league Apart from the parachute teams, nobody has got 2 pennies to rub together He's probably bought in 5 players in each position now in his tenure as the 4th longest-serving manager in the division, and he hasn't managed to get anything to stick yet I agree about the wages. You have to take what's online as a pinch of salt but it helps give a bit of an idea and a rough estimate. Like Clucas is reported to be on near 20k. I swear his contract was due to expire last summer too. I really doubt we'd have renewed it at 20k a week. As far as the team. I think Laurent/Baker/Powell or Smallbone is potentially one of the best midfield in the league. Brown/Gayle/Campbell and Delap could be one of the best attacks. Clarke/Fosu Taylor Souttar Wilmot (or LCB) Tymon also is potentially one of the best defences. Goalkeeping we arent inspiring but not going to go into that as feel im always being critical. But yeh not great. I genuinely think the Blackpool and Huddersfield games were decent performances and we deserved to win both if it wasn't for individual errors. It's not a great sample size though and Boro will be a huge test. But if we can keep performing how we have been and iron out the mistakes then I think we'll be up there. Injuries is the huge problem though. I don't buy into the whole "MON was happy to go with Sparrow as backup". I think it's more that his decisions are based on which positions he can risk neglecting rather than which positions he should prioritise. In every area of the pitch were very much only an injury away from having to play youth or players out of position. Lose a striker? No senior strikers on bench. Lose Smallbone? No real natural cover for his position until Powell is back. Lose Baker? Thompson, Kilkenny or Clucas could fill so not as bad but a drop in quality. Lose Tymon/Clarke? Before Fosu we had youth or player out of position. Oh and Mccarron. Lose Flint? We're down to Fox or Jags and then youth. And we will lose defenders to suspension too, Taylor already has a few yellows. Then in nets it's Bonham or Bursik.. We have a good starting XI but not the best depth. Although with us already having 4 or 5 injuries I guess our depth looks alot worse right now too. With a fully fit squad and another few signings we look pretty good across the pitch bar GK. I'm at the point now where I think I'd rather have someone out of position playing LCB if it meant we used the money towards a GK instead. (but would much prefer bursik to prove me wrong)
|
|
|
Post by owdestokie2 on Aug 16, 2022 22:08:10 GMT
I’m more interested (concerned) in the current position (not league) of SCFC rather than an individual. I’ll await responses to my original comments, requests for the record to be put right for the last 40 years. If MON is the anti christ who are the saviours waiting in the wings who can take on the mantle to get SCFC promoted under the present and foreseeable circumstances. Let’s take MON out of the picture and call him Smith….otherwise I’ll get labelled as an MON apologist. So again, just to confirm, you’re awaiting responses to the pointless question you asked rather than the one framed in the here and now that you don’t really want to engage with because it weakens your argument? There’s one thing that is consistent……Your ability to waffle around a point of discussion without answering a pertinent question. I’ll remind you. 40 years. Name the season where SCFC have had a 1st team squad with a significant core of so many free agents, young inexperienced loan players, home grown young inexperienced players responsible for progression to a serious promotion challenge. The points I’m raising are more about the club, it’s management and direction rather than about MON. I’d be be delighted if MON was successful, he deserves it for the shit he’s had to put up with and what he’s still trying to overcome. If he goes I’ll await with interest the name of his replacement and to see if he benefits from MON’s tenure
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Aug 16, 2022 22:08:13 GMT
I think it's an interesting discussion because there's an argument to be made both ways. In one sense I believe we still have a larger budget than alot of other clubs so I can see why some argue this case. On the other hand though the size of the budget is irrelevant when you have to decrease it year on year. By that I mean: - A huddersfield manager who can bring in new signings and increase the wage budget slightly has more options than. - Michael who may already have a larger budget but that budget is eaten up by decisions of previous managers and he has to reduce it while also improving the squad. The wages of Allen, Davies, Ince, Baath and Smith were only 10k short of Huddersfield overall budget Source - salarysport.com/football/sky-bet-championship/stoke-city/salarysport.com/football/sky-bet-championship/huddersfield-town/Then with the hindrance of Edwards and Etebo both also having large contracts further ties our hands. So yes Huddersfield are an example of how close you can get to promotion with a small budget. However I don't think they're a fair comparison because while their manager is also shopping in the free transfer market; he's not having to reduce the wage budget by 30% at the same time. The funny thing is alot of the biggest critics who say the manager can't be trusted in the transfer market. They're the same ones saying that the squad he's built on a shoe string is playoff quality. Huddersfield won’t have a big wage budget either though will they? Are we not just reducing our wage budget so it’s more in line with the rest of the division? Yes Huddersfield have a lower wage budget and yes we are having to bring ours down to their level. But the point you are missing is that we have to bring our wage budget down to Huddersfield while still paying massive Premier wages to two players who don't play for us. That means that the wages of our actual squad is equal to Huddersfield minus the wages of Etebo and Edwards. Last season our wage budget was high for the Championship but included 8 or more on Premier wages who were only average Championship players and no better than a lot of Huddersfield players and in many cases not first choice. The media have us all believe that Stoke players are on higher wages than your average Championship players but if you take out our high earners who don't or didn't play regularly for us then the wages of our actual playing squad are no higher than Huddersfield.
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 16, 2022 22:10:35 GMT
Huddersfield won’t have a big wage budget either though will they? Are we not just reducing our wage budget so it’s more in line with the rest of the division? Yes Huddersfield have a lower wage budget and yes we are having to bring ours down to their level. But the point you are missing is that we have to bring our wage budget down to Huddersfield while still paying massive Premier wages to two players who don't play for us. That means that the wages of our actual squad is equal to Huddersfield minus the wages of Etebo and Edwards. Last season our wage budget was high for the Championship but included 8 or more on Premier wages who were only average Championship players and no better than a lot of Huddersfield players and in many cases not first choice. The media have us all believe that Stoke players are on higher wages than your average Championship players but if you take out our high earners who don't or didn't play regularly for us then the wages of our actual playing squad are no higher than Huddersfield. And yet even in that context last season we were able to bring in a lot of players including spending around £4m in fees and have brought in a lot again this season?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 16, 2022 22:12:07 GMT
So again, just to confirm, you’re awaiting responses to the pointless question you asked rather than the one framed in the here and now that you don’t really want to engage with because it weakens your argument? There’s one thing that is consistent……Your ability to waffle around a point of discussion without answering a pertinent question. I’ll remind you. 40 years. Name the season where SCFC have had a 1st team squad with a significant core of so many free agents, young inexperienced loan players, home grown young inexperienced players responsible for progression to a serious promotion challenge. The points I’m raising are more about the club, it’s management and direction rather than about MON. I’d be be delighted if MON was successful, he deserves it for the shit he’s had to put up with and what he’s still trying to overcome. If he goes I’ll await with interest the name of his replacement and to see if he benefits from MON’s tenure Literally the only person who thinks it’s a pertinent question is you. Who cares if he’s the only one in that situation? He’s not in competition with the ghosts of managers past, he’s in competition with the rest of the division, and he’s in no more dire a situation than the majority. You’re talking about ‘free agents’ as if they were just what was left in the bin that nobody else wanted. But there were other clubs in for Gayle and Laurent, both of whom have good to very good reputations. Fosu has done well at this level before, Kilkenny has his admirers and Soton were reluctant to let Smallbone go given his potential and a strong pre-season. We’ve taken some flyers here and there but let’s not pretend we’re scrabbling round in the reject bin for whichever raggy doll looks our way.
|
|
|
Post by J-Roar on Aug 16, 2022 22:12:45 GMT
A loan to provide cover for the loan. Joke of a manager. I suppose the sensible thing to do would be to just leave us with no cover in a key position.
|
|
|
Post by J-Roar on Aug 16, 2022 22:17:32 GMT
Nice fella but I'm not sure one can be 'very delighted'. You don't have gradations of delight in quite that way. For strong adjectives like 'delight' one should use 'absolutely delighted' instead. Anyway its a small point, if he is as 'tricky' as he tells us he is that can only be a good thing. The bird asking the questions can barely string a sentence together herself. Where do we find these people from? The questions are always so diabolical as well. They practically steer/answer for the interviewee every time. Yawn. What the fuck do you expect? An hour long Frost / Nixon exposee?
|
|
|
Post by nottsover60 on Aug 16, 2022 22:23:06 GMT
Yes Huddersfield have a lower wage budget and yes we are having to bring ours down to their level. But the point you are missing is that we have to bring our wage budget down to Huddersfield while still paying massive Premier wages to two players who don't play for us. That means that the wages of our actual squad is equal to Huddersfield minus the wages of Etebo and Edwards. Last season our wage budget was high for the Championship but included 8 or more on Premier wages who were only average Championship players and no better than a lot of Huddersfield players and in many cases not first choice. The media have us all believe that Stoke players are on higher wages than your average Championship players but if you take out our high earners who don't or didn't play regularly for us then the wages of our actual playing squad are no higher than Huddersfield. And yet even in that context last season we were able to bring in a lot of players including spending around £4m in fees and have brought in a lot again this season? We released five players on Premier or high Championship wages and retained none of our 5 loanees. So far we have brought in 4 loanees most of whom are of a lower profile so probably on lower wages than last seasons contingent. Our four free transfers so far this window will be on significantly lower wages than those released. That is why we appear to have brought in more than Huddersfield. You also have to bear in mind that ideally you want to keep a high percentage of your squad for continuity and team spirit. Every season so far MON has had a hugely different squad who have to bond into a team. It is rarely beneficial to have a huge turn over of playing staff.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 16, 2022 22:33:54 GMT
A loan to provide cover for the loan. Joke of a manager. I suppose the sensible thing to do would be to just leave us with no cover in a key position. We have two right backs. One he deemed good enough to give a 12 month contract to.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 16, 2022 22:39:07 GMT
And yet even in that context last season we were able to bring in a lot of players including spending around £4m in fees and have brought in a lot again this season? We released five players on Premier or high Championship wages and retained none of our 5 loanees. So far we have brought in 4 loanees most of whom are of a lower profile so probably on lower wages than last seasons contingent. Our four free transfers so far this window will be on significantly lower wages than those released. That is why we appear to have brought in more than Huddersfield. You also have to bear in mind that ideally you want to keep a high percentage of your squad for continuity and team spirit. Every season so far MON has had a hugely different squad who have to bond into a team. It is rarely beneficial to have a huge turn over of playing staff. I’m sorry but Gayle will be a pretty big outlay won’t he? He would have been on 20-50k at Castle and I think it would have been closer to 50. He won’t be on anything less than 20k a week here will he? Which is massive. I am guessing but he’s an expensive Championship player surely? Laurent was wanted by a host of clubs. Flint was got rid of by Cardiff because his wages were too much. It’s just another pathetic excuse.
|
|
|
Post by J-Roar on Aug 16, 2022 22:46:02 GMT
I suppose the sensible thing to do would be to just leave us with no cover in a key position. We have two right backs. One he deemed good enough to give a 12 month contract to. So he should persevere with one who is shite and a young kid who he thought was up to the job but who isn't? I suppose he could carry on with those options and watch another season go south or he could do something about it?
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Aug 16, 2022 22:49:19 GMT
We have two right backs. One he deemed good enough to give a 12 month contract to. So he should persevere with one who is shite and a young kid who he thought was up to the job but who isn't? I suppose he could carry on with those options and watch another season go south or he could do something about it? I agree his judgement is toss and the decision making behind all of this is muddled. We have 4 players none of which are a bastard right wing back.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 16, 2022 23:38:21 GMT
He is unproven in the championship, not match fit so see what he is like at Xmas by then we will be still 16th and season over . What a load of shit this comment is. Not sure why i'm shocked though. Most of his games for Brentford were in the championship. And he's played 4 sets of 90 mins this season already. How is that not match fit? Ridiculous comment 🤣🤣
|
|
|
Post by iglugluk on Aug 16, 2022 23:42:35 GMT
So we've signed a winger who we hope will be convertible to wing back, because we only need him to perform an attacking function and this is due to the fact the current squad has such great solidity in the back 3 that defensive awareness isn't even required in our wing backs? What could possibly go wrong?
|
|
|
Post by The Toxic Avenger on Aug 17, 2022 6:24:56 GMT
And yet even in that context last season we were able to bring in a lot of players including spending around £4m in fees and have brought in a lot again this season? We released five players on Premier or high Championship wages and retained none of our 5 loanees. So far we have brought in 4 loanees most of whom are of a lower profile so probably on lower wages than last seasons contingent. Our four free transfers so far this window will be on significantly lower wages than those released. That is why we appear to have brought in more than Huddersfield. You also have to bear in mind that ideally you want to keep a high percentage of your squad for continuity and team spirit. Every season so far MON has had a hugely different squad who have to bond into a team. It is rarely beneficial to have a huge turn over of playing staff. Again, it’s the same situation for most clubs in the league? You think Nottingham Forest haven’t had a high turnover of players over the last couple of seasons?
|
|
|
Post by thevoid on Aug 17, 2022 6:41:14 GMT
We released five players on Premier or high Championship wages and retained none of our 5 loanees. So far we have brought in 4 loanees most of whom are of a lower profile so probably on lower wages than last seasons contingent. Our four free transfers so far this window will be on significantly lower wages than those released. That is why we appear to have brought in more than Huddersfield. You also have to bear in mind that ideally you want to keep a high percentage of your squad for continuity and team spirit. Every season so far MON has had a hugely different squad who have to bond into a team. It is rarely beneficial to have a huge turn over of playing staff. I’m sorry but Gayle will be a pretty big outlay won’t he? He would have been on 20-50k at Castle and I think it would have been closer to 50. He won’t be on anything less than 20k a week here will he? Which is massive. I am guessing but he’s an expensive Championship player surely? Laurent was wanted by a host of clubs. Flint was got rid of by Cardiff because his wages were too much. It’s just another pathetic excuse. The manager has been backed as well as can be expected. He also knew what he was coming into.
|
|