Perspective - This is a Major Rebuild & Jos Needs Time

[The only way is S6]

2 minutes ago, room0035 said:

The laws are very simple you can make losses of £39m over 3 seasons, in 2015/16 we lost £11m, 2016/17 we lost £21m, so if we lost more than £7m last season we breached the laws, the grey area is what is allowable for P&S such as youth development costs being taken off. 

 

Come April 2019 - if our losses for 2016/17 - £21m, 2017/18 my guestimate is around the £20m (based on players coming in/ leaving, no transfer fees in/JVA fee and attendances), 2018/19 ?????? - if these 3 figures are greater than £39m after allowable deduction we will be under embargo. The football league placed us under an embargo this season, we have offloaded or brought in about £8m of extra saving and additional income meaning I think the losses will be about £12m this season hence my theory that we need to bring in savings or income of about 35m to avoid P&S this season.

 

Once the club release the May 2018 (2017/18) accounts we will have a better picture of the losses but this won't be until February 2019 8 weeks before a possible embargo.

 

Just release the out of contract players after paying them millions for the last year will not be enough to avoid a breach of P&S. 

Grey area.

My guestimate.

My theory.

I think the losses will be about............

Enough said.

[room0035]

2 minutes ago, oh_weds_we_love_you said:

 

Exactly, it wouldn't surprise me if our argument had been that we, at one point, had a whole first team out injured, and still have a serious injury list and that's why we recruited a big squad to try and cope with that - especially in the absence of the old loan system.

 

17 minutes ago, SallyCinnamon said:

 

You’d like to think they do it on a case by case basis. Surely the EFL will and can see that the money we’ve spent has been largely wasted and it hasn’t given us an advantage at all. Half the players we’ve signed on big wages don’t play or are out injured! 

 

But i don't think you can use stupidity as an excuse for wasting money or Portsmouth, Sunderland, Bolton and many more would be using the same excuse. The old players on big contracts over 3 and 4 years was very short sighted by the chairman to spread the transfer fees over 3 or 4 season but no one told him that the wages also had to be accounted for. 

 

Look at other clubs in our league spending big money not getting parachute payments how do they stay with P&S they sell players when needed look at Derby, Leeds, Norwich as examples who have made £10m's from selling players we have a chairman that does not play players then rejects transfers when we get them. Again another example of how badly the club is run.

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

Just now, room0035 said:

The laws are very simple you can make losses of £39m over 3 seasons, in 2015/16 we lost £11m, 2016/17 we lost £21m, so if we lost more than £7m last season we breached the laws, the grey area is what is allowable for P&S such as youth development costs being taken off. 

 

Come April 2019 - if our losses for 2016/17 - £21m, 2017/18 my guestimate is around the £20m (based on players coming in/ leaving, no transfer fees in/JVA fee and attendances), 2018/19 ?????? - if these 3 figures are greater than £39m after allowable deduction we will be under embargo. The football league placed us under an embargo this season, we have offloaded or brought in about £8m of extra saving and additional income meaning I think the losses will be about £12m this season hence my theory that we need to bring in savings or income of about 35m to avoid P&S this season.

 

Once the club release the May 2018 (2017/18) accounts we will have a better picture of the losses but this won't be until February 2019 8 weeks before a possible embargo.

 

Just release the out of contract players after paying them millions for the last year will not be enough to avoid a breach of P&S. 

 

P&S aren't "laws", they are rules. The EFL uses them to make judgements on clubs breaking those rules. During Birmingham's issues in the summer, EFL even said they look at any club breaking the rules on a case by case basis.

 

The EFL will have heard our argument and the steps we are taking to rectify the situation. The EFL will also be fully aware that they won't wake up the next morning and all Sheffield Wednesday's financial problems will have gone away and will expect squad changes when possible and a change of recruitment policy to fit in with the permitted loses as soon as possible. They won't just automatically slap an embargo on us again next May because they and the club have been in dialogue for months and the club have stuck to their end of the bargain with regards to squad changes and recruitment.

 

The only thing that concerns me in the summer is our quality of recruitment - who can we afford to bring in to replace the players who will leave? I suspect the reason these players are playing no part this season is so the management can see how the team copes without them, so they can make recruitment decisions for next summer.

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

5 minutes ago, room0035 said:

 

 

But i don't think you can use stupidity as an excuse for wasting money or Portsmouth, Sunderland, Bolton and many more would be using the same excuse. The old players on big contracts over 3 and 4 years was very short sighted by the chairman to spread the transfer fees over 3 or 4 season but no one told him that the wages also had to be accounted for. 

 

Look at other clubs in our league spending big money not getting parachute payments how do they stay with P&S they sell players when needed look at Derby, Leeds, Norwich as examples who have made £10m's from selling players we have a chairman that does not play players then rejects transfers when we get them. Again another example of how badly the club is run.

 

The club can argue that we've had some very unfortunate luck with our extensive injury list, and without that we could well have been in the Premier League before before P&S season 3 came along, which would have seen us within the permitted losses.

[room0035]

23 minutes ago, The only way is S6 said:

Grey area.

My guestimate.

My theory.

I think the losses will be about............

Enough said.

No you use the knowledge you have to mke a best guess. If the club used half of that we might not be in the clusterfuck of a situation we find our self in 

 

Nuff said

[room0035]

19 minutes ago, oh_weds_we_love_you said:

 

P&S aren't "laws", they are rules. The EFL uses them to make judgements on clubs breaking those rules. During Birmingham's issues in the summer, EFL even said they look at any club breaking the rules on a case by case basis.

 

The EFL will have heard our argument and the steps we are taking to rectify the situation. The EFL will also be fully aware that they won't wake up the next morning and all Sheffield Wednesday's financial problems will have gone away and will expect squad changes when possible and a change of recruitment policy to fit in with the permitted loses as soon as possible. They won't just automatically slap an embargo on us again next May because they and the club have been in dialogue for months and the club have stuck to their end of the bargain with regards to squad changes and recruitment.

 

The only thing that concerns me in the summer is our quality of recruitment - who can we afford to bring in to replace the players who will leave? I suspect the reason these players are playing no part this season is so the management can see how the team copes without them, so they can make recruitment decisions for next summer.

 

 

Have a read of the attached link its very useful explaining how P&S works

 

http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/latest-news/-profit-and-sustainability-ffp-tests-in-championship-2016-17

 

I suspect the reason we are not seeing Westwood and the rest is due to appearance bonuses and win bonuses, clean sheet bonuses etc. Most of the young players probably won't have these clauses the reason Bannan, Reach, Lees are playing becuase a team of kids would be relegated and rightly the fans would be asking for their money back not to mention the PFA getting involved.

 

But the longer term issue here is which experience players will want to sign for a team that treat their players so badly, add to that we are a team in free fall, players don't want to play for relegation fodder unless they are starting out or getting a step up in league status. With no clear plan other than hope we are in a very dangerous position.

 

It would be interest to know if there is a financial plan in place should the team get relegated.

[Suzuki_San]

On 11/11/2018 at 16:21, gurujuan said:

This ^^ We know what the situation is regarding some of the older players, we knew it last season. So did Jos though, his job was to work with the players he has, and organise them into an effective unit There’s no sign that he’s started doing that

 

There was at the end of last season, why don't you think he can reproduce that again?

[The only way is S6]

16 minutes ago, room0035 said:

No you use the knowledge you have to mke a best guess. If the club used half of that we might not be in the clusterfuck of a situation we find our self in 

 

Nuff said

 

Your 'knowledge' is guesswork. So your best guess, is based on guesswork. Impressive stuff.

[tarn owl]

On 11/11/2018 at 15:56, Utah Owl said:

Just looking at all the crazy threads on Jos and who should be playing etc. etc.

 

We have an old squad many of whom are suffering from long term injury issues and loss of form. For example:

 

Westwood - now age 34 and had an horrendous season last year with injury and loss of form resulting in him being out of action for the last 12 months

 

Jones - Also aged 34, hasn't played for the side this season and prior to that only featured in half the games

 

Lee - Now aged 30 and is basically (sadly finished due to injury. Has played only intermittently since the 15/16 season and not at all for 12 months

 

Fletcher - Great player but has had injury issues (only 19 appearances last season) and rumoured to be on the highest wage at the club. Will be 32 in March

 

Hooper - Fantastic when available (which since he signed for us sadly hasn't been that often) - only featured in half the games the last two seasons an none this . 31 in January

 

Boyd - Never been able to pin down a regular slot. 20 games last season just one so far this. Already aged 33

 

Abdi - Aged 32 seemingly always injured

 

Hutchinson - Injury prone and reckless hasn't even managed half the games in 4 and a half seasons. 29 and rumours surfacing (on here) as a very difficult character to manage

 

Pudil - Solid and reliable but at 33 how long can he keep going for?

 

Forestieri - 29 in January but temperamental and an  unsettling influence (his no show two seasons ago over pay - even Dingle Mick says he would have got rid for that).

 

These are all players that need to be moved on somehow. It's for the long term benefit of the club and regardless of who the manager is they have got a hell of a job on their hands.

 

Joe does have a reputation for being a very strict disciplinarian and giving youth a chance in order to build a team. Regardless of his team selections he does seem to be sticking by his team selections and I think he deserves the chance to carry on for a couple of seasons.

 

Effectively we are in the same situation as we were following relegation from the EPL. Overpaid, injured and under motivated older players needing to be moved on from a club that was hamstrung with money issues. We tried umpteen managers then who struggled due to the constraints one of whom (Jewell) was a success immediately before and after leaving Hillsborough.

 

Joe is not to blame for the current problems we have with an ageing team on stupid contracts who have all manner of injury, form and motivation issues. Give him a proper chance!

 

Even if Jos goes, the new guy is going to face the same issues, this is a long term job and it's going to take two or three seasons to get back on track.

If there was an award for the most sensible post on Owlstalk i think this would be right up there. Agree with everything. Well done Sir. Rebuild, it will take time but if we stick with it we will build a very solid football club.

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

16 minutes ago, room0035 said:

 

 

Have a read of the attached link its very useful explaining how P&S works

 

http://www.financialfairplay.co.uk/latest-news/-profit-and-sustainability-ffp-tests-in-championship-2016-17

 

I suspect the reason we are not seeing Westwood and the rest is due to appearance bonuses and win bonuses, clean sheet bonuses etc. Most of the young players probably won't have these clauses the reason Bannan, Reach, Lees are playing becuase a team of kids would be relegated and rightly the fans would be asking for their money back not to mention the PFA getting involved.

 

But the longer term issue here is which experience players will want to sign for a team that treat their players so badly, add to that we are a team in free fall, players don't want to play for relegation fodder unless they are starting out or getting a step up in league status. With no clear plan other than hope we are in a very dangerous position.

 

It would be interest to know if there is a financial plan in place should the team get relegated.

 

It's a good article mate, and already read is back in the summer than all this kicked off. But the important thing to remember is clubs dealt with case by case. The EFL will know all about our losses, our predicted losses, and the actions we are putting in place to deal with the situation. If they weren't happy with that, we'd have been fine/deducted points/still under an embargo. The EFL has allowed us to extend Bannan and Joao's contracts - who are probably high earners - and of course sign 2 loanees and renew Penny's contract - and they've done that knowing we'll lose another wedge in the next accounts.

 

All the guessing around Westwood - one thing is for sure it's around finance. Whether it's as you say, what I say, or something completely different (more games trigger a contract extension or something) we don't know. I can't imagine Westwood's bonuses would be that great - especially win and clean sheet given our form this season - and would be peanuts in the grand scheme of things. I'd suggest the "Look EFL, we are dropping the high earners who's contracts expire in the summer to show you we are serious about getting rid and keeping costs down" or the potential trigger of playing him and his contract extending - and EFL not taking too kindly to that are the more likely reasons for Westwood's absence.

 

As for a financial plan on relegation, I suspect Reach, Forestieri, Bannan, Lees, Rhodes and Fletcher would want out and would all leave. Don't think that will be the case if we stay in the Championship. Though I would be happy to see any/all of the above sold if offers are significant so we can get a proper manager in and rebuild properly.

[oh_weds_we_love_you]

22 minutes ago, Suzuki_San said:

 

There was at the end of last season, why don't you think he can reproduce that again?

 

Players fighting for a contract extension? Playing clubs who already had their flip flops on? A purple patch that even poor managers have?

 

I've no doubt Jos can produce a spell like that again at some point, but a season consists of 46 games, not 6.

[davetherivelinowl]

On ‎12‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 11:03, Walt said:

The squad needed a shake up. We lost 3 players out of the defence, two of those key to the way we played (not word beaters but key for us) and the other being the ageing club captain who probably needed replacing anyway. The defence already needed strengthening, it had done for the past couple of seasons, to cull it even more, well it was only going to end up going one way (badly) if replacements weren't brought in, this was blindingly obvious at the time and has proved our undoing as we can not / will not put out a settled back line. It us undermining everything we are trying to do because if you haven't got a settled defensive unit then you're in trouble. Some may have expected the reserves - Palmer and Fox to step up, some may have expected a bomb scare Dutch centre half to suddenly learn how to defend, some may have expected the likes of Thorniley, Penney and Baker to fill the void. Others saw it for what is was - an accident waiting to happen and so it has proved. 

 

*I don't think we have enough to be doing far better than we are doing now, maybe three or four places better maybe but not far better. If we had FFand Matiais (sp?) fit for all of this season and Hector had been here from the season kick off then I could see your point, but that's not been the case.

*I'm not taking into account the situation with the likes of Abdi, Westwood, Hutch etc. as I know sweet fa on what happens behind closed doors but if available then some of them would make us better imo).

 

Where I agree with you is that we only need 3 or 4 players to be competitive but unfortunately we haven't got that luxury. I thought it pre season, we desperately needed a LWB, a RWB and a CB and then a defensive mid. We have addressed the centre back problem and Thorniley is proving more than capable in there. Still the glaring weaknesses remain in both our fullback / wingback positions and opposition managers must see this and target it. Penney may well be our long term answer at LWB but is showing exactly what you'd expect from a kid in his first season. The defensive mid we brought in seems to have gone to the same worth ethic school as Bothroyd so unless he pulls his finger out we are still weak there. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Great line. That's how I see it too. What a waste of talent.

[Walt]

6 minutes ago, davetherivelinowl said:

Great line. That's how I see it too. What a waste of talent.

The thing is I read on here people's suggested 11's for the Utd game. I couldn't believe how anyone who saw his disgusting performance against Norwich could put him in the starting line up the very next game. It wasn't just about his poor display as most of the others put in rubbish performances against Norwich but they at least tried. Onomah did not put the effort in, he gave up. Yet people still picked him...I still can't get over it tbh as it defies all logic!

[gurujuan]

For those who are saying he will play a more attacking game when he has all his attacking options available, who are you thinking of? I think we can discount Lee and Hooper, as I think we will probably be down by the time they return. Winnall? I doubt it, I’d flog him back to Barnsley in January. As I see it, only Forestieri would make a noticeable difference. Are we really so dependent on the little man’s skills, to venture over the half way line.

We already have, Matias, Joao, Bannan and Reach, who can get up and support Fletcher, but they’re not encouraged to do that  

Edited November 14, 2018 by gurujuan

[Walt]

Well he often went 343 towards the back end of last season. FF Nuhiu and João as the three.

If Matais, FF and Fletcher can keep fit then he will have more options up front than when he played it last season. 

I don’t see why he couldn’t play a front three again. As daft as it sounds I think we’d be more defensively sound with FF and Matias on either wing whether that be in a 433 or 4231 as opposed to to a back 3 or back 5 as they would give the opposition something to worry about.

[gurujuan]

5 minutes ago, Walt said:

Well he often went 343 towards the back end of last season. FF Nuhiu and João as the three.

If Matais, FF and Fletcher can keep fit then he will have more options up front than when he played it last season. 

I don’t see why he couldn’t play a front three again. As daft as it sounds I think we’d be more defensively sound with FF and Matias on either wing whether that be in a 433 or 4231 as opposed to to a back 3 or back 5 as they would give the opposition something to worry about.

Me too, but he only did that in an end of season game. Maybe he didn’t like what he saw

[HootHoot]

1 hour ago, gurujuan said:

For those who are saying he will play a more attacking game when he has all his attacking options available, who are you thinking of? I think we can discount Lee and Hooper, as I think we will probably be down by the time they return. Winnall? I doubt it, I’d flog him back to Barnsley in January. As I see it, only Forestieri would make a noticeable difference. Are we really so dependent on the little man’s skills, to venture over the half way line.

We already have, Matias, Joao, Bannan and Reach, who can get up and support Fletcher, but they’re not encouraged to do that  

Why would Winnall not get back into the squad? Before his injury he was playing for the U23's, so Jos clearly had plans to return him to the team otherwise he wouldn't have featured. He's a good player, as shown at Derby, and we'll be glad when he's back in the team

[Walt]

1 minute ago, gurujuan said:

Me too, but he only did that in an end of season game. Maybe he didn’t like what he saw

He started to go 343 when FF retuned from injury. Sometimes he altered it to go 3412 or 352. And tbf to Jos that brought the best out of FF. 

[gurujuan]

5 minutes ago, Walt said:

He started to go 343 when FF retuned from injury. Sometimes he altered it to go 3412 or 352. And tbf to Jos that brought the best out of FF. 

Yes it did. If you think back to that Norwich game, as an attacking unit we were excellent, with all three front players interchanging and causing Norwich real problems. However, our wing backs, or the areas in behind them, were constantly exploited by the visitors that day Think they racked up some 20 attempts at goal. Now I’d take that all day long, if we score five at the other end, but maybe Jos saw something he didn’t like, as he’s rarely played that way again. Only occasionally, when we’ve been chasing the game, has he released the shackles and pushed men forward

[sheriwozgod]

28 minutes ago, Walt said:

Well he often went 343 towards the back end of last season. FF Nuhiu and João as the three.

If Matais, FF and Fletcher can keep fit then he will have more options up front than when he played it last season. 

I don’t see why he couldn’t play a front three again. As daft as it sounds I think we’d be more defensively sound with FF and Matias on either wing whether that be in a 433 or 4231 as opposed to to a back 3 or back 5 as they would give the opposition something to worry about.

 

When there was nothing at stake...........couldnt go up, couldnt go down.