" Rebrand v Costcutting "

There are a lot of threads going around that suggest that fans who wanted a return to blue are now reaping what we sow.

Firstly, I am actually glad we are cutting costs. It's about time!

Secondly, I have no issue whatsoever with appointing a lower league manager, but I do have an issue with appointing one who has been in the game 20 years and achieved next to nothing. We should have been looking at hungry, young managers, like Gary Rowett, Karl Robinson or even Justin Edinburgh. Personally, I would have liked Mark Warburton from Brentford, who has a great reputation in the game for unearthing talent on a shoe string, and already has a promotion to his name in his short time in management.

Thirdly, I have no issue with signing lower league players. I actually enjoy it more when we unearth a diamond. However, I do have an issue with signing players over 30 who have played most of their career in the lower leagues, or players who are supposedly in their prime (i.e. Peltier) and are reserves at teams who are below us in the league.

We can be blue, cost cut, and still be a competitive Championship team, without having to go down the current route, which is only going to result in disaster. Just look at how well Rowett has done at Birmingham. They are being run on peanuts, and have a far worse squad than us, yet despite not changing the personnel he is working wonders!

Well said.

Spot on. Cost cutting great but for f**k sake get a good manager.

I actually think the vast majority of fans want us to cut costs, and would support Tan on this, but Slade is not the man to do it effectively. However, there are lots of hungry, ambitious, young managers around, who would jump at the chance to work for us , especially now that the rebrand is no longer an issue!

i think ppl are being a bit to harsh on one hand slades tactics dont look great but on the other i keep hearing ppl say revell and harris and malone are the only ones who look like they want to play,well two of these are slades signings surely that shows hes getting ppl in who'll work for the club rather than sponge off it. dont get me wrong i think we should have gone for a manager who has proven success at this level or at least someone with success in league one be it promotion or just good cup runs not someone whos best achievment is not spending money and keeping orient in league one and nearly getting promoted once. as for cost cutting its needed if tan is ever to turn debt to equity or sell so doesnt bother me just as long as we dont go down

The fans that wanted the blue are the reason for this cost cutting?. "Reap what you Sow"

The blue was a simple change, an obvious one that stared tan in the face for 2 years but he was stubborn.

The cost cutting is a completely different issue and it is due to tan signing off any transfer and having zero clue what he was doing.

We go back to blue and we are suddenly back in the ninian park days. We were hardly real madrid in red.

The fans that wanted the blue are the reason for this cost cutting?. "Reap what you Sow"

The blue was a simple change, an obvious one that stared tan in the face for 2 years but he was stubborn.

The cost cutting is a completely different issue and it is due to tan signing off any transfer and having zero clue what he was doing.

We go back to blue and we are suddenly back in the ninian park days. We were hardly real madrid in red.

I completely agree but for some reason some don't. If Tan had kept us blue, bankrolled us (as he has done), and hired a decent manager, then this club would really be going places. The amount of costly, needless, mistakes that have been made is demoralizing.

Spot on Jimbo 27. As fans, we have to be patient, but with the current set our a our club, & the way its currently being managed,,,I for one can only see one eventuality the end of this season, total & utter failure.

I think Tan cocked up...again..... by employing Slade.

Its obvious to all that Slade has his limitations, some may say he is crap. Would Gabbidon & Young done any worse ?

I dont think so.

I think Tan cocked up...again..... by employing Slade.

Its obvious to all that Slade has his limitations, some may say he is crap. Would Gabbidon & Young done any worse ?

I dont think so.

Neither do I. They are both part of the overall problem. After all, Slade wanted his No 2 in from Orient, didn't he?

It is further evidence of Tan knowing nothing about football, and thinking he does.

What had Eddie May done before coming to us? Frank Burrows? Many thought Slade did a grand job as Leyton Orient manager. He has lost two games since changing back to blue, these were away to strong championship teams with strong squads. He has inherited a mess and is trying his best to fix it. The disharmony affected the whole club and will take some time to fix. A new manager will not make it better necessarily.

We are very fickle us Cardiff fans.

As for the quality of signings and players leaving. We want to have our cake and eat it and wear blue while we do it. Tan will not bankroll massive losses anymore and as many said, that's not a bad thing.

i think ppl are being a bit to harsh on one hand slades tactics dont look great but on the other i keep hearing ppl say revell and harris and malone are the only ones who look like they want to play,well two of these are slades signings surely that shows hes getting ppl in who'll work for the club rather than sponge off it. dont get me wrong i think we should have gone for a manager who has proven success at this level or at least someone with success in league one be it promotion or just good cup runs not someone whos best achievment is not spending money and keeping orient in league one and nearly getting promoted once. as for cost cutting its needed if tan is ever to turn debt to equity or sell so doesnt bother me just as long as we dont go down

If your a manager it's your job to find a way to make players at your disposal perform. Slade came with talk of fantastic man management skills. That lasted just a couple of days till he announced his small squad and isolated the remainder.

That showed the very worst type of management skills.

What great OP!!

Especially about saving money by discovering NEW talent and making players. This is the patient, proper way to gain success.

Id give slade at the very least until next January before starting to get onto his back.
Like someone said above out of the three players who look like they want to play for the club two are slades signings. He's only started to build his own team.
I think its good the club are cutting costs and will have to rely less on Tan bankrolling us.

this cost cutting could bite us on the ass and send us down, january is a good time to get a few signings in to push on, we done nothing

We can be blue, cost cut, and still be a competitive Championship team, without having to go down the current route, which is only going to result in disaster. Just look at how well Rowett has done at Birmingham. They are being run on peanuts, and have a far worse squad than us, yet despite not changing the personnel he is working wonders!

teams that do well without spending money are the exception, not the rule. cutting the budget 90% of the time leads to lower league positionings. its noble to want to run the club more sensibly, but it can be a false economy if it leads to a prolonged stay in the championship, which is what i envisage unfortunately.

the large investment in the playing squad in 2012 facilitated our promotion that season. if we had operated on the same budget as the year before its highly likely we would have had the same result (i.e. struggling to make the play offs).

in a nutshell risk nothing, gain nothing.

We can be blue, cost cut, and still be a competitive Championship team, without having to go down the current route, which is only going to result in disaster. Just look at how well Rowett has done at Birmingham. They are being run on peanuts, and have a far worse squad than us, yet despite not changing the personnel he is working wonders!

teams that do well without spending money are the exception, not the rule. cutting the budget 90% of the time leads to lower league positionings. its noble to want to run the club more sensibly, but it can be a false economy if it leads to a prolonged stay in the championship, which is what i envisage unfortunately.

the large investment in the playing squad in 2012 facilitated our promotion that season. if we had operated on the same budget as the year before its highly likely we would have had the same result (i.e. struggling to make the play offs).

in a nutshell risk nothing, gain nothing.

That's what got us various court cases and possibility of liquidation.

Don't know why, but it made me uncomfortable reading the word "unearth" twice in op's post

You can cut costs in the correct areas whilst not skimping on quality. At a PL level, Arsenal cut costs massively to fund their stadium yet in the long run that decision has paid dividends even if it did lead to years without silverware and fans criticising Arsene Wenger for not splashing the cash like the others up there. We need to plan for a long term stable future and not risk the club dying again trying to make it quickly.

We can be blue, cost cut, and still be a competitive Championship team, without having to go down the current route, which is only going to result in disaster. Just look at how well Rowett has done at Birmingham. They are being run on peanuts, and have a far worse squad than us, yet despite not changing the personnel he is working wonders!

teams that do well without spending money are the exception, not the rule. cutting the budget 90% of the time leads to lower league positionings. its noble to want to run the club more sensibly, but it can be a false economy if it leads to a prolonged stay in the championship, which is what i envisage unfortunately.

the large investment in the playing squad in 2012 facilitated our promotion that season. if we had operated on the same budget as the year before its highly likely we would have had the same result (i.e. struggling to make the play offs).

in a nutshell risk nothing, gain nothing.

That's what got us various court cases and possibility of liquidation.

basically its a vicious circle. and your comparison with the financial troubles of 5-10 years ago are when we didnt have a wealthy benefactor who can plug losses. we had court cases because the money simply wasn't there to pay bills, thats not true as long as we have tan willing to fund the club.

you advocate cutting costs and running the club on a championship budget. that will, in all likelihood, keep us in the championship barring an unexpectedly good season.

if we stay in the championship for a couple of years we will, in all probability (on a reduced budget), slowly but surely edge towards mid table and will probably stay there. the championship is a graveyard of premier league clubs that slashed the budget and have stayed there ever since.

again, you can risk little, but you stand to gain very little. though the justification you put forwards that unless we do that we run the 'possibility of liquidation', is, as i showed, scaremongering.

We can be blue, cost cut, and still be a competitive Championship team, without having to go down the current route, which is only going to result in disaster. Just look at how well Rowett has done at Birmingham. They are being run on peanuts, and have a far worse squad than us, yet despite not changing the personnel he is working wonders!

teams that do well without spending money are the exception, not the rule. cutting the budget 90% of the time leads to lower league positionings. its noble to want to run the club more sensibly, but it can be a false economy if it leads to a prolonged stay in the championship, which is what i envisage unfortunately.

the large investment in the playing squad in 2012 facilitated our promotion that season. if we had operated on the same budget as the year before its highly likely we would have had the same result (i.e. struggling to make the play offs).

in a nutshell risk nothing, gain nothing.

That's what got us various court cases and possibility of liquidation.

basically its a vicious circle. and your comparison with the financial troubles of 5-10 years ago are when we didnt have a wealthy benefactor who can plug losses. we had court cases because the money simply wasn't there to pay bills, thats not true as long as we have tan willing to fund the club.

you advocate cutting costs and running the club on a championship budget. that will, in all likelihood, keep us in the championship barring an unexpectedly good season.

if we stay in the championship for a couple of years we will, in all probability (on a reduced budget), slowly but surely edge towards mid table and will probably stay there. the championship is a graveyard of premier league clubs that slashed the budget and have stayed there ever since.

again, you can risk little, but you stand to gain very little. though the justification you put forwards that unless we do that we run the 'possibility of liquidation', is, as i showed, scaremongering.

No it isn't. We were on the verge of liquidation pre Tan. Tan is not going to continue to plug our losses so unless we reduce to a manageable budget we are going to have to rely on Tan who is looking to sell. If he sells and the new owners (if there is anyone) run us on a loss making budget to try and get premiership football and the riches that would bring and we fail (as under Ridsdale) we would have to resort to selling our best players (as under Sam and Ridsdale). If there were no players of value to sell (as under Ridsdale) then we would not be able to pay our bills. (As under Ridsdale). That would then mean we could be liquidated. Simple football economics.

You can cut costs in the correct areas whilst not skimping on quality. At a PL level, Arsenal cut costs massively to fund their stadium yet in the long run that decision has paid dividends even if it did lead to years without silverware and fans criticising Arsene Wenger for not splashing the cash like the others up there. We need to plan for a long term stable future and not risk the club dying again trying to make it quickly.

Ask Arsenal fans if that has paid dividends? No title for years, status quo year on year. They aren't happy.

We can be blue, cost cut, and still be a competitive Championship team, without having to go down the current route, which is only going to result in disaster. Just look at how well Rowett has done at Birmingham. They are being run on peanuts, and have a far worse squad than us, yet despite not changing the personnel he is working wonders!

teams that do well without spending money are the exception, not the rule. cutting the budget 90% of the time leads to lower league positionings. its noble to want to run the club more sensibly, but it can be a false economy if it leads to a prolonged stay in the championship, which is what i envisage unfortunately.

the large investment in the playing squad in 2012 facilitated our promotion that season. if we had operated on the same budget as the year before its highly likely we would have had the same result (i.e. struggling to make the play offs).

in a nutshell risk nothing, gain nothing.

That's what got us various court cases and possibility of liquidation.

basically its a vicious circle. and your comparison with the financial troubles of 5-10 years ago are when we didnt have a wealthy benefactor who can plug losses. we had court cases because the money simply wasn't there to pay bills, thats not true as long as we have tan willing to fund the club.

you advocate cutting costs and running the club on a championship budget. that will, in all likelihood, keep us in the championship barring an unexpectedly good season.

if we stay in the championship for a couple of years we will, in all probability (on a reduced budget), slowly but surely edge towards mid table and will probably stay there. the championship is a graveyard of premier league clubs that slashed the budget and have stayed there ever since.

again, you can risk little, but you stand to gain very little. though the justification you put forwards that unless we do that we run the 'possibility of liquidation', is, as i showed, scaremongering.

No it isn't. We were on the verge of liquidation pre Tan. Tan is not going to continue to plug our losses so unless we reduce to a manageable budget we are going to have to rely on Tan who is looking to sell. If he sells and the new owners (if there is anyone) run us on a loss making budget to try and get premiership football and the riches that would bring and we fail (as under Ridsdale) we would have to resort to selling our best players (as under Sam and Ridsdale). If there were no players of value to sell (as under Ridsdale) then we would not be able to pay our bills. (As under Ridsdale). That would then mean we could be liquidated. Simple football economics.

i very much doubt tan will allow the club to default on debts. you are correct in stating we were on the verge of liquidation pre tan, but your assertion was that spending money now could lead to liquidation under tan. that will not happen as he would lose tens of millions.

if he sells and we are forced to live within our means and operate on a much lower budget, its likely we'll stay in the championship, whereas if we push the boat out and get promoted, we can make more money due to the riches of PL TV money. if we don't get promoted, we won't go into liquidation and have court orders because tan will not allow that for the aforementioned reasons. now theres some economics for you to get your head round.

We can be blue, cost cut, and still be a competitive Championship team, without having to go down the current route, which is only going to result in disaster. Just look at how well Rowett has done at Birmingham. They are being run on peanuts, and have a far worse squad than us, yet despite not changing the personnel he is working wonders!

teams that do well without spending money are the exception, not the rule. cutting the budget 90% of the time leads to lower league positionings. its noble to want to run the club more sensibly, but it can be a false economy if it leads to a prolonged stay in the championship, which is what i envisage unfortunately.

the large investment in the playing squad in 2012 facilitated our promotion that season. if we had operated on the same budget as the year before its highly likely we would have had the same result (i.e. struggling to make the play offs).

in a nutshell risk nothing, gain nothing.

That's what got us various court cases and possibility of liquidation.

basically its a vicious circle. and your comparison with the financial troubles of 5-10 years ago are when we didnt have a wealthy benefactor who can plug losses. we had court cases because the money simply wasn't there to pay bills, thats not true as long as we have tan willing to fund the club.

you advocate cutting costs and running the club on a championship budget. that will, in all likelihood, keep us in the championship barring an unexpectedly good season.

if we stay in the championship for a couple of years we will, in all probability (on a reduced budget), slowly but surely edge towards mid table and will probably stay there. the championship is a graveyard of premier league clubs that slashed the budget and have stayed there ever since.

again, you can risk little, but you stand to gain very little. though the justification you put forwards that unless we do that we run the 'possibility of liquidation', is, as i showed, scaremongering.

No it isn't. We were on the verge of liquidation pre Tan. Tan is not going to continue to plug our losses so unless we reduce to a manageable budget we are going to have to rely on Tan who is looking to sell. If he sells and the new owners (if there is anyone) run us on a loss making budget to try and get premiership football and the riches that would bring and we fail (as under Ridsdale) we would have to resort to selling our best players (as under Sam and Ridsdale). If there were no players of value to sell (as under Ridsdale) then we would not be able to pay our bills. (As under Ridsdale). That would then mean we could be liquidated. Simple football economics.

i very much doubt tan will allow the club to default on debts. you are correct in stating we were on the verge of liquidation pre tan, but your assertion was that spending money now could lead to liquidation under tan. that will not happen as he would lose tens of millions.

if he sells and we are forced to live within our means and operate on a much lower budget, its likely we'll stay in the championship, whereas if we push the boat out and get promoted, we can make more money due to the riches of PL TV money. if we don't get promoted, we won't go into liquidation and have court orders because tan will not allow that for the aforementioned reasons. now theres some economics for you to get your head round.

I quite clearly said if Tan sold us. You are talking about Tan as owner and spending money to push for the Premiership. That is not going to happen. He did that as part of the deal to rebrand us. You are debating and using all the sides to suit your argument. It doesn't work like that. We have Tan and cost cutting to live within our means. You are right we will not go bust while a billionaire owns us or he will sell to unknown owners and they might take a punt they can't afford which could have us facing liquidation. I would suggest if Sam got anywhere near us again borrowing money to take that punt we could go belly up.