McCabe has to go

[blade too long]

We signed Leon Clarke on July 26th . Don't have to buy players in a rush

 

[1973Blade]

Entirely McCabes fault - so little spent in last JTW that wisewblade89 has been bashing his head against a brick wall ever since

I thought only O'Connell headed bricks

 

[BladeInIreland]

There are so many clubs spunking money year in year out yet only 3 can reach the promised land and every year there are 3-9 clubs with substantial parachute payments to give them a head start. The odds are stacked against you before you kick a ball unless you are prepared to put the clubs finances and future at serious risk. Is that what you want?
“Do you honestly believe we wouldn’t be better if Wilder had more money to spend?” is what you ask. Well Wilder has an increased budget and will get some of the Brooks money. What more do you want? You’ve no idea how much he’s getting so why the flouncing?

What serious risk? If clubs are doing this year in year out at a serious risk, where are the repercussions? None of the bigish clubs have folded.
In regards to what I could possibly want more than wilder getting a cut of the brooks money, how about saying no, keeping our best players and still giving wilder a decent budget to improve the side. That's the logical way of getting a good team. Keeping your best and replacing your weakest. Or even if we have to sell, hold out for a decent bloody fee and make the lot available to the manager

 

[Cerberus Blade]

Sometimes it’s just not possible to hold on to your best players. In that situation you have to ensure you get a good fee and use that money to ensure you strengthen, or at least don’t weaken, the squad.

Sometimes that’s also difficult to achieve. Take the sale of TC. There probably wasn’t another player in England who we could have signed to fill his boots. However, if we’d got a good enough fee we could have improved the team in more than one area, which cumulatively would have not weakened and probably strengthened the squad overall. But we didn’t do that either! And the decline that ensued from there onwards is well documented.

The Brooks sale was brought about by a combination of factors. Not least being the fact that Wilder didn’t give him the game time he felt he should have had. That’s a big one actually. I am not critical of Wilder for that. On the occasions when Brooks did start he didn’t impress as much, in general, as what he did from the bench (Sheffield Derby excepted).

But I don’t think we could have done anything to keep Brooks under the circumstances. What we did do was get a very good fee.

What we don’t know is how much of that will Wilder get to spend on incoming talent?

That’s the time to judge McCabe’s ambition, not now, and don’t forget the other fella with an interest in a Belgium club.

 

[spongebobblade]

What serious risk? If clubs are doing this year in year out at a serious risk, where are the repercussions? None of the bigish clubs have folded.
In regards to what I could possibly want more than wilder getting a cut of the brooks money, how about saying no, keeping our best players and still giving wilder a decent budget to improve the side. That's the logical way of getting a good team. Keeping your best and replacing your weakest. Or even if we have to sell, hold out for a decent bloody fee and make the lot available to the manager

You’ve no idea how much Wilder will get so that’s a non starter. Decent fee? Wilder obviously thinks so so your more of an expert than he is? He wasn’t a regular and he only had potential. Why stop a player from leaving if they want to go? Wake up!! It’s the nature of the game these days for Christ’s sake. Even Real Madrid are facing a losing battle to keep hold of Ronaldo.
What serious risk? Are you for real? Clubs may not fold but they suffer the consequences long term. Portsmouth are a great example. So this extra money then. Come on, where’s it coming from?

 

[Tom Bott]

If you don’t want a team that has an owner with ambition go and support Ipswich or Rotherham

As you only wish to support a club with ambition why not support Sunderland.

 

[essexblade73]

Seen some right fannies on facebook groups crying about players leaving just cos some two bob hack writes a bulshit post about it. Thick as pigshit some people.

 

[BladeInIreland]

You’ve no idea how much Wilder will get so that’s a non starter. Decent fee? Wilder obviously thinks so so your more of an expert than he is? He wasn’t a regular and he only had potential. Why stop a player from leaving if they want to go? Wake up!! It’s the nature of the game these days for Christ’s sake. Even Real Madrid are facing a losing battle to keep hold of Ronaldo.
What serious risk? Are you for real? Clubs may not fold but they suffer the consequences long term. Portsmouth are a great example. So this extra money then. Come on, where’s it coming from?

No i don't know for a fact, that doesn't make it a non starter given the years of transfer dealings its evident he won't get the lot. Do you seriously think he will?

Why does wilder obviously think so? Maybe he just wanted a bigger budget so sacrificed brooks. I doubt he did the negotiating.
I think he was a very good player now, not just potential but that's just my opinion.
Why stop a player leaving? To set a precedent. We must be seen as the countries bargin bin. cLubs Can and do hold on to players. At least to drive the price up. Yes its the nature of the game that players move up the food chain , but it's down to us to get good value so we may reinvest a significant amount and progress ourselves. Think Southampton.

Yes I'm very serious about the point about serious risk. The worst case scenario you can name didn't fold and are already on there return. We spent 6 years in league one due to our balancing the books philosophy. Difference being Portsmouth had years in the premier league and won a trophy, which are the mugs? Most of the teams (just about all of them) spending more then they should never even get these repercussions. They just spend there money year in year out on players from the likes of good ol play by the rules Sheffield United.

 

[Harrisblade]

No i don't know for a fact, that doesn't make it a non starter given the years of transfer dealings its evident he won't get the lot. Do you seriously think he will?

Why does wilder obviously think so? Maybe he just wanted a bigger budget so sacrificed brooks. I doubt he did the negotiating.
I think he was a very good player now, not just potential but that's just my opinion.
Why stop a player leaving? To set a precedent. We must be seen as the countries bargin bin. cLubs Can and do hold on to players. At least to drive the price up. Yes its the nature of the game that players move up the food chain , but it's down to us to get good value so we may reinvest a significant amount and progress ourselves. Think Southampton.

Yes I'm very serious about the point about serious risk. The worst case scenario you can name didn't fold and are already on there return. We spent 6 years in league one due to our balancing the books philosophy. Difference being Portsmouth had years in the premier league and won a trophy, which are the mugs? Most of the teams (just about all of them) spending more then they should never even get these repercussions. They just spend there money year in year out on players from the likes of good ol play by the rules Sheffield United.

Don't worry about the rules for the moment - where exactly is the money that you want to spend coming from?

 

[BladeInIreland]

Don't worry about the rules for the moment - where exactly is the money that you want to spend coming from?

New owner hopefully.

 

[Houston_Blade]

Why stop a player leaving? To set a precedent. We must be seen as the countries bargin bin. cLubs Can and do hold on to players. At least to drive the price up. Yes its the nature of the game that players move up the food chain , but it's down to us to get good value so we may reinvest a significant amount and progress ourselves. Think Southampton.

We spent 6 years in league one due to our balancing the books philosophy.

On these 2 points:

If you stop a player leaving for a modest amount of money then fair enough, however if it's a reasonable fee, which £12m for a Sheffield United is more than reasonable, then we have no chance. Once his head is turned he's going and to keep him at the club is counter productive.

In terms of going out and spending the money, I would rather see us use some to reduce the operating losses for a few months and invest a proportion of it sensibly into transfers.

The 6 years in league one wasn't due to balancing the books, it was due to poor decision making both from the board and the managers.

 

[Harrisblade]

New owner hopefully.

Which is what McCabe's been hoping to find for for the last 5 or 6 years (if not longer)

 

[BladeInIreland]

On these 2 points:

If you stop a player leaving for a modest amount of money then fair enough, however if it's a reasonable fee, which £12m for a Sheffield United is more than reasonable, then we have no chance. Once his head is turned he's going and to keep him at the club is counter productive.

In terms of going out and spending the money, I would rather see us use some to reduce the operating losses for a few months and invest a proportion of it sensibly into transfers.

The 6 years in league one wasn't due to balancing the books, it was due to poor decision making both from the board and the managers.

Well we will have to agree to disagree on the first bit because my opinion is we should of got more for brooks. As well for other former players.

As for the second bit, ye obviously decisions from the managers(hired by the board) and the board themselves contributed to our fall. The main point being the constant desire to balance the books. A cycle of selling our best player, spending a portion of it on cheaper gambles and the rest covering losses , hoping somehow we wouldn't be worse off. Rinse and repeat till were in league one. Then our income is even less and we have to scale down further. We were on a downward spiral using this strategy untill the prince stepped in. And if we go back to it, we will be back where we started.

 

[BladeInIreland]

Which is what McCabe's been hoping to find for for the last 5 or 6 years (if not longer)

Exactly, he knows it himself. For us to progress, or even sustain we need a new face, new money.
Til kev finds someone willing to pay his price the best we can do is get value for money if we have to sell. And if we do, make it available to the manager.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Well we will have to agree to disagree on the first bit because my opinion is we should of got more for brooks. As well for other former players.

As for the second bit, ye obviously decisions from the managers(hired by the board) and the board themselves contributed to our fall. The main point being the constant desire to balance the books. A cycle of selling our best player, spending a portion of it on cheaper gambles and the rest covering losses , hoping somehow we wouldn't be worse off. Rinse and repeat till were in league one. Then our income is even less and we have to scale down further. We were on a downward spiral using this strategy untill the prince stepped in. And if we go back to it, we will be back where we started.

I'll ask you as no one else has answered, how could we HAVE got more for Brooks when there was only one bid on the table.

Same question for Maguire, Adams, Ramsdale, Calvert--Lewin.

 

[I should coco]

I'll ask you as know one else has answered, how could we HAVE got more for Brooks when there was only one bid on the table.

Same question for Maguire, Adams, Ramsdale, Calvert--Lewin.

Silly question!

Obviously 'better' businessmen would have got more, but the even beter premium businessmen would have kept Brook(e)s by paying him the £30k a week he wants.

Okay, okay, Coutts, Fleck, JOC etc would all want parity but the better businessmen would have got better sponsorship deals to pay for all this.

And where do we find these 'better businessmen' I hear you ask?

Obvious.

On the Better Businessmen Tree. It is in the Enchanted Wood near to the original Money Tree.

Simples, innit?

 

[Sean Thornton]

Silly question!

Obviously 'better' businessmen would have got more, but the even beter premium businessmen would have kept Brook(e)s by paying him the £30k a week he wants.

Okay, okay, Coutts, Fleck, JOC etc would all want parity but the better businessmen would have got better sponsorship deals to pay for all this.

And where do we find these 'better businessmen' I hear you ask?

Obvious.

On the Better Businessmen Tree. It is in the Enchanted Wood near to the original Money Tree.

Simples, innit?

Is that the tree that has those "special" mushrooms growing around the base?

 

[BladeInIreland]

I'll ask you as no one else has answered, how could we HAVE got more for Brooks when there was only one bid on the table.

Same question for Maguire, Adams, Ramsdale, Calvert--Lewin.

Set the asking price high, if they don't meet it don't sell. The longer we drag it out the better it would of been for us. More clubs attention, more desperation from the buyers. Even if we held on till January we would have got a better deal. Sure sometimes it wouldn't pay off, but in the grand scheme of things it would.

 

[BladeInIreland]

Silly question!

Obviously 'better' businessmen would have got more, but the even beter premium businessmen would have kept Brook(e)s by paying him the £30k a week he wants.

Okay, okay, Coutts, Fleck, JOC etc would all want parity but the better businessmen would have got better sponsorship deals to pay for all this.

And where do we find these 'better businessmen' I hear you ask?

Obvious.

On the Better Businessmen Tree. It is in the Enchanted Wood near to the original Money Tree.

Simples, innit?

Why do you find it so hard to believe there's people out there in football who can negotiate good deals?

Why would we need to pay brooks 30k? Your right , that's silly he was already under contract.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Set the asking price high, if they don't meet it don't sell. The longer we drag it out the better it would of been for us. More clubs attention, more desperation from the buyers. Even if we held on till January we would have got a better deal. Sure sometimes it wouldn't pay off, but in the grand scheme of things it would.

No real downside whatsoever then? Don't you think all PL clubs were aware of DB? I didn't see much desperation this time, did you. In the meantime, Wilder cant strengthen the squad and we have an unhappy player.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Why do you find it so hard to believe there's people out there in football who can negotiate good deals?

Why would we need to pay brooks 30k? Your right , that's silly he was already under contract.

I certainly think there are. I don't think any fan on a football forum has any idea of the complexity and difficulty involved and the simple notion of "set the fees" high shows that.

£12m for Brooks, rated by some on here at £20m, yet no one bid £13m.

Without knowing what's in a contract, that arguments moot from all sides.

 

[BladeInIreland]

No real downside whatsoever then? Don't you think all PL clubs were aware of DB? I didn't see much desperation this time, did you. In the meantime, Wilder cant strengthen the squad and we have an unhappy player.

No desperation no, that's my point. Look I see what your saying, don't mistake me for someone who thinks the club is always wrong, but I feel we have had a hell of a lot of talent through our doors with relatively little back. If we stop being the bargin bin, we could really replicate Southampton rise. And without major investment that's our most realistic avenue.
Wilder already had a budget he was supposedly happy with before brooks left, are we saying that's not the case? If so I can fully understand the desperate rush to sell. If not then why the rush?.

 

[Champagneblade]

I'll ask you as no one else has answered, how could we HAVE got more for Brooks when there was only one bid on the table.

Same question for Maguire, Adams, Ramsdale, Calvert--Lewin.

Absolutely no guarantees. You can’t realistically get the maximum outcome and also have the convenience of getting it when it suits you best. There is usually some compromise.

Hold out until end of the window and some clubs get desperate. But what chance of building the optimum squad if the money only comes in last minute?

You could sell in Jan when prices are more volatile but you risk an unhappy player for 4 months and then you’ll be hunting replacements in an equally unfavourable market.

In a strange way 12m by the 2nd of July may well be better than 14m the day before the window shuts or in January and I’m sure Chris knows that.

Your options are to reject outright or decide on accepting above a level. Other factors are beyond your control.

We could have got more perhaps but how when and by then how useful would it be?

 

[BladeInIreland]

I certainly think there are. I don't think any fan on a football forum has any idea of the complexity and difficulty involved and the simple notion of "set the fees" high shows that.

£12m for Brooks, rated by some on here at £20m, yet no one bid £13m.

Without knowing what's in a contract, that arguments moot from all sides.

Just because I and everyone here doesn't know, doesn't mean the club shouldn't either, when clearly other clubs do.

 

[Houston_Blade]

Well we will have to agree to disagree on the first bit because my opinion is we should of got more for brooks. As well for other former players.

As for the second bit, ye obviously decisions from the managers(hired by the board) and the board themselves contributed to our fall. The main point being the constant desire to balance the books. A cycle of selling our best player, spending a portion of it on cheaper gambles and the rest covering losses , hoping somehow we wouldn't be worse off. Rinse and repeat till were in league one. Then our income is even less and we have to scale down further. We were on a downward spiral using this strategy untill the prince stepped in. And if we go back to it, we will be back where we started.

How much was Brooks worth then? A player for a mid-table Championship team with a handful of appearances and a few goals, as well as a few sub appearances for Wales (who don't exactly have the biggest pool to select players from) then I think £12m plus add ons and the inevitable future fee % is more than acceptable.

Maguire, head was turned. Naughton, head was turned. Walker, head was turned. Slew, we got 10 times his worth. Eastwood, head was turned. Lowton, head was turned. Any others?

Balancing the books isn't something you can just choose to do or not to do, if there are losses you have to fund them, if you don't you'll go bust like many clubs have. Others will also fall foul of FFP this year and then the gamble was for nothing. If what you are suggesting is that we should throw loads of money at it, go bust and come back then I completely disagree, this is the cowards way out and puts us below the Pigs, Portsmouth's, QPR's, Rangers etc of this world morally and ethically.

Our owners have funded the losses over the years and I don't blame them for no longer pouring good money after bad. The Prince came in and over promised, not McCabe's fault.

Who would you prefer as our chairman if not the Prince or McCabe? I've heard there's a bloke in Baku with some fake money burning a hole in his pocket, maybe the bloke at Villa or Birmingham. What's Mandaric up to nowadays? Maybe he could come in put a few bob in and they sell us to a morally corrupt far-east businessman a few years down the line? Are there any bored NFL owners fancying a try at getting The Blades into the top "soccer" league in England, we could ask one of them?

 

[I should coco]

Why do you find it so hard to believe there's people out there in football who can negotiate good deals?

And why do you find it so hard to believe that self made multi millionaire doen't know the first thing about a deal and gets his leg lifted every single time?

Why would we need to pay brooks 30k? Your right , that's silly he was already under contract.

So you think that his new agents would have been happy for him to see out the existing contract on £10k per week when at least one Premer Legue club were very interested?

 

[BladeInIreland]

And why do you find it so hard to believe that self made multi millionaire doen't know the first thing about a deal and gets his leg lifted every single time?



So you think that his new agents would have been happy for him to see out the existing contract on £10k per week when at least one Premer Legue club were very interested?

Construction and football are two very different things, as is football ten years ago and now.

Why would I care how happy his new agent is? What's he going to do, refuse to play? Purposely play bad? Both outcomes would ruin his chance of a big move and that big contract. Look at Leonard from southend, got told were keeping you till January, if we don't look like going up you can go. As long as pur asking price is met.

 

[HoodedClaw]

Why do you find it so hard to believe there's people out there in football who can negotiate good deals?

Why would we need to pay brooks 30k? Your right , that's silly he was already under contract.

How would you feel if your employer stopped you moving to a new job that would increase your salary by 6+ times?

As admirable as it is just wanting to say he's not for sale, until we can compete more on wages we're going to be vulnerable to teams wanting our players and our players wanting to leave, like Brooks did.

 

[BladeInIreland]

How much was Brooks worth then? A player for a mid-table Championship team with a handful of appearances and a few goals, as well as a few sub appearances for Wales (who don't exactly have the biggest pool to select players from) then I think £12m plus add ons and the inevitable future fee % is more than acceptable.

Maguire, head was turned. Naughton, head was turned. Walker, head was turned. Slew, we got 10 times his worth. Eastwood, head was turned. Lowton, head was turned. Any others?

Balancing the books isn't something you can just choose to do or not to do, if there are losses you have to fund them, if you don't you'll go bust like many clubs have. Others will also fall foul of FFP this year and then the gamble was for nothing. If what you are suggesting is that we should throw loads of money at it, go bust and come back then I completely disagree, this is the cowards way out and puts us below the Pigs, Portsmouth's, QPR's, Rangers etc of this world morally and ethically.

Our owners have funded the losses over the years and I don't blame them for no longer pouring good money after bad. The Prince came in and over promised, not McCabe's fault.

Who would you prefer as our chairman if not the Prince or McCabe? I've heard there's a bloke in Baku with some fake money burning a hole in his pocket, maybe the bloke at Villa or Birmingham. What's Mandaric up to nowadays? Maybe he could come in put a few bob in and they sell us to a morally corrupt far-east businessman a few years down the line? Are there any bored NFL owners fancying a try at getting The Blades into the top "soccer" league in England, we could ask one of them?

I have asked this a few times, name a semi big English club that has folded?
I'm struggling to see these harsh punishments for teams who don't follow the rules.
What does it matter if heads are turned? We still decide whether a bid is acceptable or not. Although some on your list are debatable (walker never pushed for a move) .
Having said that, no I'm not suggesting throwing loads of money at it, but that doesn't mean we have to get pushed around by clubs, agents and players.
Believe it or not I don't have a list of owners id like. Is there honestly no one you would rather have? Is the prince and Kev as good as it gets in your opinion?

 

[BladeInIreland]

How would you feel if your employer stopped you moving to a new job that would increase your salary by 6+ times?

As admirable as it is just wanting to say he's not for sale, until we can compete more on wages we're going to be vulnerable to teams wanting our players and our players wanting to leave, like Brooks did.

I'm not saying he would like it, but he sure as hell would have to lump it.