A reminder to the board bashers

[Nicolaus_Copernicus]

I've been educated by Nicolaus_Copernicus a few moments ago. I was wrong. We did borrow. However, it doesn't look as if it worked.

Back to the spreadsheet, up the income, lower the contingency, off we go again.

May I unreservedly apologise Sean Thornton , my response to your post was uncalled for.

 

[Sean Thornton]

May I unreservedly apologise Sean Thornton , my response to your post was uncalled for.

No need mate. On the money really

 

[west_yorks_blade]

No need mate. On the money really

Get a room - the pair of you.

But TBF I’m not sure that Sean/Holden has ever backed down and apologised before.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Get a room - the pair of you.

But TBF I’m not sure that Sean/Holden has ever backed down and apologised before.

Not true WYB. But the myth continues......

Did you read about the German guy who said I was really funny? Better than a 100 likes or good post comments

 

[Esablade]

It’s all relative in’t it...relative to the majority of clubs in the Champ, the board have given Wilder peanuts.

Now that’s a fact.

 

[west_yorks_blade]

Not true WYB. But the myth continues......

Did you read about the German guy who said I was really funny? Better than a 100 likes or good post comments

I missed that one. I must have been booking a room in the copthorne for you and Nicky at the time.
Are you still ok for pinchy to join you? He still likes to be spooned until he nods off.

 

[Dkc]

People underestimate the value of a good manager who knows the lower leagues. Bassett and Warnock both achieved promotion to the top flight on a relative shoestring. What their sides had was a fantastic team spirit and a winning mentality. It took Warnock a few years, and a lot of players, before he found the right combination. I doubt he, or any other manager, would be given so much time today

Give Wilder five more years and I'd expect a couple of top six finishes, or at least top ten, perhaps a cup semi, even on a limited budget. We could even get promoted if he hits on the right combination and has a bit of luck. The problem is, too many fans want success right now.

Admittedly the financial discrepancies are a lot greater these days, and the parachute payments make a mockery of the "level playing field" idea but in the end it's still eleven v eleven. The longer CW and AK stay at the club, the better chance we have of success imo.

As for investment, it would be great to find a backer willing to spunk 50 million knowing that only three teams get promoted, and ten teams in the league have similar financial clout. But no way should we borrow big from the bank in an attempt to compete with the richest teams in the Championship. That would surely end in disaster.

 

[spongebobblade]

Money spent wisely is better than no money spent.

Premiership - top 6 biggest 6 spenders
Championship - Wolves, Villa , Cardiff, Boro, Derby etc all spent more than us.
League 1. You use an example of a playoff team. I will choose the two biggest spenders in Blackburn and Wigan.
League 2 Accrington - unreal job!!! Luton biggest spenders.

So before you pull out 5 teams think before you post.

We have had money and spent it, in Wilders opinion, wisely. It may not be to a level we want but at least it isn’t putting the club in financial jeopardy.
Your point was spending little guarantees a relegation battle. I proved it didn’t. I’d suggest it’s you who should think before you post

 

[blade too long]

It doesn't make a mockery of anything.

The facts are clear that in the main the teams with money have notably more success than those who don't

wasnt the case last season 2 of 3 that went up didnt spend among the top 10 highest outlays

66 per cent didnt spink huge amounts to go up
Blackpool bournemouth burnley palace were all grossly out spent but went up

It is a rule of thumb at the very very top but thats due to the huge ammounts spent

What is pai for championshop top end players is very unscientific as Wednesday utterly wasting 9 m on Rhodes shows

We have fallen just short due to major injury losses to Coutts and Freeman whose 10 goals he got last season could have made all the difference with even 5 or 6 more at key times. The most pertinent fact is we just dont have the investors to put in what we need , McCabe gives what he thinks he can , but West Brom , Stoke etc have boards with 5 mccabes on them all putting in.

 

[Pedro's Winger]

oh dear!

Look mate, you believe what you want to believe. I believe the club hasn't been ambitious enough in terms of giving Wilder a little bit more financial flexibility in January to bring in some very good quality players, whether that be a short-term loan, or whatever. I think that was a golden opportunity missed and I think the investment could have been raised to do so.

I'm not "Board Bashing" - I think they've actually done a sound job over the past few years in stabilising the club and their approach has been sensible in the main. But on this occasion I think they've missed a trick, I really do.

That's my opinion - sorry if you don't like it - but there it is.

Wilder's thought along the same lines and who can blame him.
If he isn't supported in the summer and another more ambitious club comes along and says we will support you in the transfer market no-one could blame him for walking away.

 

[Chali 2na]

I use Mitrovic as an example, but yes I do. I think we should be looking for players like that, obviously a top player but one who wasn't getting in the first team at a Prem club at the time. It would cost a lot in wages, but for just over 4 months if we'd signed him in Jan - and we'd probably be able to negotiate something with the parent club.

Well sticking to Mitrovic example, ask yourself the following:

How much of Mitrovic's £60000pw wages would we be willing to cover?

Would we be able to cover a higher percentage of his wages than Fulham or Anderlecht?

Would we be able to make a better financial offer to Newcastle than Fulham or Anderlecht?

Would we be a more attractive proposition to a Mitrovic than said clubs?

 

[Nicolaus_Copernicus]

Well sticking to Mitrovic example, ask yourself the following:

How much of Mitrovic's £60000pw wages would we be willing to cover? According to the Belgian Press he's on 2m euros a year at Newcastle, which equates to £1.75m a year. @Danny04 thinks it's £60k a week. Judging by posts & comments on here, we would've been able to theoretically cover 25% of his salary under our current wage structure.

Would we be able to cover a higher percentage of his wages than Fulham or Anderlecht? Anderlecht & Mitrovic were asking Newcastle to pay 100% of his wages for the duration of the loan.

Would we be able to make a better financial offer to Newcastle than Fulham or Anderlecht? Fulham have reportedly paid Newcastle £600k as a Loan Fee. I took this to be as well as a % of his salary.

Would we be a more attractive proposition to a Mitrovic than said clubs?

No. Newcastle had agreed a deal with Bordeaux, which he turned down. He wanted to go back to Anderlecht as he's played for them before. He's gone to Fulham because of their Serbian manager. According to reports even when Fulham had made a better offer than Anderlecht, Mitrovic played silly buggers for an 1hr to try and force through the Anderlecht move. The deal was done so late that Fulham had to get the Anderlecht Doctor to carry out the medical on their behalf.

It's worth noting at this point that due to his scoring at Fulham, Newcastle are starting the bidding for him at £20m pre-world cup & will probably wait and see how he fairs there.

 

[Chali 2na]

9

No. Newcastle had agreed a deal with Bordeaux, which he turned down. He wanted to go back to Anderlecht as he's played for them before. He's gone to Fulham because of their Serbian manager. According to reports even when Fulham had made a better offer than Anderlecht, Mitrovic played silly buggers for an 1hr to try and force through the Anderlecht move. The deal was done so late that Fulham had to get the Anderlecht Doctor to carry out the medical on their behalf.

It's worth noting at this point that due to his scoring at Fulham, Newcastle are starting the bidding for him at £20m pre-world cup & will probably wait and see how he fairs there.

What do you mean 'No.'?

How does any of that information make Mitrovic a more realistic signing?

 

[Nicolaus_Copernicus]

9

What do you mean 'No.'?

How does any of that information make Mitrovic a more realistic signing?

I mean 'no' in the sense that even if we could have funded the deal, we wouldn't be attractive to either Mitrovic or his level of player (international player due to take part in the world cup). That bit of the answer was meant to follow on from your 5th question.

My answers to your questions weren't meant to make Mitrovic a more likely signing, they were just answering the questions you posed & clarified the facts of the deal, eg. his salary, the loan fee & how he ended up at Fulham.

Without getting bogged down with the signing of a player that we never had any chance of making, I think the better point of discussion is that, using Mitrovic as an archetypal figure, could we have in theory, funded the loan signing of a premiership/high championship quality striker (better than Wilson) if we compare what we have spent in the JTW. I personally think the answer is yes, someone like Grabban for instance. We didn't and that is CW's choice, and even if we had of acquired his services on loan it wouldn't have lead to a permanent signing because are wanting big money for him.

 

[Chali 2na]

I mean 'no' in the sense that even if we could have funded the deal, we wouldn't be attractive to either Mitrovic or his level of player (international player due to take part in the world cup). That bit of the answer was meant to follow on from your 5th question.

My answers to your questions weren't meant to make Mitrovic a more likely signing, they were just answering the questions you posed & clarified the facts of the deal, eg. his salary, the loan fee & how he ended up at Fulham.

Without getting bogged down with the signing of a player that we never had any chance of making, I think the better point of discussion is that, using Mitrovic as an archetypal figure, could we have in theory, funded the loan signing of a premiership/high championship quality striker (better than Wilson) if we compare what we have spent in the JTW. I personally think the answer is yes, someone like Grabban for instance. We didn't and that is CW's choice.

I was unaware of the exact circumstances surrounding Mitrovic, but in my mind, your post further strengthened my original point: he's an unrealistic target.

As for Grabban: he went to Villa, so the same questions apply: could we offer more than Villa (wages/fee), and are we a more attractive proposition than Villa? I would say no to both.

 

[Bladezz]

We have had money and spent it, in Wilders opinion, wisely. It may not be to a level we want but at least it isn’t putting the club in financial jeopardy.
Your point was spending little guarantees a relegation battle. I proved it didn’t. I’d suggest it’s you who should think before you post

Let’s hope next season your right.

 

[Isaw Joeshaw]

It's the word chequer does some strange things can be quite embarrassing if I don't notice it, as you just saw.

You need to get that chequer checked out then !

 

[andy m]

Is that a subsidiary of RBS?

I'm intrigued that someone knows where finance can be raised but that the owners just didn't bother.

Presumably it has to be paid back though.

What about W

Consultant speak. Draw up a business plan, make it fit the aim. Worry about it only when it goes wrong. Do another plan.

Borrow money then. Didnt work before. Spent heavily after PL relegation. Lost heavily, borrowed more.

Which financial institutions. You must know of a few it seems.

No business plan? Rubbish. Ones that haven't worked undoubtedly.

Sometimes its not the plan that is wrong but the person charged with implementing it.
We trusted the wrong people with the investment, namely Robson and Blackwell.

 

[Tom Bott]

Where could they raise the money from?

From all the fans who demand we spend more, because it is an investment.

Though when I was at school it was spelt - gamble.

When the money is someone elses it cannot be a gamble because all the risk is taken by someone else..

 

[Tom Bott]

How many times can we fail

I find it quite sad that having seen some of the best footballing entertainment in years at BDTBL some see it as failure.

 

[Tom Bott]

everyone would be delighted

Funny how last season no one was saying we should have spent/invested/gambled more.

This season we have spent more than last season but now it seems that is not enough.

Maybe season tickets should increase by say 30% to see a similar increase in player fees.

I can see the thread headers already.

 

[Keen Blade]

We don't have the money to replace Coutts but ignoring that for a moment who would you have brought in to replace him?

We apparently bid £4m for Conor Coady.
A player we once had on loan and failed to sign permanently , though his quality was patently obvious.
Another sign of our ineptitude.
However I am not paid to scout players.
Wilder is.
And his mantra is "Don't get players in for the sake of it - they have to be better than what's already here".
They have to IMPROVE , not just bolster the squad.
Brave words for a man on a tight budget.
Or is it bluster to cover for his potless co-owners ?
I give you James Wilson , Ricky Holmes , Ryan Leonard , Lee Evans , John Lundstrom , Nathan Thomas & Ben Heneghan.
Are any of them anywhere near Coutts level ?
Or Fleck ?
Or Duffy ?
So why bring em in ?
How can this club "move forward" if the co-owners are more interested in a private cockfight than stumping up to back their manager , ultimately making his words sound hollow.

 

[Isaw Joeshaw]

We apparently bid £4m for Conor Coady.
A player we once had on loan and failed to sign permanently , though his quality was patently obvious.
Another sign of our ineptitude.
However I am not paid to scout players.
Wilder is.
And his mantra is "Don't get players in for the sake of it - they have to be better than what's already here".
They have to IMPROVE , not just bolster the squad.
Brave words for a man on a tight budget.
Or is it bluster to cover for his potless co-owners ?
I give you James Wilson , Ricky Holmes , Ryan Leonard , Lee Evans , John Lundstrom , Nathan Thomas & Ben Heneghan.
Are any of them anywhere near Coutts level ?
Or Fleck ?
Or Duffy ?
So why bring em in ?
How can this club "move forward" if the co-owners are more interested in a private cockfight than stumping up to back their manager , ultimately making his words sound hollow.

So all these players were identified by the board then, and CW was told to go and sign them rather than an ( unspecified ) range of talent that he would have preferred ?

I don't think so. In respect of at least two of them, he chased them for over a year and then almost immediately consigned them to the backwaters as not being good enough.

 

[HolmesfieldBlade]

Huddersfield

To be fair, they did spend big money.

A large chunk on hefty wages for foreign players, very similar to Wolves.

 

[Maidenhead]

I find it quite sad that having seen some of the best footballing entertainment in years at BDTBL some see it as failure.

I completely agree.

That is one line from a longer post taken out of context.

The only thing we have failed to do is to get promotion (because we won't), nowhere have I branded the club or anyone connected with it a failure.

If I had been offered our current position in August ie. above Leeds and Wednesday having played them both twice and taken 10 of the 12 points on offer I would have bitten your hand off.

The problem now is that we got off to a real flyer and were then unable to sustain it for the season.

If our season had mirrored Milwalls, and we had stormed up the table in the second half of the season, most of the people that are moaning now would be delighted with the season.

I have to say that I understand that too because expectations were raised by our great start and ultimately dashed as the season petered out so there is bound to some feelings of disappointment for all of us.

 

[Maidenhead]

I'd put it to you that you could have raised the funds to buy it. You might have had to sell other things, like your house, to do so, or made other sacrifices, but the chances are you could have raised the funds. However, you decided that the benefits weren't worth the risks. And that's what businesses do in this situation. They weigh up the pro's and con's of investing in something and what it would mean if they did, and to what extent. And also what it would mean if they didn't.

"Risk/benefit ratio" it's called. We all take such things into account, often subconsciously, when making purchasing decisions or other types of decisions. My point is that the Board have been too "risk averse" when faced with the situation the club found themselves in, in January.

By "risk averse" I take it that you mean unprepared to gamble?

In which case I'm fully behind them as I've never seen a poor bookie.

 

[Keen Blade]

So all these players were identified by the board then, and CW was told to go and sign them rather than an ( unspecified ) range of talent that he would have preferred ?

I don't think so. In respect of at least two of them, he chased them for over a year and then almost immediately consigned them to the backwaters as not being good enough.

So you are saying that Wilder wasn't constrained by his budget to look amongst a range of players who were poorer than the ones we already had ?

 

[Revolution]

What all this comes down is, not for the first time in our glorious history, those who own the club do not have the means to compete financially with many teams in the same division and therefore we have not had, and will not get, the level of funding that would make it more likely that we could get another promotion.

This is more than a little disappointing given the mantra from the Prince's people that serious investment would come from him after promotion. One wonders whether the amount he was prepared to invest will buy you a lot less than it would have had we been promoted a couple of years earlier. Or perhaps he's holding out because of the current kerfuffle between him and McCabe.

Nothing ever changes. Oh well. Fingers crossed Wilder has a better summer transfer window than his January one.

 

[Keen Blade]

So all these players were identified by the board then, and CW was told to go and sign them rather than an ( unspecified ) range of talent that he would have preferred ?

I don't think so. In respect of at least two of them, he chased them for over a year and then almost immediately consigned them to the backwaters as not being good enough.

You must have a lot of bumps in car parks if you don't recognize that you've gone into reverse when you were hoping to move your car forwards

 

[Maidenhead]

So you are saying that Wilder wasn't constrained by his budget to look amongst a range of players who were poorer than the ones we already had ?

If Wilder had thought that his January signings were poorer than the players we already had, then he wouldn't have signed them.

He has repeatedly said that Lenny and Holmes will be much better next season after having a full pre season with us and working on the right kind of fitness and conditioning.

He may or may not be proved right but coming into a team from outside the set up, halfway through a season is not easy for any player.

If by this time next year the two above named players are still with us and still making minimal contributions then it will be fair to say that CW got it wrong.