footiexmadx wrote:Is going to cost us big time it's clear to see some of our players ain't Good enough we ll be lucky to reach 25 points
City Slicker wrote:footiexmadx wrote:Is going to cost us big time it's clear to see some of our players ain't Good enough we ll be lucky to reach 25 points
Were a Premier club in name only. It's a pity for us fans but we will have to look to new owners if we ever dream of developing as a club.
2blue2handle wrote:City Slicker wrote:footiexmadx wrote:Is going to cost us big time it's clear to see some of our players ain't Good enough we ll be lucky to reach 25 points
Were a Premier club in name only. It's a pity for us fans but we will have to look to new owners if we ever dream of developing as a club.
How many players are we short and how much would it cost? We are what we are and signed who we signed. Chucking money at it that isn't sustainable is not a good way to run a club. Most these owners promise the world and deliver on little.
City Slicker wrote:2blue2handle wrote:City Slicker wrote:footiexmadx wrote:Is going to cost us big time it's clear to see some of our players ain't Good enough we ll be lucky to reach 25 points
Were a Premier club in name only. It's a pity for us fans but we will have to look to new owners if we ever dream of developing as a club.
How many players are we short and how much would it cost? We are what we are and signed who we signed. Chucking money at it that isn't sustainable is not a good way to run a club. Most these owners promise the world and deliver on little.
Probably six players short and that might have cost another £30m. We certainly don't have to be what we are. I can't see that careful investment could in any way be construed as "chucking money". Some make idle promises and some do not. Nevertheless, the fact remains; if we are ever to get to the next level it will be with new owners because it's not in Tan's plan. Some of course may be happy with that, and it's their prerogative; however others may not be, and equally they are free to have their own opinions.
City Slicker wrote:2blue2handle wrote:City Slicker wrote:footiexmadx wrote:Is going to cost us big time it's clear to see some of our players ain't Good enough we ll be lucky to reach 25 points
Were a Premier club in name only. It's a pity for us fans but we will have to look to new owners if we ever dream of developing as a club.
How many players are we short and how much would it cost? We are what we are and signed who we signed. Chucking money at it that isn't sustainable is not a good way to run a club. Most these owners promise the world and deliver on little.
Probably six players short and that might have cost another £30m. We certainly don't have to be what we are. I can't see that careful investment could in any way be construed as "chucking money". Some make idle promises and some do not. Nevertheless, the fact remains; if we are ever to get to the next level it will be with new owners because it's not in Tan's plan. Some of course may be happy with that, and it's their prerogative; however others may not be, and equally they are free to have their own opinions.
psw78 wrote:City Slicker wrote:2blue2handle wrote:City Slicker wrote:footiexmadx wrote:Is going to cost us big time it's clear to see some of our players ain't Good enough we ll be lucky to reach 25 points
Were a Premier club in name only. It's a pity for us fans but we will have to look to new owners if we ever dream of developing as a club.
How many players are we short and how much would it cost? We are what we are and signed who we signed. Chucking money at it that isn't sustainable is not a good way to run a club. Most these owners promise the world and deliver on little.
Probably six players short and that might have cost another £30m. We certainly don't have to be what we are. I can't see that careful investment could in any way be construed as "chucking money". Some make idle promises and some do not. Nevertheless, the fact remains; if we are ever to get to the next level it will be with new owners because it's not in Tan's plan. Some of course may be happy with that, and it's their prerogative; however others may not be, and equally they are free to have their own opinions.
£30m for 6 players? So £5m each - hardly Premier League quality at that price. We paid nort of £20m just for Reid and Murphy.
6 more players of ‘average’ PL quality would have cost at least £100m surely?
psw78 wrote:City Slicker wrote:2blue2handle wrote:City Slicker wrote:footiexmadx wrote:Is going to cost us big time it's clear to see some of our players ain't Good enough we ll be lucky to reach 25 points
Were a Premier club in name only. It's a pity for us fans but we will have to look to new owners if we ever dream of developing as a club.
How many players are we short and how much would it cost? We are what we are and signed who we signed. Chucking money at it that isn't sustainable is not a good way to run a club. Most these owners promise the world and deliver on little.
Probably six players short and that might have cost another £30m. We certainly don't have to be what we are. I can't see that careful investment could in any way be construed as "chucking money". Some make idle promises and some do not. Nevertheless, the fact remains; if we are ever to get to the next level it will be with new owners because it's not in Tan's plan. Some of course may be happy with that, and it's their prerogative; however others may not be, and equally they are free to have their own opinions.
£30m for 6 players? So £5m each - hardly Premier League quality at that price. We paid nort of £20m just for Reid and Murphy.
6 more players of ‘average’ PL quality would have cost at least £100m surely?
City Slicker wrote:psw78 wrote:City Slicker wrote:2blue2handle wrote:City Slicker wrote:footiexmadx wrote:Is going to cost us big time it's clear to see some of our players ain't Good enough we ll be lucky to reach 25 points
Were a Premier club in name only. It's a pity for us fans but we will have to look to new owners if we ever dream of developing as a club.
How many players are we short and how much would it cost? We are what we are and signed who we signed. Chucking money at it that isn't sustainable is not a good way to run a club. Most these owners promise the world and deliver on little.
Probably six players short and that might have cost another £30m. We certainly don't have to be what we are. I can't see that careful investment could in any way be construed as "chucking money". Some make idle promises and some do not. Nevertheless, the fact remains; if we are ever to get to the next level it will be with new owners because it's not in Tan's plan. Some of course may be happy with that, and it's their prerogative; however others may not be, and equally they are free to have their own opinions.
£30m for 6 players? So £5m each - hardly Premier League quality at that price. We paid nort of £20m just for Reid and Murphy.
6 more players of ‘average’ PL quality would have cost at least £100m surely?
Yes you're right, I meant £30m minimum. However, being careful I think we could have invested £50-60m and given ourselves a fighting chance of survival. And that's nowhere near the money Fulham have invested. A striker, right back, centre back and midfielder might have been enough, coupled with canny loan deals.
2blue2handle wrote:City Slicker wrote:psw78 wrote:City Slicker wrote:2blue2handle wrote:City Slicker wrote:footiexmadx wrote:Is going to cost us big time it's clear to see some of our players ain't Good enough we ll be lucky to reach 25 points
Were a Premier club in name only. It's a pity for us fans but we will have to look to new owners if we ever dream of developing as a club.
How many players are we short and how much would it cost? We are what we are and signed who we signed. Chucking money at it that isn't sustainable is not a good way to run a club. Most these owners promise the world and deliver on little.
Probably six players short and that might have cost another £30m. We certainly don't have to be what we are. I can't see that careful investment could in any way be construed as "chucking money". Some make idle promises and some do not. Nevertheless, the fact remains; if we are ever to get to the next level it will be with new owners because it's not in Tan's plan. Some of course may be happy with that, and it's their prerogative; however others may not be, and equally they are free to have their own opinions.
£30m for 6 players? So £5m each - hardly Premier League quality at that price. We paid nort of £20m just for Reid and Murphy.
6 more players of ‘average’ PL quality would have cost at least £100m surely?
Yes you're right, I meant £30m minimum. However, being careful I think we could have invested £50-60m and given ourselves a fighting chance of survival. And that's nowhere near the money Fulham have invested. A striker, right back, centre back and midfielder might have been enough, coupled with canny loan deals.
I think in that instance a new manager would have been required. For all the qualities and unbelievable work Warnock has done its been clear his strength is in the championship as shown with his singing.
City Slicker wrote:2blue2handle wrote:City Slicker wrote:footiexmadx wrote:Is going to cost us big time it's clear to see some of our players ain't Good enough we ll be lucky to reach 25 points
Were a Premier club in name only. It's a pity for us fans but we will have to look to new owners if we ever dream of developing as a club.
How many players are we short and how much would it cost? We are what we are and signed who we signed. Chucking money at it that isn't sustainable is not a good way to run a club. Most these owners promise the world and deliver on little.
Probably six players short and that might have cost another £30m. We certainly don't have to be what we are. I can't see that careful investment could in any way be construed as "chucking money". Some make idle promises and some do not. Nevertheless, the fact remains; if we are ever to get to the next level it will be with new owners because it's not in Tan's plan. Some of course may be happy with that, and it's their prerogative; however others may not be, and equally they are free to have their own opinions.
Mr Moo Cow wrote:We should be improving the scouting network.......We are embarrassingly out of our depth each game around 20% possession - other clubs don’t spend a fortune likes Burnley and Bournemouth even Swansea when they were in the league
Bargains are to be had we just have to find them
dogfound wrote:Mr Moo Cow wrote:We should be improving the scouting network.......We are embarrassingly out of our depth each game around 20% possession - other clubs don’t spend a fortune likes Burnley and Bournemouth even Swansea when they were in the league
Bargains are to be had we just have to find them
is this the same relegated Swansea that spent over 50 million pounds on Mesa, Clucas, Bony and Ayew just last season..
and who had over 40 million pounds worth of the bargains you talk about out on loan because they didn't work out at the Vetch.?
psw78 wrote:Today isn’t the day to be saying ‘we should have invested’. We lost heavily to a team who broke all sorts of records last season - we could have invested £100m and the result probably would have been the same.
Our last three games have been against teams we’d have expected to lose to - in two of those games, we’ve more than competeted. Our first three, arguably we were finding our feet.
The next run of homes games will define our season - I’ve seen enough to believe we can get points from those games (assuming no injuries or suspensions).
In reality, we came up with an average Championship squad, that Warnock squeezed everything out of. The amount we’d have had to spend to ‘guarantee’ survival would have been ridiclous. I still think the strategy from the club has been the right one for a sustainable future and one that we can build on if we do go back down.
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], ias [Bot], Proximic [Bot], Semrush [Bot], Underhill1927 and 181 guests