The Brooks Money

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Sean Thornton said:
The £7m we borrowed. Presumably to fund running costs.

Maybe he meant "his share" of the Brooks money.
Click to expand...
Oh I see, I hope we have enough to bring someone in, it's ok looking at the lad at Lincoln, but will he be any use at this level??
 

Worksop II said:
You do know we did get relegated from this very division the Season that Sabella arrived :rolleyes:

Just sayin loik :)
Click to expand...
That was mainly due to a language problem though. There’s a famous tale about Happy Harry giving a team talk to the side with Sabella in it:

HH: This, ball. That, goal. Kick ball in goal!

AS: it’s ok boss, you don’t need to explain. I understand.

HH: I wasn’t talking to you Alex I was talking to the others!
 
Topplayersleave said:
We're all pretty happy with the defence even though we concede goals
We're happy with the industrial side of the midfield, getting the ball back and keeping it

But we do need a bit of foreign flair and razzamatazz to break down the stubborn defences of these lesser clubs. An Alex Sabella in this team would be amazing. And a good Argentinian flair player would create just as much interest now as it did then
A team pushing to get in the Premier League is a good move for some of these fellas and they'd be happy to come, it's just a shame that United have about as much knowledge of the eye catching, marketable, interesting overseas market as I have about quantum physics
Click to expand...
How do you know this ?
 
finlaytheblade said:
How do you know this ?
Click to expand...


I don't,
I'm sure they'd rather go to Brentford or Swansea or somewhere
But maybe us being near the top of the League and trying to get in the Premier League might help us become more competitive in the foreign market..............mind you we'd still have the obstacle of having a lot of backward fans to overcome.
 
Topplayersleave said:
Yes we did, but I wouldn't blame Sabella for that.
He was on a different level to the carthorses he was playing with.
He could have wondered "What the hell have I done coming here" but if he did he didn't show it and always tried his best whilst fighting a losing battle.

As bad as we were there was still plenty of interest in Sabella, it's just a shame that we had a unwritten rule at the club that anybody who's any good has to be sold to Leeds regardless of whether there's interest from anybody else or not.

Anyway, never mind all that, Sabella in this team would tear the Championship a new arsehole.
All the times when our players are camped in the opponents half but can't break through, Sabella would pick the ball up, skip through a couple of challenges, get into the penalty area and put it on a plate for Billy or get hacked down for a penalty.
It would be awesome
Click to expand...

All very laudable but we already had a Sabella by the name of Brooks. The stupid debate about the Brooks money would also never have arisen had we kept him and we would have had to stick with the original budget the club claimed to have in place prior to selling him. Oops sorry, forgot about that damned agent.
 
LJBlade said:
Derby got him for £5m, I thought it was said at the time they'd outbid us?
Click to expand...

We had a 5 million bid on the table and Frank Lampards Derby simply matched our offer.
However I’m sure it was reported that they offered him a much higher wage package of £25,000 a week.
Waghorn would have been by far our highest earner and Wilder didn’t think he was worth it.
 
snootyfenooty said:
All very laudable but we already had a Sabella by the name of Brooks. The stupid debate about the Brooks money would also never have arisen had we kept him and we would have had to stick with the original budget the club claimed to have in place prior to selling him. Oops sorry, forgot about that damned agent.
Click to expand...


Absolutely, it's ironic that the exact type of player we need is the one we've sold and not replaced
 
snootyfenooty said:
All very laudable but we already had a Sabella by the name of Brooks. The stupid debate about the Brooks money would also never have arisen had we kept him and we would have had to stick with the original budget the club claimed to have in place prior to selling him. Oops sorry, forgot about that damned agent.
Click to expand...

This again....I repeat and I repeat again.
It Brooks was at our club he wouldn’t even be a starter.

If we’d have kept him we would not be as high in the table.
No brainier of a deal to sell Brooks. Great business for SU, great business for AFCB and great business for Brookes.
He’s a player for the future, not for a now in the Championship playing within our style, although his style matches AFCB really well.

If we were rich it would have been great to keep Brooks and develope him for the future
But we aren’t rich , can’t afford to gamble for the future and need players for the here and now.
 
Sheffsteel said:
We had a 5 million bid on the table and Frank Lampards Derby simply matched our offer.
However I’m sure it was reported that they offered him a much higher wage package of £25,000 a week.
Waghorn would have been by far our highest earner and Wilder didn’t think he was worth it.
Click to expand...


I'm so glad we didn't get Waghorn. I've never rated him and spent most of my time laughing at him playing for Rangers.
He did well at Ipswich and he's not a bad player, but the money being offered to him was ridiculous
 
Topplayersleave said:
We're all pretty happy with the defence even though we concede goals
We're happy with the industrial side of the midfield, getting the ball back and keeping it

But we do need a bit of foreign flair and razzamatazz to break down the stubborn defences of these lesser clubs. An Alex Sabella in this team would be amazing. And a good Argentinian flair player would create just as much interest now as it did then
A team pushing to get in the Premier League is a good move for some of these fellas and they'd be happy to come, it's just a shame that United have about as much knowledge of the eye catching, marketable, interesting overseas market as I have about quantum physics
Click to expand...

We won't be so daft next time. Why not pay a bit more and get a Maradona.
 
Was it worth selling one of the brightest prospects in the country for a £4.5m boost to the transfer budget?

Edit; especially considering the gap in our squad at the minute is a David Brooks shaped gap.
 
Robby Blade said:
We won't be so daft next time. Why not pay a bit more and get a Maradona.
Click to expand...


Why is it that whenever anybody mentions anything about United signing quality from Britain or abroad that there's an enormous amount of apologists that have to take everything out of context.
It's absolutely fucking pathetic
 
ShockingBadBuy said:
Neither would the debates about how good Egan and Norwood have been for us.
Click to expand...

At the beginning of a new season, with TV money being shared out, new season ticket sales coming in and sponsorship deals renewing, Norwood and Egan should have been the very least we should have expected, even without David Brooks being sold.
Hence the reason why the Brooks money hadn't been touched.

I'm not sure where it is now, but it hadn't been touched up until September
 
Sheffsteel said:
We had a 5 million bid on the table and Frank Lampards Derby simply matched our offer.
However I’m sure it was reported that they offered him a much higher wage package of £25,000 a week.
Waghorn would have been by far our highest earner and Wilder didn’t think he was worth it.
Click to expand...

He’s right.
 

Sheffsteel said:
This again....I repeat and I repeat again.
It Brooks was at our club he wouldn’t even be a starter.

If we’d have kept him we would not be as high in the table.
No brainier of a deal to sell Brooks. Great business for SU, great business for AFCB and great business for Brookes.
He’s a player for the future, not for a now in the Championship playing within our style, although his style matches AFCB really well.

If we were rich it would have been great to keep Brooks and develope him for the future
But we aren’t rich , can’t afford to gamble for the future and need players for the here and now.
Click to expand...

Well in that case I guess we'll have to go along with the pundits and accept that it was Eddie Howe and Bournemouth who were responsible for turning him into a Premiership player and accomplished international. You're also avoiding the issue that the budget Wilder was given for buying Egan and Norwood was not conditional on selling Brooks. Unless of course you're calling bullshit on United's claims on this (I wouldn't blame you by the way).
 
Topplayersleave said:
I'm not sure where it is now, but it hadn't been touched up until September
Click to expand...

The club factored it in October in lieu of our owners putting the money in they promised Wilder (plus a bit more besides). Its the last you'll see of that money.
 
https://www.s24su.com/forum/index.php?threads/ownership-developments.64814/page-4

Maidenhead post #72.




https://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/she...at-a-preliminary-high-court-hearing-1-9242353

"Sheffield United Ltd says that in real and practical terms it is necessary, to maintain and improve the standards of the football club and its prospects of further promotion and to honour an assurance previously given to the club's manager that an additional £2 million would be available in the transfer window to improve the squad," he added. "UTB says that in purely financial terms it is not necessary and that in any event the cash flow properly analysed does not show that the injection of further capital is needed to fund such expenditure."




McCabe said we needed to put £7m in to progress. (Sheffield United Ltd being McCabe's company)

The Prince disagreed.

Pretty clear to me which one doesn't wasn't to invest any more.
 
TomJonesBlade said:
I'd be fucking flabbergasted if Defoe came here on a free. Even if his wages were halved we'd be nowhere near affording him. Depends how badly he wants to keep playing, I suppose.
Click to expand...

Apparently he wants to check out the new Moor Market and his Missus likes shopping at Atkinsons.
 
Sheffsteel said:
We had a 5 million bid on the table and Frank Lampards Derby simply matched our offer.
However I’m sure it was reported that they offered him a much higher wage package of £25,000 a week.
Waghorn would have been by far our highest earner and Wilder didn’t think he was worth it.
Click to expand...
And the rest...
 
snootyfenooty said:
Well in that case I guess we'll have to go along with the pundits and accept that it was Eddie Howe and Bournemouth who were responsible for turning him into a Premiership player and accomplished international. You're also avoiding the issue that the budget Wilder was given for buying Egan and Norwood was not conditional on selling Brooks. Unless of course you're calling bullshit on United's claims on this (I wouldn't blame you by the way).
Click to expand...
Bullshit.
 
Sean Thornton said:
https://www.s24su.com/forum/index.php?threads/ownership-developments.64814/page-4

Maidenhead post #72.




https://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/she...at-a-preliminary-high-court-hearing-1-9242353

"Sheffield United Ltd says that in real and practical terms it is necessary, to maintain and improve the standards of the football club and its prospects of further promotion and to honour an assurance previously given to the club's manager that an additional £2 million would be available in the transfer window to improve the squad," he added. "UTB says that in purely financial terms it is not necessary and that in any event the cash flow properly analysed does not show that the injection of further capital is needed to fund such expenditure."




McCabe said we needed to put £7m in to progress. (Sheffield United Ltd being McCabe's company)

The Prince disagreed.

Pretty clear to me which one doesn't wasn't to invest any more.
Click to expand...

Sorry ST, but facts, evidence set out in sworn documents and recorded in legal judgments are simply fake news now. I bet I know who managed to arrange the finance with the Brooks fee because it wouldn't be the Prince with that particular quoted source of finance. Sometimes I am staggered by what people chose to believe or indeed ignore. :oops:
 
snootyfenooty said:
Well in that case I guess we'll have to go along with the pundits and accept that it was Eddie Howe and Bournemouth who were responsible for turning him into a Premiership player and accomplished international. You're also avoiding the issue that the budget Wilder was given for buying Egan and Norwood was not conditional on selling Brooks. Unless of course you're calling bullshit on United's claims on this (I wouldn't blame you by the way).
Click to expand...


How much was Wilder promised?
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tony Currie
Why it's the biggest game in Football
Replies
0
Views
492
Tony Currie
Tony Currie
Deadbat
Swansea 1 United 0 - report/ratings
2
Replies
45
Views
4K
fleckagainagainagain…
fleckagainagainagain…
SB_90
Why do Managers without Blades link fail at the lane
2 3
Replies
73
Views
2K
I should coco
I should coco
T
A chance to make the right sort of history
Replies
26
Views
3K
chesblade
C
Deadbat
Bristol City 0 United 3 - report/ratings
Replies
17
Views
3K
coaxingstar71
coaxingstar71

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom