|
Post by Deleted on Jan 3, 2015 22:06:31 GMT
Talking of Prestwich I've just drove past there mate and for over 15 miles it's roadworks central and not a worker in sight Thus morning or just ( angry ) J17 of the M60 is the bain of my life mate, if there's not 6 mile tail backs there's roadworks......
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Jan 3, 2015 22:08:30 GMT
Expect this to be deleted like my Pulis thread earlier was. It's getting a bit tideous now though isn't it? We don't need a new thread everytime he has an interview or press conference! We all know he talks shite 99% of the time to the media "Marc Wilson is the best left back in the country" We're not going to have a new thread every time TP opens his mouth. There are already two threads running about him, plus another one about a West Brom player. This is primarily a Stoke City message board, and while other footballing matters are welcome to be discussed, we're not going to allow several threads to run about one manager and one other football club. The majority of threads should be about the club we support.
|
|
|
Post by Sergeant Muttley on Jan 3, 2015 22:16:14 GMT
It's getting a bit tideous now though isn't it? We don't need a new thread everytime he has an interview or press conference! We all know he talks shite 99% of the time to the media "Marc Wilson is the best left back in the country" We're not going to have a new thread every time TP opens his mouth. There are already two threads running about him, plus another one about a West Brom player. This is primarily a Stoke City message board, and while other footballing matters are welcome to be discussed, we're not going to allow several threads to run about one manager and one other football club. The majority of threads should be about the club we support. Dave have you ever considered having a general football section like they do on most other clubs board that runs alongside the Stoke forum?
|
|
|
Post by numpty40 on Jan 3, 2015 22:17:14 GMT
Just want to highlight the potential misuse of statistics. From season 2000/1 to 2007/8 Stoke had spent a total of £5.4m on transfer fees, at the end of 2007/8 they had been promoted to the PL. Aston Villa between the same period had spent £89.1m Newcastle £151.8m Sunderland £145.6m It's possible to see how basically unprepared Stoke were for PL football compared to the above three teams. From seasons 2008/9 to 2012/13 the transfer fees were as follows: Aston Villa £161.0m Sunderland £132.2m Stoke £96.2m Newcastle £91.1m Whether Tony Pulis wasted some money is debatable, what isn't debatable is the massive catching up we had to do to get anywhere near to being a competent PL side. Geoff you are the best wind up poster on this board and I promised myself I wouldn't respond to any of your posts but you are that good!!! From 2008 Villa did indeed outlay around £161m but taking into account transfers out they actually spent about £38m. I've not worked out Sunderland and Newcastle but I'd imagine it would be similar.
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Jan 3, 2015 22:18:24 GMT
I aint going while hes there H Yet another of tazi's wide range of usernames
|
|
|
Post by Davef on Jan 3, 2015 22:22:23 GMT
We're not going to have a new thread every time TP opens his mouth. There are already two threads running about him, plus another one about a West Brom player. This is primarily a Stoke City message board, and while other footballing matters are welcome to be discussed, we're not going to allow several threads to run about one manager and one other football club. The majority of threads should be about the club we support. Dave have ever considered having a general football section like they do on most other clubs board that runs alongside the Stoke forum? It wouldn't work on here and we really don't want to go down that route. If you look at other boards they have dedicated threads on players and managers than run for hundreds of pages and we don't like that idea either. Just use threads that are clearly running and are topical, that's all we ask.
|
|
|
Post by Sergeant Muttley on Jan 3, 2015 22:23:50 GMT
Dave have ever considered having a general football section like they do on most other clubs board that runs alongside the Stoke forum? It wouldn't work on here and we really don't want to go down that route. If you look at other boards they have dedicated threads on players and managers than run for hundreds of pages and we don't like that idea either. Just use threads that are clearly running and are topical, that's all we ask. No problem mate just wondered if you'd considered it
|
|
|
Post by geoff321 on Jan 3, 2015 23:45:20 GMT
I know numpty there is an issue regarding sales of players but in the 2006/7 season Pulis spent £1m and sold players to the value of £1.1m. In 2007/8 he spent £3.5m and sold players to the value of £3.7m., Stoke simply didn't have players on their books that other clubs were willing to pay big money for.
It's also worth looking at Stoke in comparison to W.B.A.
In 2006/7 both clubs were in the Championship, that season Stoke spent £1m and West Brom £2.2m.
In 2007/8 both clubs were promoted, Stoke spent £3.5m and West Brom £15.9m
In 2008/9 with both clubs in the PL, Stoke spent £18.7m and West Brom £14.5m.
At the end of 2008/9 Stoke were mid table and West Brom were relegated.
If there was other spending by Pulis I'm not aware of it, but for me the massive turnaround in the clubs fortunes was not achieved by massive spending, nor was the consolidation in the PL due to big spending.
On the basis the club now wished to sell players at least three of Stokes' players, signed by Pulis, would attract significant fees.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Jan 3, 2015 23:56:03 GMT
For Pulis to take the plaudits of shawcross bego et al he has to take it right up the shitter for
Soares, tongue, Andrew Davies, sonko, eider, woodgate, The crap faye, not playing Owen and bonus games
You get signings right you get signings wrong
The Andrew Davies deal is very over priced and strange the fact it involved little ant makes eyebrows raise
|
|
|
Post by oatcakesteve on Jan 4, 2015 0:03:56 GMT
I'm watching his career with interest. He's a hell of a manager as we all know, just because he isn't ours anymore, doesn't mean some folk don't like to see him do well. Of course, when we play them again, it goes without saying who I want to win
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 4, 2015 0:09:00 GMT
Just want to highlight the potential misuse of statistics. From season 2000/1 to 2007/8 Stoke had spent a total of £5.4m on transfer fees, at the end of 2007/8 they had been promoted to the PL. Aston Villa between the same period had spent £89.1m Newcastle £151.8m Sunderland £145.6m It's possible to see how basically unprepared Stoke were for PL football compared to the above three teams. From seasons 2008/9 to 2012/13 the transfer fees were as follows: Aston Villa £161.0m Sunderland £132.2m Stoke £96.2m Newcastle £91.1m Whether Tony Pulis wasted some money is debatable, what isn't debatable is the massive catching up we had to do to get anywhere near to being a competent PL side. Geoff you are the best wind up poster on this board and I promised myself I wouldn't respond to any of your posts but you are that good!!! From 2008 Villa did indeed outlay around £161m but taking into account transfers out they actually spent about £38m. I've not worked out Sunderland and Newcastle but I'd imagine it would be similar. All three clubs also have much higher average attendances than us. Strange that Geoff (I haven't got an agenda) 321 didn't compare us to (say) Swansea isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by numpty40 on Jan 4, 2015 0:12:07 GMT
I know numpty there is an issue regarding sales of players but in the 2006/7 season Pulis spent £1m and sold players to the value of £1.1m. In 2007/8 he spent £3.5m and sold players to the value of £3.7m., Stoke simply didn't have players on their books that other clubs were willing to pay big money for. It's also worth looking at Stoke in comparison to W.B.A. In 2006/7 both clubs were in the Championship, that season Stoke spent £1m and West Brom £2.2m. In 2007/8 both clubs were promoted, Stoke spent £3.5m and West Brom £15.9m In 2008/9 with both clubs in the PL, Stoke spent £18.7m and West Brom £14.5m. At the end of 2008/9 Stoke were mid table and West Brom were relegated. If there was other spending by Pulis I'm not aware of it, but for me the massive turnaround in the clubs fortunes was not achieved by massive spending, nor was the consolidation in the PL due to big spending. On the basis the club now wished to sell players at least three of Stokes' players, signed by Pulis, would attract significant fees. Geoff you keep banging on about what clubs spend, you don't bang on about turnover.
|
|
|
Post by tazi on Jan 4, 2015 5:06:27 GMT
I aint going while hes there H Yet another of tazi's wide range of usernames WTF?.
|
|
|
Post by StokieAsh13 on Jan 4, 2015 8:23:50 GMT
Tone telling a team to push forward?the worlds gone mad!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 4, 2015 8:40:11 GMT
Tone telling a team to push forward?the worlds gone mad! The worlds not mad but many on this board are....
|
|
|
Post by MarkWolstanton on Jan 4, 2015 9:54:57 GMT
I know numpty there is an issue regarding sales of players but in the 2006/7 season Pulis spent £1m and sold players to the value of £1.1m. In 2007/8 he spent £3.5m and sold players to the value of £3.7m., Stoke simply didn't have players on their books that other clubs were willing to pay big money for. It's also worth looking at Stoke in comparison to W.B.A. In 2006/7 both clubs were in the Championship, that season Stoke spent £1m and West Brom £2.2m. In 2007/8 both clubs were promoted, Stoke spent £3.5m and West Brom £15.9m In 2008/9 with both clubs in the PL, Stoke spent £18.7m and West Brom £14.5m. At the end of 2008/9 Stoke were mid table and West Brom were relegated. If there was other spending by Pulis I'm not aware of it, but for me the massive turnaround in the clubs fortunes was not achieved by massive spending, nor was the consolidation in the PL due to big spending. On the basis the club now wished to sell players at least three of Stokes' players, signed by Pulis, would attract significant fees. Geoff you keep banging on about what clubs spend, you don't bang on about turnover. Doesn't seem so keen to bang on about the costs of loans and agents fees which dwarfed the overwhelming majority of other spends between 2006 and 2008 and with relation to the agents fees (which tells you how much the loan players themselves were costing us)how we smashed what Premier League clubs were paying. I think Geoff knows full well that the promotion strategy of the club was to focus on getting in quality loan players rather than do what Leicester and Cardiff did for example and saddle themselves with players good enough to get promotion from the Championship but not good enough to cut it in the Premier League. It isn't the cheap and shoestring way of doing it that no agenda Geoff wants you to believe and still meant our budget blew away most of the Championship clubs over the two years but it is a model that worked wonderfully well for us. Promotion was hard earned and a credit to all concerned but it was a long way away from the shoestring miracle that Geoff would have you believe. There is of course the question raised above as to why we had to do it somewhat differently to clubs like Swansea. That is when you start to question what had gone on about player development under a manager in his previous years at the club. It got no better after and is a primary contributor to the long term financially unsustainable requirements of such a manager at a club like Stoke.
|
|
|
Post by MrMagic on Jan 4, 2015 10:19:48 GMT
Is this going to rumble on all bloody season? I dread full time today if we win, there will be people in rapture at the prospect of a WBA 4th round tie.
As Stafford would say
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Jan 4, 2015 10:34:30 GMT
Is this going to rumble on all bloody season? I dread full time today if we win, there will be people in rapture at the prospect of a WBA 4th round tie. As Stafford would say Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz It's just crazy mate. The funny thing is it isn't the so called rimmers that keep bring him up!
|
|
|
Post by swampmongrel on Jan 4, 2015 10:45:27 GMT
To be fair.
The Geoff321 and the MarkWolstanton versions are both as misleading and agenda driven as each other.
Anyone seeking an objective appraisal of Pulis and his time at Stoke would be advised to disregard both of them.
|
|
|
Post by MarkWolstanton on Jan 4, 2015 10:54:21 GMT
Is this going to rumble on all bloody season? I dread full time today if we win, there will be people in rapture at the prospect of a WBA 4th round tie. As Stafford would say Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz It's just crazy mate. The funny thing is it isn't the so called rimmers that keep bring him up! I think we all need a lecture on balance from a half-wit who sits on a Stoke City message board with a signature glorifying the dismissed ex-manager alongside a call for the removal of our current manager who is delivering better results than said previous manager and has delivered football that has returned the thousands of fans that were beginning to dwindle away with boredom previously.
|
|
|
Post by MarkWolstanton on Jan 4, 2015 10:54:50 GMT
To be fair. The Geoff321 and the MarkWolstanton versions are both as misleading and agenda driven as each other. Anyone seeking an objective appraisal of Pulis and his time at Stoke would be advised to disregard both of them. I'm sure Geoff and I cannot contain ourselves with excitement at the thought of you actually posting something that appraises anything with a little more substance than the sum total of nothing. Lets have your objective appraisal to put us to shame.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jan 4, 2015 11:00:55 GMT
To be fair. The Geoff321 and the MarkWolstanton versions are both as misleading and agenda driven as each other. Anyone seeking an objective appraisal of Pulis and his time at Stoke would be advised to disregard both of them. The only objective appraisal is that Tony Pulis was truly fucking magnificent for this club and was relieved of his duties at exactly the right time.
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jan 4, 2015 11:01:21 GMT
Dave have ever considered having a general football section like they do on most other clubs board that runs alongside the Stoke forum? It wouldn't work on here and we really don't want to go down that route. If you look at other boards they have dedicated threads on players and managers than run for hundreds of pages and we don't like that idea either. Just use threads that are clearly running and are topical, that's all we ask. This. Much prefer the approach in this message board as stated above. Works well IMO. If folk don't like something, don't read it or don't contribute. If a subject starts getting tedious, judicious use of the anchor works.
|
|
|
Post by Stafford-Stokie on Jan 4, 2015 11:01:45 GMT
It's just crazy mate. The funny thing is it isn't the so called rimmers that keep bring him up! I think we all need a lecture on balance from a half-wit who sits on a Stoke City message board with a signature glorifying the dismissed ex-manager alongside a call for the removal of our current manager who is delivering better results than said previous manager and has delivered football that has returned the thousands of fans that were beginning to dwindle away with boredom previously. Haha. And you call me a half wit?
|
|
|
Post by MrMagic on Jan 4, 2015 11:03:13 GMT
To be fair. The Geoff321 and the MarkWolstanton versions are both as misleading and agenda driven as each other. Anyone seeking an objective appraisal of Pulis and his time at Stoke would be advised to disregard both of them. The only objective appraisal is that Tony Pulis was truly fucking magnificent for this club and was relieved of his duties at exactly the right time. I think it was twelve months too late, but I take your point.
|
|
|
Post by crapslinger on Jan 4, 2015 11:14:33 GMT
To be fair. The Geoff321 and the MarkWolstanton versions are both as misleading and agenda driven as each other. Anyone seeking an objective appraisal of Pulis and his time at Stoke would be advised to disregard both of them. The only objective appraisal is that Tony Pulis was truly fucking magnificent for this club and was relieved of his duties at exactly the right time. Just before he bankrupted the club, it could be argued that he went at least one season later than he should have done, he did a magnificent job in gaining promotion etc then lost his way completely in the last two seasons he was in charge, his way or no way shame really.
|
|
|
Post by RAF on Jan 4, 2015 11:22:20 GMT
I aint going while hes there H Yet another of tazi's wide range of usernames ::) I think its more likely to be one of Orrins thick as shit mates or family as it goes. H
|
|
|
Post by elystokie on Jan 4, 2015 11:24:04 GMT
Yet another of tazi's wide range of usernames ::) I think its more likely to be one of Orrins thick as shit mates or family as it goes. H Fairy nuff.
|
|
|
Post by harryburrows on Jan 4, 2015 11:29:45 GMT
The only objective appraisal is that Tony Pulis was truly fucking magnificent for this club and was relieved of his duties at exactly the right time. I think it was twelve months too late, but I take your point. You can't sack a manager until it's clear he's lost the plot , he couldn't have been sacked a year earlier although in hindsight his last year was awful
|
|
|
Post by WorkingclassHero on Jan 4, 2015 11:40:17 GMT
The club most definately back Pulis in getting promoted with a number of costly loans, not ridiculousvanounts but I would have guessed between 5 and 10m of additional investment was made that season when compared to what the Icelanders had used as a budget each year. The anticipated windfall at that time for Prem football was around 30m of prize money plus the halo effect if additional crowds endorsements etc in the following year.
As such if we spent nothing in the first year of per need have been up around 30m.
We effectively had no players and no costs prior to buying those players in year 1. The job Pulis did was excellent right up until we made the FA Cup final. We made some excellent signings good signings and some poor ones in the first three years. We were not an attractive proposition to players and we had to cut our cloth accordingly.
Additionally the clubs infrasturcure for foreign scouting and the academy was poor. We were definately lacking here and fingers can be pointed at Pulis for this. Though with a stronger director of football maybe this shoukd not have been the case.
Following the FA Cup final if I remember correctly we splashed all of the pot on Crouch Palacios and Jerome. At the time I said the crouch palacios deal for a club our size was insane and was up there with the Ibrahimovic swap for 30m and Eto executed by Barcelona in terms of poor value.
However even that deal in the context of increased prem prize money was probably not so ridiculous.
Pulis' last season was shocking, I personally believe he three his toys out because he wanted further investment and was not allowed it. He knew he had made errors and effectively wasted 30m and did not have the network to be able to get players at low cost to push the club on in the way that Coates wanted.
|
|