JayGreen17
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2017
- Messages
- 2,656
- Reaction score
- 4,232
We’d still be in league 1 or below.
How do you things would have looked right now if McCabe had won the court case?
- Thread starter LiviBlade
- Start date
All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?
Yep that was the plan.
Wed just been promoted to PL. So what signings we'd have made that first summer who knows. Would we have stayed up? The main drivers our first season were still largely the previous crop of players so hopefully so.
Would have thought that by the following season we would have been owned by who now own Burnley.
Would we have still been relegated?
Kinda too much time has passed..
If McCabe was still chairman though, no way the hotel is shut and also decent chance more ground and training improvements would be planned or taking place.
nopigfansintown
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2016
- Messages
- 6,281
- Reaction score
- 10,734
Adkins was my correction of that post you responded too, he was a joint appointment. I think the first Ramsdale, Maguire and Calvert Lewin deals were worse. Just three examples. The total package for the Kyles is in the region of 20m which isn't great but perhaps not the worst we've done. All about opinions.
I think it's easy to front up when celebrating promotions and big investment in players - a LOT harder when things are going south. I'm talking about public visibility and accountability, not money, but you already know that I'd hazard. As it it is we were running on fumes at the level, we weren't competitive in the market. If our field performance under Wilder matched our budgets the joint ownership would've been despised imo.
This visibility is a pattern with the Prince post Phipps: we do well and he rocks up, we do badly and he plays hide and seek.. After Slav it was Yusuf fielding.the questions. I'm surprised you haven't noticed tbh. I've always given him his props re PR.
Last edited:
Bladesman
The Great Grumbleduke
It could be Kevin McCabe. That new book won't shift itself.
Sean Thornton
I say a little prayer….
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2015
- Messages
- 55,142
- Reaction score
- 87,776
Haven’t noticed. . The irony.
From someone who regularly claims to be aware of what’s actually happening, and happened, at the club that’s funny. After your “not terrible” comments on the KW sale you’ve now lumped in the KN fee and rounded up to £20m which is a bit pathetic even for barrel scraping. The point was about Walker, as you know.
I see you’ve swapped disappeared for visibility. Maybe you’ve remembered why he wasn’t here on a day to day basis. If not, let Wiki tell you
“ In June 2014, Prince Abdullah was appointed General President of General Sports Authority in Saudi Arabia making him at the same time the head of the Saudi Arabian Olympic Committee, and the head of Islamic Solidarity Sports Federation. His tenure began on the 26 of June 2014 and ended on the 22 of April 2017. He was succeeded by Mohammed Abdul Malik Al Al-Sheikh. Later the Authority became a ministry.
The legacy of Prince Abdullah as president of the General Sports Authority (GSA) is significant. Dozens of experts, commentators, TV and press interviews hailed the prince as the founder of modern Saudi sport[citation needed] spearheading, amongst other endeavors, the privatisation of the major Saudi football clubs, the legalisation of the main sport bodies, the beginning of the mass participation in sport and exercise, and opening the doors for women to freely and legally join sport facilities.”
As for Jim, up till him resigning in 2016, he was often at BL and in the Copthorne. As well as being a director, he was also Co-Chairman as PA had disappeared to do his government job.
Facts eh?
nopigfansintown
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2016
- Messages
- 6,281
- Reaction score
- 10,734
The Kyles deal was a joint deal. That's just an incontrovertible fact you'll have to deal with. https://www.theguardian.com/football/2009/jul/22/tottenham-sheffield-united-naughton-walker Facts eh? I don't think it was a great deal due to the Walker part of the deal, but I'll have to disagree on the severity. I'll ignore the ad hominem in the next part of your diatribe; I'm not interested and it's totally wasted on me. It's also inaccurate. You don't like what I have to say then either counter my points or block me.
Disappeared and invisibile are ambiguous. You interpreted my meaning incorrectly which is somewhat understandable if not done deliberately. I elucidated and embellished my point in the next post anyway, which should have removed all doubt as to my precise meaning which I accept wasn't totally clear in the first post. Your leap was your leap though. I've never claimed the finance wasn't shared - that's your imaging which I can't be held responsible for. If I did suggest that, or have anywhere else on this board, quote me...
There should be lots of evidence so don't be shy...
You're barrel scrapping in the extreme with that Wiki piece. So he can't go on Skype a couple of times a season for an hour or two? He's permanently at work? Further - we all know what Yusuf said about the further involvement of the Prince in terms of public facing. What's the excuse for that then? And why has he relented now the going is good again? He managed to video call in in the Premier League last time I recall. He was also at the ground to celebrate promotions - including in the periods you've quoted. At Wembley for the big games. Also on Sky Sports, Radio Sheffield, Star, club website, Talksport etc . Funny that! Facts eh?
I gave Jim his props (and the Prince by extension), I've no idea why you have highlighted that unless it was to buttress my argument or attempt to misrepresent my view in some way.
Last edited:
Sean Thornton
I say a little prayer….
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2015
- Messages
- 55,142
- Reaction score
- 87,776
Ha ha ha.
You lumped in the KN part of the deal to build it up at the value. You also bumped up the KW sell on amount to cover up your ridiculous suggestion that the initial Walker fee, Spurs, “wasn’t terrible” That selection only works in your head.
Re PA, it was stated at the time that he would have to give all his time to the government job. If you thought things through rather than trying to protect your “l know” ego, it would have dawned on you that was why Phipps was made Co-Chairman.
The rest is pure waffle.
nopigfansintown
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2016
- Messages
- 6,281
- Reaction score
- 10,734
This was my initial post: ". The Walker income probably amounted to around 10 million post add ons which isn't great but not terrible either". I presume I don't have to define "post add ons"?. It's quite the reach that a deal involving two players shouldn't be judged based on the merits of the totality of the deal, but here we are. It's really low to make out somebody said something that they didn't - deplorable actually. "Post add ons" couldn't be more clear; it's unambiguous. Why have you misrepresented that? And I stand by 10 million being a not great but not terrible package based on my fag packet evaluation of the Walker only side of the deal (post add ons).
"Re PA, it was stated at the time that he would have to give all his time to the government job. If you thought things through rather than trying to protect your “l know” ego, it would have dawned on you that was why Phipps was made Co-Chairman".
Above already countered with evidence that you have metaphorically retreated in the face of. You had no counter argument. As for your ironical ad hominem it only serves to underline your lack of a counterpoint to the incontrovertible evidence presented to you.
Phipps was a spokesperson before the Prince took the Saudi job by the way. Maybe you should've availed yourself of that fact before diving in so recklessly. Nothing really changed in terms of facing the public. Jim carried on speaking to the fans as director and co chairman. Autumn 2013 until May 2016 is his tenure according to this: https://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/spo...ow-par-sheffield-united-season-begins-1799032 He was the public face long before the Prince took the Saudi job in June 2014. Facts eh?
Very interesting article re visibility of the Prince in an interview with Jim
First, Phipps admits that the Prince may have been a little invisible. " : https://www.demblades.co.uk/blogs/news/interview-with-jim-phipps
Last edited:
Sean Thornton
I say a little prayer….
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2015
- Messages
- 55,142
- Reaction score
- 87,776
Jesus what a load of self serving bollocks
It was a terrible deal to sell him to Spurs for next to nothing. However you want to dance around that stupid statement by throwing later events in the pot.
Jim was made co chairman because he was PA’s principal advisor and took over his role in his absence. I’m well aware he was a spokesperson thank you. Bit rich when you accused PA of going missing when you didn’t seem to know about his Saudi job. Or more likely airbrushed it.
Metaphorically retreated? No counter argument? See above re Walker. You’ve defended that deal to big up McCabe against the Prince. As for counter argument, why pretend PA had just gone AWOL when his government job was known and the reason for his absence. Then you never mentioned Phipps co-chairmanship until l pointed it out. Using big words and phrases doesn’t cover up bullshit. I’ll leave you and your ego to continue waffling.
I should coco
A little harsh on a well meaning body of men
Sean, it works in my head too.
It WAS a JOINT deal and the split was still being buggered about with when Daniel Levy tried to get clever, when they moved KN on. You have to include the sell on clause, as it was part of the contract. Excluding would normally be done by the anti-McCabes, so as a man ever for the detail, I'm surprised you have done this.
Been an interesting joust though and you've both made decent points.
(....Tousles hair and pats on head....)
Sean Thornton
I say a little prayer….
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2015
- Messages
- 55,142
- Reaction score
- 87,776
The sell on clause which made the total deal £10m for the purposes of this thread?
I’ll leave you with this, said more than once….
“Walker, Maguire, Murphy sell on clauses totalling 8.5 million”
And this.
“You could say all the same things about Harry Maguire and Kyle Walker. Selling at the "right time", based on your assessment of the players potential, is the key to selling young players imo. If you think you have a potential superstar, who will prove it in a year or two - you don't sell at the first sign of serious interest.”
nopigfansintown
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2016
- Messages
- 6,281
- Reaction score
- 10,734
Jesus what a load of self serving bollocks
It was a terrible deal to sell him to Spurs for next to nothing. However you want to dance around that stupid statement by throwing later events in the pot.
Jim was made co chairman because he was PA’s principal advisor and took over his role in his absence. I’m well aware he was a spokesperson thank you. Bit rich when you accused PA of going missing when you didn’t seem to know about his Saudi job. Or more likely airbrushed it.
Metaphorically retreated? No counter argument? See above re Walker. You’ve defended that deal to big up McCabe against the Prince. As for counter argument, why pretend PA had just gone AWOL when his government job was known and the reason for his absence. Then you never mentioned Phipps co-chairmanship until l pointed it out. Using big words and phrases doesn’t cover up bullshit. I’ll leave you and your ego to continue waffling.
I don't see the Saudi job as sufficient reason not to talk to the fans whilst Rome burns. He also did pop his head above the parapet at the big games when the going was good during this period. Was he on his holidays then? Jim took the considerable flack during this period. When he left there was nobody representing the Prince facing up to the shitshow at BL. You are rewriting history. My whole point was the public accountability of the prince when the going was good vs bad. You are skirting around that. Phipps's co chairmanship is irelevant; it's his role that was relevant not his title. It's interesting that Phipps agreed with me re visibility.
The Kyle deal analysis is not a McCabe does good deals the Prince does (or better) deals. It's my analysis of the Kyle deal. You've completely made that up based on zero evidence. And I did include the "add ons" in the post which you deliberately omitted in your smear (still no apology). The three other deals were made under the joint ownership, not under the Prince's sole ownership, so why you believe that is beyond me - it's completely illogical. You say people have said things they haven't said which is bang out of order. You did it again there.
nopigfansintown
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2016
- Messages
- 6,281
- Reaction score
- 10,734
Precisely.
Sean Thornton
I say a little prayer….
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2015
- Messages
- 55,142
- Reaction score
- 87,776
McCabe was there. As was Phipps on the Princes behalf. If you think that through where’s the need? It’s just a rather childish dig.
Making things up? Physician heal thyself. £8.5m for three and almost all of that just for Kyle?
I should coco
A little harsh on a well meaning body of men
Not sure what you are saying there?
I haven't heard that, who said it?
Houston_Blade
Well-Known Member
We'd have been in League 1 but we wouldn't have Rhian Brewster, swings and roundabouts!
Sean Thornton
I say a little prayer….
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2015
- Messages
- 55,142
- Reaction score
- 87,776
That the figure has deliberately been bumped up. (Ignoring the fact that the initial deal was a shocker)
One guess
Working Class Hero
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2014
- Messages
- 1,618
- Reaction score
- 2,976
There's no reason to think anything different would have happened in the first Premier League season, as we were already a few games in when the Prince took control and all the signings had already been made.
We probably wouldn't have signed Berge in the January window (probably not a bad thing given the financial loss on him, the lack of output, and what it did to Lundstram).
The signings would have been different for the second year as I doubt we'd have spent the same amounts (again, that could be a good thing given some of those signings).
Chris Wilder may well not have had the breakdown in relationship and would have been around longer, although to say he'd still be here now would be a stretch.
Ndiaye was already here when the Prince took control.
My guess is we'd have made a better fist of it in 2020/21, still gone down as the lack of crowds and second season syndrome would have been hard to overcome. We'd have bounced straight back up with Wilder and fewer expensive burdens (e.g. Berge, Brewster). Back in the Premier League in 22/23, scraped survival and ended up in the exact same spot we are now, but with a better squad and manager.
We probably wouldn't have signed Berge in the January window (probably not a bad thing given the financial loss on him, the lack of output, and what it did to Lundstram).
The signings would have been different for the second year as I doubt we'd have spent the same amounts (again, that could be a good thing given some of those signings).
Chris Wilder may well not have had the breakdown in relationship and would have been around longer, although to say he'd still be here now would be a stretch.
Ndiaye was already here when the Prince took control.
My guess is we'd have made a better fist of it in 2020/21, still gone down as the lack of crowds and second season syndrome would have been hard to overcome. We'd have bounced straight back up with Wilder and fewer expensive burdens (e.g. Berge, Brewster). Back in the Premier League in 22/23, scraped survival and ended up in the exact same spot we are now, but with a better squad and manager.
And now look. Premier Leauge with a Champions Leauge Medal Owner on books. Not too shabby eh?
Houston_Blade
Well-Known Member
I bet he was on the pitch in full kit at full time then as well!
Every time I think about the £23m fee and the subsequent wages we've forked out a little bit of my soul dies.
Every time I think about the £23m fee and the subsequent wages we've forked out a little bit of my soul dies.
Montymagic
Active Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2017
- Messages
- 1,553
- Reaction score
- 2,394
Mid table championship at best, we talk about selling players now but we would have sold them even faster under mcknoba and for even less.
50p and he would sell any cunt.
nopigfansintown
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2016
- Messages
- 6,281
- Reaction score
- 10,734
We'll have to agree to disagree on that. The fees were mentioned in a fans forum. I think we can presume that the appearances were reached in Walkers' case:
"I keep hearing that the transfer fee for Kyle Walker is still “undisclosed” but it isn’t.
Kevin McCabe disclosed the exact fee at a Fans Forum in July 2009.
Here is an extract from the S24SU transcript taken by Foxy/Linz at the time:-
KMc: Well, the actual split is £6 million and £4 million. With £3 million for Kyle.W guaranteed with one on appearances and £5 million for Kyle.N guaranteed and £1 million on appearances.
This also tallies with the figure for Naughton you mention as he didn’t make many Spurs appearances.
So we can say with a great deal of certainty that the fee Spurs paid us for Kyle Walker was £4M.
If they sell him for £40M and we get 10% of that, our cut should be £3.6M".
Post 126: https://www.s24su.com/forum/threads/kyle-walker-to-move-on.51570/page-5#post-1353311
Sean Thornton
I say a little prayer….
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2015
- Messages
- 55,142
- Reaction score
- 87,776
Can’t disagree with that but would point out pedantically it’s not £10m.
All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?