Jim Phipps summed up our current predicament perfectly...

[Borbokisfreekick]

£10M investment over 2 years is £5M a year. McCabe claims to have been putting that much in consistently over the last few years anyway so is HRH just replacing that or is it really "new" investment in the team?

Also Clough has generated extra funds himself by selling Maguire, 3 lucrative cup runs and potentially now 2 or 3 play off matches. Be sure that HRH and Phipps wouldn't have allowed Clough the same amount of leeway in the transfer market if he hadn't been adding money into the pot himself.

Does the £10M he's invested cover the wages of Brayford etc going forward or is he committed to chucking another £5M in the pot next year and the year after that? Is it really £2.5M a year he's investing not £5M?

Phipps is correct that now is not the right time to speculate about the manager's position.

Neither is the right time to post inflammatory comments on Facebook, presumably to try and appease a few impatient loudmouths who are giving him a hard time.

Absolutely spot on.

Phipps is looking after Phipps here. He'll be getting heat from the Prince and he so much wants to be a fans favorite, so is pining to both, whilst throwing Clough under the bus somewhat.

Will be interesting seeing how all this pans out.

 

[blade too long]

Or alternatively:

Regular (if not constant) mediocre and/or lacklustre performances are affecting supporter confidence, the players on the pitch and the coaching staff on the sideline are to blame for poor performances, as the players and staff are the ones with the chance to ultimately change their own fortunes and that of the club who employ them...

Seriously, it's the fans' fault?!

whats the point of big crowds ,, to lift a team
is it not
why , to raise players spirits , , if you were constantly criticised in your working environment would you be giving 100%

just a thought
its a new team learning to gel it needs encouragement not
fucking hell we are sheffield united we are big already get up there and do it , its not the way to go

 

[grafikhaus]

I would be pretty cheesed off if I were McCabe at our continual failure to get over the line.

So who keeps employing these managers, then?

I think someones moved the goal posts , either Clough or the board . I don't think its Clough .

So not Clough's fault either.

Phipps is looking after Phipps here.

And it's obviously nowt to do with Jim-bob.

Guess that just leaves us fans for this mess!

 

[judge]

whats the point of big crowds ,, to lift a team
is it not
why , to raise players spirits , , if you were constantly criticised in your working environment would you be giving 100%

just a thought
its a new team learning to gel it needs encouragement not
fucking hell we are sheffield united we are big already get up there and do it , its not the way to go

There isnt a POINT to having big crowds
20,000 individuals pay money to be entertained not to be part of some greater good

 

[BornOnShorehamStreet]

I will use spell check

UTB

Don't use spell check - it doesn't understand UK English spelling - use your own brain - far better!

 

[BornOnShorehamStreet]

A spell check wouldn't have helped since both words exist my Lord. Didn't they teach you anything at Eton?

Enjoy reading the posts by the way

Also for you Lord Bos of Eckington.

Interestingly, whilst we speak of what a rich language we have, I've found out that we can largely blame the Normans for that.

I saw a programme on the rise and spread of the Normans and their culture; in England, whilst the Norman elite continued to speak their native French tongue, the also-rans carried on with Anglo-Saxon as their main language, hence we have "amorous", from the French, and "loving", from the Anglo-Saxon, both words meaning the same thing, of course.

I also seem to remember that we gave the Yanks, "gotten", and now they are trying to give it back to us!

 

[Worksop II]

I also seem to remember that we gave the Yanks, "gotten", and now they are trying to give it back to us!

Well someone is using Yank-isms while referring to the Blades

"to hold management (front office and touchline)"

We have enough trouble trying to figure out who does what, without Front Office, Back Office, and Touchline

 

[BornOnShorehamStreet]

Well someone is using Yank-isms while referring to the Blades

"to hold management (front office and touchline)"

We have enough trouble trying to figure out who does what, without Front Office, Back Office, and Touchline

Well, Jim Phipps is a Yank so fair enough

 

[itsinyerblood]

Also for you Lord Bos of Eckington.

Interestingly, whilst we speak of what a rich language we have, I've found out that we can largely blame the Normans for that.

I saw a programme on the rise and spread of the Normans and their culture; in England, whilst the Norman elite continued to speak their native French tongue, the also-rans carried on with Anglo-Saxon as their main language, hence we have "amorous", from the French, and "loving", from the Anglo-Saxon, both words meaning the same thing, of course.

I also seem to remember that we gave the Yanks, "gotten", and now they are trying to give it back to us!

All good points BoSS. The thing is, there are two versions of English, ours (the original), and the reinvented version that has been spewed forth by Americans.

I agree, we do have a rich, luxuriating language. The thing I find is that most posters (let's use this forum as an example) tend to use language they're secure in. So what happens is that the same number of familiar words and terms are repeated over and over. Nothing intrinsically wrong with that, but on a scale of 1 to 100 it's as if we decide to neglect two thirds, even three quarters, of this wonderful lexicon.

Most importantly, the thing I seek is to understand a poster's intent, and with familiar repetitions becoming the common thread by which we are expected to grasp a poster's message, I am forced to understand most posts, even when words are absent. A strange one really, it's as if the intention exists that we, the reader, are expected to know what a poster's intentions are even when they write in a way that turns our mother tongue on it's head.

Back to your point, yes, amorous and loving share striking similarities, but nuance can separate them by a mile. It's this wealth of meaning, subtle and brazen, that I believe gives us a playground of descriptive writing that is sadly overlooked.

 

[HillmortonBlade]

All good points BoSS. The thing is, there are two versions of English, ours (the original), and the reinvented version that has been spewed forth by Americans.

I agree, we do have a rich, luxuriating language. The thing I find is that most posters (let's use this forum as an example) tend to use language they're secure in. So what happens is that the same number of familiar words and terms are repeated over and over. Nothing intrinsically wrong with that, but on a scale of 1 to 100 it's as if we decide to neglect two thirds, even three quarters, of this wonderful lexicon.

Most importantly, the thing I seek is to understand a poster's intent, and with familiar repetitions becoming the common thread by which we are expected to grasp a poster's message, I am forced to understand most posts, even when words are absent. A strange one really, it's as if the intention exists that we, the reader, are expected to know what a poster's intentions are even when they write in a way that turns our mother tongue on it's head.

Back to your point, yes, amorous and loving share striking similarities, but nuance can separate them by a mile. It's this wealth of meaning, subtle and brazen, that I believe gives us a playground of descriptive writing that is sadly overlooked.

I am sure I read somewhere that quite a bit of American language, e.g. the use of z (zed or zee) in hospitalization is in fact how it was spelt in England but we have progressively changed to using s instead. I do think there is too much use of crude old anglo-saxon words used on this forum sometimes and whilst it can be funny, or an expression of frustration, it does offend my sense of communication (well, two words really, one of them being the naughtiest word of all).

 

[itsinyerblood]

I am sure I read somewhere that quite a bit of American language, e.g. the use of z (zed or zee) in hospitalization is in fact how it was spelt in England but we have progressively changed to using s instead. I do think there is too much use of crude old anglo-saxon words used on this forum sometimes and whilst it can be funny, or an expression of frustration, it does offend my sense of communication (well, two words really, one of them being the naughtiest word of all).

Ah, the 'naughtiest' word of all. I could take a stab at what that word might be, but perhaps that's a discussion we should have the next time we meet.

You're right, language has changed considerably. There are suggestions that (and I'm excluding native americans from this) what we refer to as american-english was a hybrid of Somerset/Cornwall/Devon as many ships sailed from this neck of the woods carrying with them the twangy yokel tones that morphed into modern american. No doubt there are other explanations for what constitutes contemporary american, but as I've read this from more than one source it does tend to give credence to how we gave 'birth' to the language of the Clinton's and Obama's.......or even the bastardised version hijacked by those wizards of the word, rappers.

 

[BornOnShorehamStreet]

All good points BoSS. The thing is, there are two versions of English, ours (the original), and the reinvented version that has been spewed forth by Americans.

I agree, we do have a rich, luxuriating language. The thing I find is that most posters (let's use this forum as an example) tend to use language they're secure in. So what happens is that the same number of familiar words and terms are repeated over and over. Nothing intrinsically wrong with that, but on a scale of 1 to 100 it's as if we decide to neglect two thirds, even three quarters, of this wonderful lexicon.

Most importantly, the thing I seek is to understand a poster's intent, and with familiar repetitions becoming the common thread by which we are expected to grasp a poster's message, I am forced to understand most posts, even when words are absent. A strange one really, it's as if the intention exists that we, the reader, are expected to know what a poster's intentions are even when they write in a way that turns our mother tongue on it's head.

Back to your point, yes, amorous and loving share striking similarities, but nuance can separate them by a mile. It's this wealth of meaning, subtle and brazen, that I believe gives us a playground of descriptive writing that is sadly overlooked.

Hence we get different understandings of the meanings of the same words ...

Mrs BoSS - What do you think you're doing, BoSS?

BoSS - I call it being amorous and loving, my sweet!

Mrs BoSS - you call it amorous and loving, I call it being a dirty bastard!

 

[Woodwardfan]

This doesn't answer the question: Who do we loan, or who should we not have signed in order to get a CH or two instead?

Does the above post answer your question?

 

[JJ Sefton]

Louis XIV is supposed to have said "l'etat c'est moi". Could Phippsy justly say "Le Blades c'est moi"?

 

[itsinyerblood]

Hence we get different understandings of the meanings of the same words ...

Mrs BoSS - What do you think you're doing, BoSS?

BoSS - I call it being amorous and loving, my sweet!

Mrs BoSS - you call it amorous and loving, I call it being a dirty bastard!

Ah ha.....more like a cunning use of language to impart different meanings? Loving to suggest how much you value and care for Mrs BoSS, and amorous to suggest that you're in need of something deliciously carnal and rampant.....if you lead with loving you might actually convey that your stiff appendage also values Mrs BoSS in the way she understands, worth a try mate.

 

[Lane Ender]

Fans will not turn on Brayford .

Done is playing with a injury , so a little stop start .

Boardroom issues may take over the footballing issues in weeks to come .

UTB

Even in the depth of utter boredom this year Brayford still stands out
Great signing

 

[JasonEllis]

whats the point of big crowds ,, to lift a team
is it not
why , to raise players spirits , , if you were constantly criticised in your working environment would you be giving 100%

just a thought
its a new team learning to gel it needs encouragement not
fucking hell we are sheffield united we are big already get up there and do it , its not the way to go

I agree entirely with the second bit, I don't think we should be always getting on the players' backs.

However, I don't understand this idea that the performances are not ultimately the players' fault(s). They were mediocre this season long before the fans became so negative. If the argument had basis, it would be that since the negativity has come in performances have got worse.

I would think the performances came first, which initiated the vicious cycle of performances, support, performances, support etc

If the players and staff don't want negativity, they should apply themselves better, and the fans will be back onside. UTB

 

[him behind you]

If "John came in at the same fee Harry went out at " we paid £2.5m or thereabouts.

Russell slade said "it got to apoint we couldn't say no anymore". No fucking onder.

As for £2.5m or thereabouts on a full back, as good as he is, in our predicament what the f*** is going on?

Woops I've just said I'll keep my counsel !

I'm not suggesting you are part of this WWF, but isn't it amasing how many people are suddenly saying that we shouldn't have spent so much money on a right back? At the time I challenged this when we clearly needed a CB and a striker but was told in no unscertain terms that that the signing of such a talisman would generate a huge positive impact on both the team and the supporters so was a good one - have to say that I've not noticed either.

Personally, I think that one of the biggest things JP and the Prince can learn from this season is not pay too much attention to the who the fans want to sign. Clough undoubtedly wanted to sign Brayford but there is also no doubt that the majority of fans were mentioning his name as someone to sign time and time again. I think that probably swung the decision to allow Cough to blow most of his budget on him because it would appease the majority of supporters at a time when things were not all sweetness and light. Going forward the manager (whoever it is) generally has to be backed whenever possible but it should be based on a balanced argument which shows to the board how a specific player is going to have the impact the transfer fee should demand. As supporters we all want to see big name players signed no matter the cost as we can then enjoy watching them entertain us but, unfortunately, the board have to manage the club and the budget and have to accept (as do we) that they can't keep us all happy all of the time.

 

[Revolution]

Personally, I think that one of the biggest things JP and the Prince can learn from this season is not pay too much attention to the who the fans want to sign. Clough undoubtedly wanted to sign Brayford but there is also no doubt that the majority of fans were mentioning his name as someone to sign time and time again.

For me, the big squad building lesson for the year is "when you want to sign a player, check who else you've already got in the squad first".

Have a lot of tiny midfielders? Try and sign taller ones.
Fallen out with your centre backs and don't have any fit good ones? Sign a centre half
Sick of none of your midfield 3 ever scoring? Sign someone with a better scoring record (to be fair, this has now happened with Holt)
Sick of relying on players with poor injury histories? Stop signing more of them.
Have the slowest squad in the division? Sign quicker players.

I really thought we'd had more than our fair share of this crap when Blackwell and Weir ensured we entered 2 out of 4 seasons with no goals in the team at all, but we've had more of the same from someone who should know better.

I understand that a recent programme had a jokey piece about which of Scoogs, Reed and Holt is smaller. That's not funny. It's one of the reasons we aren't going up.

 

[Sothall_Blade]

Weve used more than 40 players

No we haven't.
We've used 32 in the league and 5 others in cups only (Butler, McGinn, Diego, Dimaio and Ben Whiteman).

 

[Punk Blade]

I've had another thought. Fans writing off our playoff campaign isn't negative, it's showing faith that we'll pick up at least one point in the final two league games.

 

[Maidenhead]

Cardiff City went up the road to Leeds last week and won 2-1, good performance and a good result in a traditionally hostile fixture, I bet the 1000 away fans helped spur on the players from Wales to get that winner.

No, Cardiff refused the allocation. The 11 players beat Leeds without a single away chant, proof that fans don't actually influence things as much as some people like to suggest.

or proof that Cardiff are just much better than Leeds?

Got to be the worst arguement ever heard on here.

One result proves a theory.

You should be a politician

 

[Worksop_Blade]

or proof that Cardiff are just much better than Leeds?

Got to be the worst arguement ever heard on here.

One result proves a theory.

You should be a politician

It's not total proof, maybe that was a bad word to use but it is definitely something. Think about the times that clubs have had to play behind closed doors and still won or got a draw.

The fanbase in modern football is nothing but a small number in the company accounts, a revenue stream that can be emotionally blackmailed into returning over and over again no matter how badly it is treated.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

No of course it's not. It's a ridiculous quote.

United fans turn up in their bloody thousands, week in week out and those sorts of numbers deserve a lot better on the pitch and off it. This constant sniping by the desperate is a joke and apart from the blindless patriots, the likes of Phipps and Clough certainly know better. When you are panicking or simply looking for excuses it's much easier to blame everyone else isn't it.

Yes we can do without the 'boo boy's' and 'daft rants' but unfortunately it's a by product of what we are witnessing on the pitch. What was noticeable to me on Saturday was how eager the fans were to get behind the team. First half was like a morgue but second 90 when the team pushed on a bit, the whole of the crowd was immediately lifted. Yep, the crowds demeanor didn't last long but neither did the quality of the play on the pitch.

Was it another point gained or two points lost? To be honest I don't really give a shit but like many of the 19,000 to 21,000 who regularly turn up and pay their money I want to see us having a go, I want to see something positive and exciting, I want hope, and I want to be entertained.

Give us that and the crowd will pay the team back in shovel fulls - they always have.

Average gates of over 19,000 and they are having a go at the fans - Phipps and co you are taking the piss!

As always:
It's not all fans
Turning up and supporting are different things
Negativity adversely affects performance

There are other responses but my phone is too small for sausage fingers.

 

[William Henry Foulkes]

It's not total proof, maybe that was a bad word to use but it is definitely something. Think about the times that clubs have had to play behind closed doors and still won or got a draw.

The fanbase in modern football is nothing but a small number in the company accounts, a revenue stream that can be emotionally blackmailed into returning over and over again no matter how badly it is treated.

That may have some truth at some clubs and TV companies but from everything he says and does Mr Phipps cares about the club and the fans. I am very glad he is on board.

 

[Bladebri]

Serious question where would Clough get another job?
His CV is utterly appalling.
He presided over one of the worst 5 years spells in Derby's long history.

He sends his dad's cv in.

 

[Worksop_Blade]

That may have some truth at some clubs and TV companies but from everything he says and does Mr Phipps cares about the club and the fans. I am very glad he is on board.

It must be lovely, being able to blindly follow and trust absolutely everyone.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/lip+service

 

[blade too long]

and of the 32 squad members we have played several have been farmed out on loan now
and several left in january , we probably have the 24 clough was looking to arrive at

 

[itsinyerblood]

Serious question where would Clough get another job?
His CV is utterly appalling.
He presided over one of the worst 5 years spells in Derby's long history.

You forgot to mention - Clough was forced to sell many of Derby's most rated players. He was told by the board to encourage a policy where the team depended on youth development. So please refrain from making statements that are inaccurate. Factually incorrect, or perhaps I should rephrase, no facts at all. Just a damning statement that collapses upon examination.

 

[secretchief]

He was under severe financial constraints for a long period at Derby.

He isn't under any now.