The same squad?

[PeteBlade]

So, signing our top scorer was a bad idea because he happens to support the club? What a bastard Adkins is.

I think his logic is that he doesn't count as a good signing because he's a Blade.

It sounds even more stupid when I type it out.

 

[Tyler Durden]

I think his logic is that he doesn't count as a good signing because he's a Blade.

It sounds even more stupid when I type it out.

I was furious when we signed Whitehouse, Ward and Bradshaw. Terrible foresight from Bassett.

 

[PeteBlade]

I was furious when we signed Whitehouse, Ward and Bradshaw. Terrible foresight from Bassett.

He should have used his managerial ability and signed players he'd never heard of.

 

[Tyler Durden]

He should have used his managerial ability and signed players he'd never heard of.

Aldershot were going bust around the time we signed Dane Whitehouse. That's an entire squad we could've signed on the cheap. Bassett Out retrospectively.

 

[Barney]

Are you suggesting Adkins' managerial decisions are based on the fanbase talking?

Curiouser and Curiouser...

The point is that you can't say the decision to sign Sharp was a completely original and individual one. He had radio presenters and people from the club pestering him about it from day one for christs sake.

 

[Tyler Durden]

The point is that you can't say the decision to sign Sharp was a completely original and individual one. He had radio presenters and people from the club pestering him about it from day one for christs sake.

Well I'm delighted to discover that the fans now have complete control over transfer policy.

Harry Kane, get him signed Nige you cunt.

 

[PeteBlade]

The point is that you can't say the decision to sign Sharp was a completely original and individual one. He had radio presenters and people from the club pestering him about it from day one for christs sake.

Since when do signings need to "original"?

He was pestered about it because he'd played for him at 3 different football clubs for fucks sake!

How do you not get that?

 

[Tyler Durden]

Since when do signings need to "original"?

He was pestered about it because he'd played for him at 3 different football clubs for fucks sake!

How do you not get that?

Oh no, he signed Sharp purely on the basis of his whopping 8 goals in 51 appearances for United the last time round.

 

[Barney]

Since when do signings need to "original"?

He was pestered about it because he'd played for him at 3 different football clubs for fucks sake!

How do you not get that?

There's a difference between not even having to think about it by signing Billy Sharp amongst all the clamour from the fanbase and the media and going out to sign a player like Woolford purely on judgement and completely off the managers own back.

 

[PeteBlade]

There's a difference between not even having to think about it by signing Billy Sharp amongst all the clamour from the fanbase and the media and going out to sign a player like Woolford purely on judgement and completely off the managers own back.

You're so desperate not to give Adkins credit for anything it forces you into stupid corners like this.

He's signed him for every single club he's ever managed, but yes, a couple of radio journalists asking him whether he'll sign or not really made the difference.

Your argument is ludicrous, even for you and your agenda.

 

[Barney]

You're so desperate not to give Adkins credit for anything it forces you into stupid corners like this.

He's signed him for every single club he's ever managed, but yes, a couple of radio journalists asking him whether he'll sign or not really made the difference.

Your argument is ludicrous, even for you and your agenda.

You surely cannot deny that there is a difference between the two scenarios in my previous post.

 

[PeteBlade]

You surely cannot deny that there is a difference between the two scenarios in my previous post.

You hugely overplay the so called "clamour from the fan base and media" which was created, by the way, BECAUSE Adkins was going to sign him and hugely downplay the fact that he's signed him at every club he's been at.

Your argument is entirely invalid.

 

[Barney]

You hugely overplay the so called "clamour from the fan base and media" which was created, by the way, BECAUSE Adkins was going to sign him and hugely downplay the fact that he's signed him at every club he's been at.

Your argument is entirely invalid.

You're avoiding the question. Whether or not he has signed him anywhere else isn't significant to the point. There's a difference between the two.

 

[PeteBlade]

You're avoiding the question. Whether or not he has signed him anywhere else isn't significant to the point. There's a difference between the two.

I've unequivocally answered your question whilst you've completely ignored or decided that the very relevant points put to you "aren't relevant".

For the removal of doubt and for the hard of thinking- there's no difference. Only in the heads of those unable to give a manager any credit.

 

[Barney]

For the removal of doubt and for the hard of thinking- there's no difference.

Well, that explains all then doesn't it?

 

[PeteBlade]

Well, that explains all then doesn't it?

For the vast majority of sensible people it does, yes.

For you, clearly not.

 

[Darthblade]

After Adkins had already wasted the budget. If I gave a manager enough funds to be promoted and he wasted it on the wrong players I'd be tempted to take his hands off any more of my money too.

But then Adkins started gobbing off about two players being near in the loan window, so they either gave him a second chance and gave him even more money to waste, or they told him not to fuck things up any more and Adkins was just lying.

I don't understand exactly what budget NA has wasted .......... he's only spent ~ £500k on Billy Sharp!

There doesn't appear to be any evidence of any other budget as far as I can see ....... unless you believe the stories of the bids we have allegedly made and had turned down. Every one of them

UTB & FTP

 

[Tyler Durden]

I don't understand exactly what budget NA has wasted .......... he's only spent ~ £500k on Billy Sharp!

There doesn't appear to be any evidence of any other budget as far as I can see ....... unless you believe the stories of the bids we have allegedly made and had turned down. Every one of them

UTB & FTP

He's been comprehensively shown up yet again. But he weirdly seems to enjoy that.

 

[nopigfansintown]

No, it's just that you don't have any grounds to say whether it is true or not. Do you think Adkins would have started gobbing off about those two players that were near to being signed in the loan window if he wasn't allowed to sign any?

Or even in the extremely unlikely event they hadn't allowed it, perhaps they indicated to Adkins that he'd already used and wasted the budget that should have been enough for promotion.

Adkins has brought in circa 3 million if you include the Murphy money and the Old Trafford Cup money. To claim that he has exceeded this with three loan signings, a free, and one transfer fee is obviously folly. That's before we factor in Murphy's wages, a small fee for Alcock, and the outward loan wages we have saved. I also know that Billy took a massive drop in his basic salary to come to SUFC, and Baptiste's wages are being subsidised very little by SUFC (subject to change if loan is extended). Our highest outgoing on a loan wages is Sammon - its not even close.

 

[Barney]

Adkins has brought in circa 3 million if you include the Murphy money and the Old Trafford Cup money. To claim that he has exceeded this with three loan signings, a free, and one transfer fee is obviously folly. That's before we factor in Murphy's wages, a small fee for Alcock, and the outward loan wages we have saved. I also know that Billy took a massive drop in his basic salary to come to SUFC, and Baptiste's wages are being subsidised very little by SUFC (subject to change if loan is extended). Our highest outgoing on a loan wages is Sammon - its not even close.

Oh dear, another ITK? The money we have spent being enough had it been spent it right was the point. Money in and everything else is irrelevant.

 

[HillmortonBlade]

Adkins has brought in circa 3 million if you include the Murphy money and the Old Trafford Cup money. To claim that he has exceeded this with three loan signings, a free, and one transfer fee is obviously folly. That's before we factor in Murphy's wages, a small fee for Alcock, and the outward loan wages we have saved. I also know that Billy took a massive drop in his basic salary to come to SUFC, and Baptiste's wages are being subsidised very little by SUFC (subject to change if loan is extended). Our highest outgoing on a loan wages is Sammon - its not even close.

As an aside, I think that (for the time he was on the pitch) that Baptiste looks a good investment. Just saying.

 

[nopigfansintown]

I am in the know. Alas, you don't have to be in the know, to understand that we played an FA cup game at Old Trafford and sold a player for a reported 1.5 - 2 million. Or that the club reported we have received a fee for Alcock. Or that the club has loaned out players and isn't a charity. The club has not backed the manager. This is what austerity looks like...

 

[nopigfansintown]

I agree. He's the defender we have that most suits a high pressing game

 

[Barney]

I am in the know. Alas, you don't have to be in the know, to understand that we played an FA cup game at Old Trafford and sold a player for a reported 1.5 - 2 million. Or that the club reported we have received a fee for Alcock. Or that the club has loaned out players and isn't a charity. The club has not backed the manager. This is what austerity looks like...

Can't wait for the transfer window then... All of that has nothing to do with my point, as I have said.

 

[nopigfansintown]

Maybe - if your a genius - you may also have been asking whether Jamie Murphy's subsequent success had reaped any further financial benefits that Nigel Adkins could or should've been able to access. Or whether these funds can be accessed in the summer? You wouldn't have to be ikn to have these thoughts although, admittedly, you may have arrived at them more quickly.

 

[nopigfansintown]

Can't wait for the transfer window then... All of that has nothing to do with my point, as I have said.

So to be clear your point is: Even if Nigel Adkins has brought in a budget surplus, - like the dubious ikn nopigfansintown is claiming, - he still should've been able to achieve a much higher league position than the one we currently occupy? He has unequivocally been backed by the board in order to do this.

If so our definition of being 'backed' is radically different.

 

[PeteBlade]

Maybe - if your a genius - you may also have been asking whether Jamie Murphy's subsequent success had reaped any further financial benefits that Nigel Adkins could or should've been able to access. Or whether these funds can be accessed in the summer? You wouldn't have to be ikn to have these thoughts although, admittedly, you may have arrived at them more quickly.

I'm just praying that Rob Staton influences Adkins into buying more players during the summer.

 

[PokerBlade]

It's clear that Clough's mass signing spree was a disaster (even if I have some sympathy for his tenure overall which, at a simplistic look, took us from bottom and left us in fifth) for not only last season but this one as well. With so many players we're still struggling to get rid of I could have accepted a diplomatic line from the club about how they trusted a manager with a budget, the squad ended up over-sized, and now we plan to reduce the squad to something more manageable before allowing the current staff to build a team, blah blah blah. It would've taken some pressure off Adkins and been quite a reasonable mid to long term plan.

The frustration is the bullshit from the board about how this season was going to be a straight up promotion push, money was available, strengthening would be done in January, and so on. And then having the cheek to issue statements about how not doing any of that in January was meeting "most of our ambitions" for the window.

Sure we finished in the play-offs last season, but we were far from a good side. We all knew we had no chance of going up and it took a poor division to keep us in that place. Now we're going to finish a few places shy of last season but to my mind with a fairly consistent showing from most of the players left over.

Even if I accept that it's the same squad as Clough's, that squad wasn't fucking good enough. Why be surprised at all now? How can you listen to all the spew from the board and be appeased by sacking Adkins?

Let's go into a closed season with no excuses and hopefully give a manager a chance to build a decent side.

 

[nopigfansintown]

It's clear that Clough's mass signing spree was a disaster (even if I have some sympathy for his tenure overall which, at a simplistic look, took us from bottom and left us in fifth) for not only last season but this one as well. With so many players we're still struggling to get rid of I could have accepted a diplomatic line from the club about how they trusted a manager with a budget, the squad ended up over-sized, and now we plan to reduce the squad to something more manageable before allowing the current staff to build a team, blah blah blah. It would've taken some pressure off Adkins and been quite a reasonable mid to long term plan.

The frustration is the bullshit from the board about how this season was going to be a straight up promotion push, money was available, strengthening would be done in January, and so on. And then having the cheek to issue statements about how not doing any of that in January was meeting "most of our ambitions" for the window.

Sure we finished in the play-offs last season, but we were far from a good side. We all knew we had no chance of going up and it took a poor division to keep us in that place. Now we're going to finish a few places shy of last season but to my mind with a fairly consistent showing from most of the players left over.

Even if I accept that it's the same squad as Clough's, that squad wasn't fucking good enough. Why be surprised at all now? How can you listen to all the spew from the board and be appeased by sacking Adkins?

Let's go into a closed season with no excuses and hopefully give a manager a chance to build a decent side.

Great post, I posted a similar thread called expectation management a while ago. I'll try and bump it.

 

[PokerBlade]

Feels a bit as though the board talked themselves up so much when they first came in that they can't or won't admit that they aren't willing to throw money at the team before some downsizing occurs. When you look at the number of players it's clear that they gave Clough a genuine financial backing and their mistake was to not step in about the quantity over quality. Even then there's an extent to which you can defend them and say letting a manager have free reign over his budget is a genuinely positive approach.

The issue for me only occurs because they want to keep up an unbelievable lie about how two permanent signings (one of which was Woolford) and a few loans is showing ambition for promotion.