Forever Blue wrote:Blue78 wrote:Forever Blue wrote:Reply FB:
Is this quote for real? They could easily find funds for more players if they really wanted to and we’d have more money in League 1. Both utter nonsense.
Firstly, there is a thing called FFP - see Derby, Reading and others soon when it is not followed.
Secondly, has anyone actually looked at where we sit on net spend over the last few years - I briefly looked before and we were certainly top half of not top 10 (I can’t remember exactly). So we are certainly not being outspent by every club as some would have you think.
Do we have an issue with having got in some terrible players - yes of course. But the football managers and scouting hold a massive amount of responsibility for that.
ALL OVER SEEN BY CCFC COMMITTEE:
Their words , contracts , scouts , final paper work , bids etc etc
I get that - and we don’t disagree that money has been spent poorly (although hasn’t it at all clubs - including those with football people on board - Spurs, Utd etc - and I’m saying that as someone who thinks we should have more football expertise on the board.
But that is different to the narrative that no money has been spent - it might not have been this season (although we aren’t out of line with most clubs), but has been since we have been back in the Championship.
Surely the football people who were on the transfer committee - Warnock, Harris, Mick and their scouts identify the players that they need, the board go and get and then sign off.
For example, Warnock really did spank cash on a huge amount of ‘dross’, but if the wanted a player and then the board say no based on footballing reasons, they would rightly get some serious flack for it.
It has now clearly caught up with us (and COVID has played a significant part) but is the answer to really change the owner at a time when you can’t ‘spend your way out of it’.
Whatever happens now and spending on the court cases I do agree there is need to freshen things up potentially - but I don’t think that is Tan, but those ‘below’ him.