Jump to content

#SWFC Summer 2018 Transfer Window Rumours Thread


Recommended Posts

22 minutes ago, room0035 said:

completely agree at least there is one other person who thinks of the current set up the same as me.

 

Clare and Hirst £5,000 - £10,000 a week each OR £4m fee and £30,000+ a week for Abdi, which would you say is better business for our club - i will give you a clue its the first one 

 

Your powers of hindsight are amazing.  That's without mentioning  the massively over exaggerated transfer fee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, dan1980 said:

Why dont you ask chansiri if he needs a hand ya seem to know everything about how to run a club

No but the basic simple things i understand like you can only spend money you have so have,  income of £23m and outgoings of £43m - you are not going to continue to trade like that for very long.

 

So what do you do increase you income by tickets, merchandise or advertising or what most business do is look where they can reduce their costs and the obvious one is get rid of all of the players that never play the like of Hutch, Abdi, Fletcher, Matias, Jones, Winnall etc. - The problem is finding a team to take them because we have given them all silly 3-4 year deal on money most of us won't earn in our lifetimes.

 

I am a fan as are you, but when we got to Wembley and missed out everyone said what we needed to get over the line that was ignored and instead we spent the next 2 years signing players that did not improve the team only Reach and Venancio have, maybe Pessy once we have seen more. The rest have been a massive waste of money and will be hanging around our head until we can offload or their contracts are up - would I have done this different definitely. 

 

Until we know if we have broke the finance rules we don't know where we are but you can lose £39m over 3 season we lose £20m last season presumably this season is the same, add to that the £10m loss the year before I wait to see how we cannot be under some sort of embargo - I hope I am wrong but I cannot see it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, room0035 said:

No but the basic simple things i understand like you can only spend money you have so have,  income of £23m and outgoings of £43m - you are not going to continue to trade like that for very long.

 

So what do you do increase you income by tickets, merchandise or advertising or what most business do is look where they can reduce their costs and the obvious one is get rid of all of the players that never play the like of Hutch, Abdi, Fletcher, Matias, Jones, Winnall etc. - The problem is finding a team to take them because we have given them all silly 3-4 year deal on money most of us won't earn in our lifetimes.

 

I am a fan as are you, but when we got to Wembley and missed out everyone said what we needed to get over the line that was ignored and instead we spent the next 2 years signing players that did not improve the team only Reach and Venancio have, maybe Pessy once we have seen more. The rest have been a massive waste of money and will be hanging around our head until we can offload or their contracts are up - would I have done this different definitely. 

 

Until we know if we have broke the finance rules we don't know where we are but you can lose £39m over 3 season we lose £20m last season presumably this season is the same, add to that the £10m loss the year before I wait to see how we cannot be under some sort of embargo - I hope I am wrong but I cannot see it.

Im not even going to take you on about it .trying to ram figures down peoples neck .top and bottom of is you talk  **** and dont know what ya talking about

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, room0035 said:

The problem is he has been here 3 and half years and he is still making massive gaffs.

 

We Owls are simple folk give us a team of players who play for the shirt and give 100% and we are happy, give us a blue and white shirt with an Owl on it we are happy, don't charge us a fortune to see our team play and we will pay what we can if the entertainment and match day experience improves.

 

 

who the f*** are you talking on behalf because it isn't me. What a load of horsesh**

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, WTF said:

 

who the f*** are you talking on behalf because it isn't me. What a load of horsesh**

He a clown mate 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, room0035 said:

Yep the one thing I don't understand DC has surrounded himself with people who are here to get as much out of the club as possible and give nothing back but grief.

 

If DC had no idea what he was doing why did he not ask Milan to stay on for the first 12 months and help him in running the club, Milans 30+ years of experience and DC financial backing. Had this happened we might now have been a premiership team for the last few years. Instead we are saddled with an aging overpaid squad with debts now £20m+ a season, probably going to get some sort of embargo or have to vastly reduce the playing staff, the fans paying some of the highest prices in the league to what a team struggle on the pitch, losing the best young players to come through the academy in years to tribunal fees which historically favour the buying team. 

 

We need to start next season early and not make any more of these errors.

Milan involved the advisors who brought DC to club and were ones who were advising him. Understand MM also had dealings with advisors.  it has been indicated there influence has waned and this was clear at last transfer window. Milan used us as a vehicle to make money which he did and for him to saty would have cost Dc top wages, so we may not have made as many mistakes but help would not have been cheap. Also MM was keeen to hang onto to Stuart Gray and CEO wherehas DC wanted his own men in place so would have been difficult. I think they would have found it difficult to work together.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Hougoumont said:

Yeah! send a highly promising youngster out on loan into the big shop window with 8 months left on his contract.WTF:

That's probably why you couldn't forge a career in football management.

 

 

I understand you're pi**ed off at the prospect of losing a good youngster but it takes two to tango and D Hirst is on record as saying that his lad would not be signing for SWFC "If I have anything to do with it" He obviously has a chip on his shoulder regarding Wednesday...and I would suggest that the statement from CC about him not getting any game time was from his boss who doesn't like being used and abused.

To be fair, it was almost inevitable he wouldn't sign with us no matter what we did... and loaning him out would have increased what we're entitled to at tribunal (first team appearances = more initial payout), got a % of his wages off the bill and would have made us as a club look less petty. Yes, to an extent it's understandable to freeze him out as a negotiating stance/ punishment for not signing, but not letting him go out on loan was really a case of cutting our noses off to spite our own faces. Personally I'd have preferred the club to have had a few more 10's of thousands in the kitty than stalling a kid's development and having our chairman save face, but eh... we move on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, StudentOwl said:

To be fair, it was almost inevitable he wouldn't sign with us no matter what we did... and loaning him out would have increased what we're entitled to at tribunal (first team appearances = more initial payout), got a % of his wages off the bill and would have made us as a club look less petty. Yes, to an extent it's understandable to freeze him out as a negotiating stance/ punishment for not signing, but not letting him go out on loan was really a case of cutting our noses off to spite our own faces. Personally I'd have preferred the club to have had a few more 10's of thousands in the kitty than stalling a kid's development and having our chairman save face, but eh... we move on

Do we know for sure that we were the ones that stopped any loans deals. Or did he just not fancy any of them.as I find it funny that he has never been on loan once since he has been here, when he out of any of our players we have ever sent out on loan was probably the one who needed it the most. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, pazowl55 said:

Do we know for sure that we were the ones that stopped any loans deals. Or did he just not fancy any of them.as I find it funny that he has never been on loan once since he has been here, when he out of any of our players we have ever sent out on loan was probably the one who needed it the most. 

He GH was set to go on loan to Peterbrough or a n other (possible Notts County) but only when he signed a new deal, which he was going to do then his advisers (Doyes) found out the club were asking for a £10,000 a week loan fee so they came back asking for more money for their client( and themselves as a knock on) and the club said no - thus started the great G H contract escapade.

 

garymegson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, room0035 said:

He GH was set to go on loan to Peterbrough or a n other (possible Notts County) but only when he signed a new deal, which he was going to do then his advisers (Doyes) found out the club were asking for a £10,000 a week loan fee so they came back asking for more money for their client( and themselves as a knock on) and the club said no - thus started the great G H contract escapade.

 

garymegson

No league 1 club or lower could afford a £10,000 a week loan fee no mater who player was, It is £500,000  a sason and that is top money for any loan player. League 1 clubs simplu do not have this type of money availbale. Any sensible fan knows that. Iwould also think Wednesday officials are aware of this too. Liverpool last season started to ask for loan fees but only payable if player did not play a certain number of games asthey were not happy with players going on loan and not playing. Most loans to lower level clubs are subsidised by club in higher division. Theabove does not ring true on so many levels it suggests it is way off the mark. If you want to check look at respective budgets of clubs and you will see can not be true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, room0035 said:

completely agree at least there is one other person who thinks of the current set up the same as me.

 

Clare and Hirst £5,000 - £10,000 a week each OR £4m fee and £30,000+ a week for Abdi, which would you say is better business for our club - i will give you a clue its the first one 

 

And if Abdi hadn't been unlucky with injuries? Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Tell you what, let's pay all our kids huge money, just in case one turns out decent.. :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, pazowl55 said:

Do we know for sure that we were the ones that stopped any loans deals. Or did he just not fancy any of them.as I find it funny that he has never been on loan once since he has been here, when he out of any of our players we have ever sent out on loan was probably the one who needed it the most. 

To be honest, we don't. I have it on good authority (yep, I hate when people say that too) that it is the case, and that at least one loan deal was all but agreed with a League One club with a larger budget than most, but was obviously reliant on GH signing an extension. Don't know details about % of wages we wanted the loan club to pay etc, so I'm not gonna throw figures around hoping I hit the mark. But whether it's actually 100% true or not, I don't know and won't pretend to. 

 

Irregardless, my opinion is always going to be he shouldn't have been frozen out as he was... and if we did stop him going out on loan (which I believe we did, though again, I won't claim that that's 100% fact) I disagree with that even more. However, I also don't think the club should bend over backwards for any player's wage demands. We should have a structure in place and it should be adhered to... and if any player kicks up a fuss and tries to hold the club to ransom to the extent we have to break that wage structure, then best of luck and good ruddy riddance to them.  

 

 

Edited by StudentOwl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, Hitcat said:

 

And if Abdi hadn't been unlucky with injuries? Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Tell you what, let's pay all our kids huge money, just in case one turns out decent.. :wacko:

Or lets offer then reasonable wages to sign for the first team if we had Clare and Hirst would be going nowhere.

 

The club stated GH would have been the highest paid kid ever but who was the last one or current record holder no one seems to know - so it is speculation to think they offer him £10,000's as you say why would you offer a kid loads of money. So how can Sheff Utd sign their best young signing for 10 years up to a long term deal but we can't. Simple question what are they doing different to us, is it money, first team football or just becuase he wanted to stay.

 

If we needed Abdi he would have been a good signing but we didn't we already had Bannan, and Fessi who played in his position - we sign a player that was available instead of a player that we needed.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...