Wilder grateful for boards support

[Bladesway]

Says nothing = he's not being backed.

Says something = he's not being backed and is a yes man

FACT.

Or to look at it another way, for the last ten years we have been fed on a diet of shit and more shit. Now when someone turns up with cake it might just take a while to get the taste of shit out of your mouth. I truly hope things and times have changed but until we actually see it on the pitch then isn't it to be expected that many will be sceptical?

If you tell me I'm being unreasonable then fair enough, but as someone who has been fed on a 40 year diet of false dawns I would hope you had enough respect to at least understand why.

 

[Rodders]

I hesitate to comment on Maguire but I suppose July 2014 is recent past and during the prince's time with us at least.

Nothing much to do with this thread today but we did get £2.5m and the lad has not held down a first team place yet. According to Wikipedia he has played just 25 games for Hull in all that time though he played 16 games for Wigan on loan.

To date it could be argued we robbed Hull at that price!! Most of us suspected he would not have the pace to survive in the Premier League but we did think he could cut it in the Championship, not as yet though.

Great that he's featured so little for Hull, it's what we should judge every outgoing by... by the way how much revenue has the Club potentially missed out on due to his departure?

 

[Barney]

Says nothing = he's not being backed.

Says something = he's not being backed and is a yes man

FACT.

Or he's not aware the board plan on selling DCL and/or Che without reinvesting on transfer fees?

 

[Lord Bos of Eckington.]

Or he's not aware the board plan on selling DCL and/or Che without reinvesting on transfer fees?

McCabe is not daft enough to do anything behind Wilders back . If we sell anybody it will be with Wilders blessing .

For once I think we have to give both the board and manager some credit .

They ain't ever going to please all of us but that's part of the tapestry of life.

UTB

 

[Barney]

For once I think we have to give both the board and manager some credit .

Bit early for that yet I'd say. We don't who who's going to be sold, and how much is going to be reinvested.

McCabe won't be able to sell anyone behind Wilder's back, but he can choose not to reinvest on transfer fees a la Murphy.

 

[Trueblade]

The message from the outset with Wilder involved has been less funds, and a cheaper United. We haven't sold any of the 7 listed players, yet to be fair he's been able to go out and bring in those he has signed.

You can't help feeling though that maybe the board are going to want to see a few of those listed go before he gets the go ahead on to many more!

 

[Woodwardfan]

Bit early for that yet I'd say. We don't who who's going to be sold, and how much is going to be reinvested.

McCabe won't be able to sell anyone behind Wilder's back, but he can choose not to reinvest on transfer fees a la Murphy.

Barney, your old chestnut. Believe me Wilder will regard expenditure on transfer fees and wages as coming from the same pot. He has a budget and he can only spend it once. If he pays a fee then it's money he can't spend on wages and vice versa.

There seems little doubt Wilder's budget is less than the apparent £6m we spent last season. The manager's brief may well be to reduce the budget by say £1.5m and that seems reasonable to me at this level; the manager has stated he understands that the bloated wage bill has to reduce. If those numbers are roughly accurate then it might be really convenient to Wilder to get a £1.5m fee for Calvert-Lewin and that means he has managed his reduction for this year and doesn't have to make the savings on the wage bill.

That's why managers feel able to spend more on players' wages when there is no fee -the cost of the player relative to value justifies higher wages than if a big fee was part of the deal. e.g. Fletcher at Hillsborough, good player, free agent, no fee which otherwise might have been £8m? so the player demands higher wages and gets them.

Clubs our size would be stupid to get £1.5/ £2m for a player and have a mentality that it goes in the 'transfer fee pot' to be spent on fees rather than wages ( we sell to clubs who can afford big transfer fees and we can't). That's how it's been spent in the past and it's entirely valid. For example, we got a reported £1.5m for Murphy and yet we still had an apparent mushrooming £6m wage bill. The transfer fee income didn't disappear anywhere, it was spent on wages and smaller transfer fees (so was the Maguire fee).

 

[finlaytheblade]

Barney, your old chestnut. Believe me Wilder will regard expenditure on transfer fees and wages as coming from the same pot. He has a budget and he can only spend it once. If he pays a fee then it's money he can't spend on wages and vice versa.

There seems little doubt Wilder's budget is less than the apparent £6m we spent last season. The manager's brief may well be to reduce the budget by say £1.5m and that seems reasonable to me at this level; the manager has stated he understands that the bloated wage bill has to reduce. If those numbers are roughly accurate then it might be really convenient to Wilder to get a £1.5m fee for Calvert-Lewin and that means he has managed his reduction for this year and doesn't have to make the savings on the wage bill.

That's why managers feel able to spend more on players' wages when there is no fee -the cost of the player relative to value justifies higher wages than if a big fee was part of the deal. e.g. Fletcher at Hillsborough, good player, free agent, no fee which otherwise might have been £8m? so the player demands higher wages and gets them.

Clubs our size would be stupid to get £1.5/ £2m for a player and have a mentality that it goes in the 'transfer fee pot' to be spent on fees rather than wages ( we sell to clubs who can afford big transfer fees and we can't). That's how it's been spent in the past and it's entirely valid. For example, we got a reported £1.5m for Murphy and yet we still had an apparent mushrooming £6m wage bill. The transfer fee income didn't disappear anywhere, it was spent on wages and smaller transfer fees (so was the Maguire fee).

Barney, your old chestnut. Believe me Wilder will regard expenditure on transfer fees and wages as coming from the same pot. He has a budget and he can only spend it once. If he pays a fee then it's money he can't spend on wages and vice versa.

There seems little doubt Wilder's budget is less than the apparent £6m we spent last season. The manager's brief may well be to reduce the budget by say £1.5m and that seems reasonable to me at this level; the manager has stated he understands that the bloated wage bill has to reduce. If those numbers are roughly accurate then it might be really convenient to Wilder to get a £1.5m fee for Calvert-Lewin and that means he has managed his reduction for this year and doesn't have to make the savings on the wage bill.

That's why managers feel able to spend more on players' wages when there is no fee -the cost of the player relative to value justifies higher wages than if a big fee was part of the deal. e.g. Fletcher at Hillsborough, good player, free agent, no fee which otherwise might have been £8m? so the player demands higher wages and gets them.

Clubs our size would be stupid to get £1.5/ £2m for a player and have a mentality that it goes in the 'transfer fee pot' to be spent on fees rather than wages ( we sell to clubs who can afford big transfer fees and we can't). That's how it's been spent in the past and it's entirely valid. For example, we got a reported £1.5m for Murphy and yet we still had an apparent mushrooming £6m wage bill. The transfer fee income didn't disappear anywhere, it was spent on wages and smaller transfer fees (so was the Maguire fee).

Barney, your old chestnut. Believe me Wilder will regard expenditure on transfer fees and wages as coming from the same pot. He has a budget and he can only spend it once. If he pays a fee then it's money he can't spend on wages and vice versa.

There seems little doubt Wilder's budget is less than the apparent £6m we spent last season. The manager's brief may well be to reduce the budget by say £1.5m and that seems reasonable to me at this level; the manager has stated he understands that the bloated wage bill has to reduce. If those numbers are roughly accurate then it might be really convenient to Wilder to get a £1.5m fee for Calvert-Lewin and that means he has managed his reduction for this year and doesn't have to make the savings on the wage bill.

That's why managers feel able to spend more on players' wages when there is no fee -the cost of the player relative to value justifies higher wages than if a big fee was part of the deal. e.g. Fletcher at Hillsborough, good player, free agent, no fee which otherwise might have been £8m? so the player demands higher wages and gets them.

Clubs our size would be stupid to get £1.5/ £2m for a player and have a mentality that it goes in the 'transfer fee pot' to be spent on fees rather than wages ( we sell to clubs who can afford big transfer fees and we can't). That's how it's been spent in the past and it's entirely valid. For example, we got a reported £1.5m for Murphy and yet we still had an apparent mushrooming £6m wage bill. The transfer fee income didn't disappear anywhere, it was spent on wages and smaller transfer fees (so was the Maguire fee).

Good explanation of how transfers
Interact with our budget Woody! but the usual posters will not accept it.
They beleave ( stupidly) that the funds go into McCabe back pocket which would bring the tax man down on him and the club very quickly. But keep trying one day you might have some success

 

[Barney]

Barney, your old chestnut. Believe me Wilder will regard expenditure on transfer fees and wages as coming from the same pot. He has a budget and he can only spend it once. If he pays a fee then it's money he can't spend on wages and vice versa.

There seems little doubt Wilder's budget is less than the apparent £6m we spent last season. The manager's brief may well be to reduce the budget by say £1.5m and that seems reasonable to me at this level; the manager has stated he understands that the bloated wage bill has to reduce. If those numbers are roughly accurate then it might be really convenient to Wilder to get a £1.5m fee for Calvert-Lewin and that means he has managed his reduction for this year and doesn't have to make the savings on the wage bill.

That's why managers feel able to spend more on players' wages when there is no fee -the cost of the player relative to value justifies higher wages than if a big fee was part of the deal. e.g. Fletcher at Hillsborough, good player, free agent, no fee which otherwise might have been £8m? so the player demands higher wages and gets them.

Clubs our size would be stupid to get £1.5/ £2m for a player and have a mentality that it goes in the 'transfer fee pot' to be spent on fees rather than wages ( we sell to clubs who can afford big transfer fees and we can't). That's how it's been spent in the past and it's entirely valid. For example, we got a reported £1.5m for Murphy and yet we still had an apparent mushrooming £6m wage bill. The transfer fee income didn't disappear anywhere, it was spent on wages and smaller transfer fees (so was the Maguire fee).

The Murphy money went on wages rather than fees to allow McCabe and the Prince to put in £1.75m less than they would have done. They used that money until it ran out to substitute their own. Where as they could have spent it straight on transfer fees and continued to pay the same wages themselves. That is about as clear as day.

If you think that's acceptable, I think you're barking mad.

 

[The Crab]

I know we are desperate for success but I would expect CW is receiving cups of cum in the post people are getting that giddy with his every passing word. I'm waiting for the first "he shows passion on the touch line" waste of ink when the season starts.

Results are the only yardstick, the past few years has proved that.

Now you're being ridiculous. Everyone knows cups of cum are better off Fed'exed.

 

[Woodwardfan]

The Murphy money went on wages rather than fees to allow McCabe and the Prince to put in £1.75m less than they would have done. They used that money until it ran out to substitute their own. Where as they could have spent it straight on transfer fees and continued to pay the same wages themselves. That is about as clear as day.

If you think that's acceptable, I think you're barking mad.

Barney, your old chestnut does not make any sense.

The wage bills have not reduced since the Prince arrived in 2012, they have mushroomed under Clough and Adkins.

The owners have been injecting millions since 2012, not reducing anything. The wage bill was estimated around £6m last season from best information available and detailed in a couple of excellent threads on here and that's as high as it's been for a number of years because we had that bloated squad per Clough and then some big earners on loan as well. The owners threw money at those two managers relative to our league status. Murphy's fee was a drop in the ocean.

You are not making sense.

 

[Bladesway]

Good explanation of how transfers
Interact with our budget Woody! but the usual posters will not accept it.
They beleave ( stupidly) that the funds go into McCabe back pocket which would bring the tax man down on him and the club very quickly. But keep trying one day you might have some success

Ahh yes the old "if you don't agree with me then you are stupid". Perhaps you could explain to me why we always sell our best players and replace them with dross. Of course you must do this without blaming the manager because no manager sanctions the sale of his best players. This can only come from the board.

If you believe this is a business model for success then you perhaps need to stop calling others stupid.

 

[Barney]

Barney, your old chestnut does not make any sense.

The wage bills have not reduced since the Prince arrived in 2012, they have mushroomed under Clough and Adkins.

The owners have been injecting millions since 2012, not reducing anything. The wage bill was estimated around £6m last season from best information available and detailed in a couple of excellent threads on here and that's as high as it's been for a number of years because we had that bloated squad per Clough and then some big earners on loan as well. The owners threw money at those two managers relative to our league status. Murphy's fee was a drop in the ocean.

You are not making sense.

I am not saying they reduced anything. The figure itself can still be higher than previous years, but it was £1.75m less than it would have been had we reinvested the Murphy money on transfer fees.

 

[Bladesway]

I am not saying they reduced anything. The figure itself can still be higher than previous years, but it was £1.75m less than it would have been had we reinvested the Murphy money on transfer fees.

I get what you are saying Barney, it's simple enough if you want to hear it.

 

[Woodwardfan]

Ahh yes the old "if you don't agree with me then you are stupid". Perhaps you could explain to me why we always sell our best players and replace them with dross. Of course you must do this without blaming the manager because no manager sanctions the sale of his best players. This can only come from the board.

If you believe this is a business model for success then you perhaps need to stop calling others stupid.

Whoever said anybody was "stupid"?

What have you been up to Finlay, I can hardly believe it !!

Anyway two genuine errors I'm sure and back to the 'business model' you mention Bladesway. You know full well that there are business models and executed business models. Our execution in recent years has been unsuccessful of course. The model is fine, it's the choice of managers and their transfer dealings that have been awful. We have to sell our best players when big clubs come knocking ( as you have recently acknowledged) but we don't have to sign "dross" as you call them.

 

[finlaytheblade]

Whoever said anybody was "stupid"?

What have you been up to Finlay, I can hardly believe it !!

Anyway two genuine errors I'm sure and back to the 'business model' you mention Bladesway. You know full well that there are business models and executed business models. Our execution in recent years has been unsuccessful of course. The model is fine, it's the choice of managers and their transfer dealings that have been awful. We have to sell our best players when big clubs come knocking ( as you have recently acknowledged) but we don't have to sign "dross" as you call them.

What you have posted Woody is 100% true but when closed minds read it ,who also think our chairman is a crook then I get the feeling you are wasting your time.As you say the business model has not ... worked and it's cost him and the prince millions as well has us fans having to put up with lower league football.The fans have stayed loyal through all this mess ( all credit to us for that ) and ime sure Mccabe appreciate s that.

• We are all up for it arnt we ? A big blade now in the hot seat and I for one think he will do the business.

 

[Worksop II]

who also think our chairman is a crook

Very unfair on crooks ...................

 

[David Lee's first touch]

Kinell season hasn't even started, both the manager and chairman in the shit unbefuckinlievable Jeff.

 

[Bladesway]

Whoever said anybody was "stupid"?

What have you been up to Finlay, I can hardly believe it !!

Anyway two genuine errors I'm sure and back to the 'business model' you mention Bladesway. You know full well that there are business models and executed business models. Our execution in recent years has been unsuccessful of course. The model is fine, it's the choice of managers and their transfer dealings that have been awful. We have to sell our best players when big clubs come knocking ( as you have recently acknowledged) but we don't have to sign "dross" as you call them.

Finlay said (in brackets) that basically if you don't agree you are stupid. The words are there in his post, you are smart enough to read them. You see there are many levels where anyone reasonable has to agree with you here. Of course we have to sell if the big clubs come knocking but not in the way we do.

Where you and I are miles apart is on the business model. By definition good players are hard to replace. We all know this, so why sell them so easily (or at least it appears). The Harry McGuire one is recent enough that even you acknowledge it. We turned the bid down, which was great but then changed our minds. We really did that. I'm sorry but this is not the makings of a successful business model it is one of rank amateurs who from the outside at least don't know what they are doing.

Now, you worked in the banking sector if I am right so I will draw a parallel if I may. Your business tanks, you sack your local managers, you sack your regional managers. Problem is the person at the top stays the same. Now in business, this person would rightly be seen as the person responsible for the failure. So after 10 years of failure where this strategy isn't working and firing managers isn't working, you have to look at the guy at the top and say "it's your fault". You may be well meaning, you may be a good person, but ultimately it is your fault. Please stop making the decisions, get someone else to make them for you.

Fact is this is McCabes fault, he fired Warnock without a replacement being lined up, he got Robson in, he fired Robson after less than a season, and on, and on...........

Finally, we all know that buying players is a gamble. Sometimes it pays off, sometimes it doesn't. So when you get good players you keep hold of them because you know full well they are difficult to replace. This doesn't appear to be the BDTBL model.

Anyhow, heres hoping we have finally got it right and we can celebrate at the end of the season. You would think if you pin the tail on the donkey often enough eventually you stick it in the right place.

 

[Bladesway]

What you have posted Woody is 100% true but when closed minds read it ,who also think our chairman is a crook then I get the feeling you are wasting your time.As you say the business model has not ... worked and it's cost him and the prince millions as well has us fans having to put up with lower league football.The fans have stayed loyal through all this mess ( all credit to us for that ) and ime sure Mccabe appreciate s that.

• We are all up for it arnt we ? A big blade now in the hot seat and I for one think he will do the business.

Shame you couldn't reply directly to my post but you had to pop your head round from the back of the bigger kid. It isn't 100% true, it is an opinion, hence open to a counter opinion. Just because people post "your 100% right" only makes it an opinion. You are the one who appears to be utterly blinkered and thus can't see anything but your own point of view. I'd be pleased if rather than riding on WWF's coat tails and throwing rocks you would be big enough to stand up and proffer some opinions of your own. Trust me, I like everyone else is open to listen to them. Thats generally how places like this work. But don't go home crying to WWF if you don't like the responses.

FWIW I think Wilder is a good man with a good chance. If he fails however who will be blamed again? Him or his overlord?

 

[sitwell]

Sort of contradicts the little rumour that was knocking about a couple of weeks ago that he was unhappy that the board were dragging their heels with regards to recruitment.

Article interestingly also says this:

"The story behind Wright’s move to South Yorkshire is a case in point.

He was granted permission to leave on a free transfer after winning promotion from League Two with Oxford United.

But sources close to the process last night told The Star that the defender’s former club tried to renege on that agreement after discovering United were likely to be his next destination.

The talks that followed, and which ended with Wright signing a two-year contract at Bramall Lane, proved a test of both United’s negotiating skills and diplomacy."


http://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/foot...r-wilder-grateful-for-board-support-1-8018390

Bet youre really glad you posted that now aren't you that will teach you

 

[FriethBlade]

Interesting how Clough signed plenty of good players at Derby including Buxton, Martin, Russell, Bryson etc and now at Burton he just signed Macfadzean and O'Grady. Both of the latter are players we were after in the past, and in macfadzeans case again recently, but couldn't get over the line......so was it the budget he got at the Lane or the manager ?

It has to be open to debate doesn't it ? Despite Wilders comments the majority of his signings are frees so again it looks like the board are will one to fund wages but not necessarily transfer fees and there's only so far you can go on free transfers !

 

[BushBlade]

Whoever said anybody was "stupid"?

What have you been up to Finlay, I can hardly believe it !!

Anyway two genuine errors I'm sure and back to the 'business model' you mention Bladesway. You know full well that there are business models and executed business models. Our execution in recent years has been unsuccessful of course. The model is fine, it's the choice of managers and their transfer dealings that have been awful. We have to sell our best players when big clubs come knocking ( as you have recently acknowledged) but we don't have to sign "dross" as you call them.

KM has made some poor choices of manager but the last two aren't idiots. One has just won promotion from L1 (and if it's so easy taking over someone else's side tell that to Walsall) and the other had won four promotions, two from this league. Even DW1 is still in work. How much longer do we blame managers?

 

[Treeton Blade]

 

[Bert]

Fact is this is McCabes fault, he fired Warnock

Warnock was not fired.

 

[Worksop II]

View attachment 18548

A little known fact is that Compass Catering did used to Cater the Workhouses of 19th Century London

and no you cant ................

 

[Woodwardfan]

Finlay said (in brackets) that basically if you don't agree you are stupid. The words are there in his post, you are smart enough to read them. You see there are many levels where anyone reasonable has to agree with you here. Of course we have to sell if the big clubs come knocking but not in the way we do.

Where you and I are miles apart is on the business model. By definition good players are hard to replace. We all know this, so why sell them so easily (or at least it appears). The Harry McGuire one is recent enough that even you acknowledge it. We turned the bid down, which was great but then changed our minds. We really did that. I'm sorry but this is not the makings of a successful business model it is one of rank amateurs who from the outside at least don't know what they are doing.

Now, you worked in the banking sector if I am right so I will draw a parallel if I may. Your business tanks, you sack your local managers, you sack your regional managers. Problem is the person at the top stays the same. Now in business, this person would rightly be seen as the person responsible for the failure. So after 10 years of failure where this strategy isn't working and firing managers isn't working, you have to look at the guy at the top and say "it's your fault". You may be well meaning, you may be a good person, but ultimately it is your fault. Please stop making the decisions, get someone else to make them for you.

Fact is this is McCabes fault, he fired Warnock without a replacement being lined up, he got Robson in, he fired Robson after less than a season, and on, and on...........

Finally, we all know that buying players is a gamble. Sometimes it pays off, sometimes it doesn't. So when you get good players you keep hold of them because you know full well they are difficult to replace. This doesn't appear to be the BDTBL model.

Anyhow, heres hoping we have finally got it right and we can celebrate at the end of the season. You would think if you pin the tail on the donkey often enough eventually you stick it in the right place.

No point dwelling on semantics I suppose but nobody intentionally called anybody "stupid" I'm sure. However there are obvious defintion differences in your and my use of the term 'business model' and I believe the 'business model' is part fulfillment of strategy and there is a difference. In banks the strategy and the business model can be different responsibilities as can the implementation of both with various people held responsible and some even accountable, unusual if it's the Chairman though !!!

What else can I say? You agree with Barney that Murph'y transfer fee should have been ring-fenced and used solely for fees for incoming players so we just can't discuss beliefs so far apart.

I said above we got a very good price for Maguire who has not held down a first team place at Hull in 2 years with one of those years in the Championship where you'd think he might prosper. I was reliably told Maguire quadrupled his wages when he moved and that really affects the dynamics obviously.

I also said we've chosen the wrong managers and I've said those managers have performed poorly. BTW I fully supported the appointments of both Clough and Adkins and it just goes to show it's not an easy task and it even takes a few months to realise it won't work. As you know I've always said the quality of player signings really is the key because they provide the bulk of any added value amongst the squad.

Over the years you have been critical of McCabe, almost obsessive in fact but the man has suffered huge monetary loss as a result of his managerial appointments who have failed to effectively implement the business model. He has given away half the club and said he will leave if a 'suitable buyer' can be found and who 'has the club's best long term interests at heart'. In other words he's here to stay no matter how many posts you write so that's a given unless the prince buys the other half. I'm sure he'd love to find the way out of a living nightmare though.

As for selling our best players, I've no doubt in my own mind that McCabe will not sell Calvert-Lewin above Wilder's head. If Wilder can work to budget this season without a sale then he will be authorised to do just that. If on the other hand Wilder can better spend the fee on wages for say three first teamers and recommends that approach then fair enough the lad will depart. Presumably the player will surely be insisting on a big pay rise if he has to stay and that would eat into the budget and could swing the decision process. In all those circumstances who is responsible for the sale of the player - the manager or the half owner? If on the other hand any fee helps with the running expenses of the Academy and Wilder never sees a penny, that is a different matter, but even then would Wilder want to keep Lewin if his new pay rise eats into the budget and effectively means at least one less new signing? Not a simple situation and not one that warrants the tag "McCabe's fault", it's how things are; 'facts of life' in League 1.

 

[I should coco]

I hesitate to comment on Maguire but I suppose July 2014 is recent past and during the prince's time with us at least.

Nothing much to do with this thread today but we did get £2.5m and the lad has not held down a first team place yet. According to Wikipedia he has played just 25 games for Hull in all that time though he played 16 games for Wigan on loan.

To date it could be argued we robbed Hull at that price!! Most of us suspected he would not have the pace to survive in the Premier League but we did think he could cut it in the Championship, not as yet though.

I sat on a train with a Hull fan on Friday and he was very disappointed Harry hadn't figured more. He thought that with an old head (Dawson) at the side of him, Hull should build their defence around Harry.

He also thought that for some reason Bruce wasn't keen on him anymore.

Also some great stories about how their owner, Allam, has taken his bat and ball home since they stopped him changing the name to 'Tigers'. No victory parade after the playoff final, no mention of 'Hull City' anywhere in the programme or stadium. They should still be wetting themselves after promotion but it seems he's cutting his nose off to spite his face.

 

[Esablade]

The wage bills have not reduced since the Prince arrived in 2012, they have mushroomed under Clough and Adkins.

If McCabe's £6 million figure for the the wage bill under Adkins is correct, then the wage bill came down from around £9 million under Clough Y/E 2015...small point, but there you go...who knows what we're aiming for this season...maybe between £3-5million?

P.S- I believe Burton got promoted on a wage bill between £2-3 million...

 

[Bladesway]

Warnock was not fired.

He didn't renew his contract then, but the key part of the sentence you happened to miss out was he did it without actually having a replacement lined up.