Unrealistic ambitions

[Sean Thornton]

It amazed me when people go on an internet forum and make claims like "Blackman was on the bench for Chelsea in the Champions League Final", it took me literally less than a minute to check that it was bollocks!

Checking for facts is frowned upon. Bad form apparently.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

Okay, so firstly Brentford, they didn't sign anyone for a lot of money, they were a team that prided them on football science, taking players that were flops or unknown, for example Jota, was a relative unknown at Celta Vigo, and signed for Brentford on the cheap. Another example, is Andre Gray, who they signed from Luton developed and sold for £6 million, bringing in a big revenue, which they reinvested. Therefore, Brentford signed youngsters or unknowns very cheap and sold a few for a profit.

Sheffield Wednesday, at the start, didn't sign a lot of big named players, and didn't boss the league at all, nearly getting relegated, it wasn't till recently they've spent big, which hasn't worked out, as the spent money hoping to get to the premier league and now they haven't, which has put them into a difficult situation and the main reason why the players they've signed have only been on a free such as George Boyd.

Bristol City, really? haven't really achieved more than a relegation fights since promotion. But last season would have got relegated if it wasn't for Toby Abraham, so they are a team, who has perfectly used the loan system, which we've failed to use.

The point was that pigs spunked £10million on Rhodes, £5million on Reach, £45k a week on Fletcher etc. How could they do this if the FFP restrictions prevent investment?

Bristol have just spent over £5million on a player. How is their revenue higher than ours?


Brentford I take your point. They have done excellent business and generated revenue through the sales of the likes of Gray and Hogan.

 

[1danewhitehouse]

They said the same about Huddersfield. It's human v human. 11 of them. Do you believe that putting a £10m price tag on one makes them a better player than another?

I think it's a bit like the price of wine. Above a certain price point it becomes less about quality and more about availability. Spotting the next best vintage now and holding onto it is key.

I'll have a Chateaux de Brooks please!

Putting a £10million price tag on someone doesn’t make them a better player. But a player usually has a £10million price tag because he has proven he is a better player. Of course, the way round it is to find those who are not yet proven, tap into their potential and develop them into multi-million pound players. Barnsley have had joy with that model recently but there are pitfalls as they make their mistakes for your club whilst they are learning, many won’t make it for whatever reason etc.

 

[BushBlade]

The point was that pigs spunked £10million on Rhodes, £5million on Reach, £45k a week on Fletcher etc. How could they do this if the FFP restrictions prevent investment?

Bristol have just spent over £5million on a player. How is their revenue higher than ours?


Brentford I take your point. They have done excellent business and generated revenue through the sales of the likes of Gray and Hogan.

Because you can carry a loss. You're allowed to put a certain amount in, it seems to keep changing but it's about £12m a year. FFP is assessed over a three year period.

If anyone is suggesting a club has to break even every year because of FFP, they're wrong.

 

[Sean Thornton]

Because you can carry a loss. You're allowed to put a certain amount in, it seems to keep changing but it's about £12m a year. FFP is assessed over a three year period.

If anyone is suggesting a club has to break even every year because of FFP, they're wrong.

That's correct. Currently £39m in losses over three years.

Transfer fees are written off over the length of the contract so in a very simple example, let's say the Pigs have spent £20m last season on players on three year contracts. £39m less £20m gives then just nineteen million allowable losses over a three year period. Think they've already lost half of that. That's why they have issues currently. What a lot of them don't realise though is that now it's not just a fine, but possible points deductions. In theory anyway.

 

[BLADES1988]

Whereas Wilder is trying to buy a decent drop from Aldi?

Saying that though Aldi's Gin just won an award for best gin and its £8 a bottle. You can pay well in excess of £50 some overpriced hipster crap these days and its blatantly no better. Might have a fancy name and look swanky, but that don't mean shit!

 

[SB_90]

yes there is pressure with some of competitors but i reading link below & cant agree more with wilder. they mention in 2016, 16 of the Championship’s 24 clubs spent more than 100 per cent of their income on wages. he says I want us to compete, but I think everybody realises that to compete at the top end is a loss-making exercise. talks about his troubles at Halifax & Northampton. People didn’t get paid for three months and it destroyed the football club. Absolutely destroyed it.

also think across the city the 10s of millions they have spent over the last few years on wages & transfers, they got 6th 4th & 5th to show for it

http://www.theleaguepaper.com/featu...nable-to-pay-our-suppliers-says-chris-wilder/