A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:03 - Jan 24 with 974 views | PhilTWTD |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 09:37 - Jan 24 by Superfrans | Coming from an independent source (rather than a so-called "Mick/Evans inner") is always good though. And contextualising us with other clubs is also valuable. Swiss Ramble does these on lots of clubs and clearly knows what he is talking about. |
True, but doesn't really add anything we didn't already know. | | | |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:07 - Jan 24 with 968 views | textbackup |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:03 - Jan 24 by PhilTWTD | True, but doesn't really add anything we didn't already know. |
I didn't know that Evans used money from player sales to fund the £7m he puts in a year. Was always told that money was used to pay for season long loans and other top player investments | |
| |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:09 - Jan 24 with 968 views | Darth_Koont |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 09:59 - Jan 24 by textbackup | But isn't what he's saying correct? The money wasn't put in by Evans as he just used player sale money to make his overall input lower? Or have I read that wrongly? |
In one year of accounting, yes. And only relevant if you ignore the whole of ME's ownership, the future losses he's committed to and a consistent approach to football spending over the last 3 or 4 years. Yes, he could have put in the usual amount from the outside to increase our football spending last year but that would have been a one-off (you can't build a strategy on selling players every year for that amount). And that in itself would be a return to the short-term, chopping and changing of approach that screwed up every manager until Mick came along. It's only by settling to a level of "sustainable" losses that we've turned the corner and competed at all over the past 9 years. | |
| |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:12 - Jan 24 with 955 views | Axeldalai_lama |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 09:58 - Jan 24 by Radlett_blue | Right. And as our wage bill is around 14th highest in the league, we are currently pretty much where we should expect to be in the league. |
14th highest in the league and 102% of our turnover. How ridiculous and unsustainable is that?!! For the whole league, not just us, obviously. | | | |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:13 - Jan 24 with 948 views | PhilTWTD |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:07 - Jan 24 by textbackup | I didn't know that Evans used money from player sales to fund the £7m he puts in a year. Was always told that money was used to pay for season long loans and other top player investments |
That's not really the situation. Player sales meant that for one season there wasn't the shortfall that he has been required to cover in previous years. The money did pay for season-long loans, wages etc. | | | |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:22 - Jan 24 with 924 views | textbackup |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:13 - Jan 24 by PhilTWTD | That's not really the situation. Player sales meant that for one season there wasn't the shortfall that he has been required to cover in previous years. The money did pay for season-long loans, wages etc. |
So really for that one year he could have taken that risk to see what his best manager could achieve | |
| |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:22 - Jan 24 with 918 views | Axeldalai_lama |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:07 - Jan 24 by textbackup | I didn't know that Evans used money from player sales to fund the £7m he puts in a year. Was always told that money was used to pay for season long loans and other top player investments |
But picking bit's like that out surely shows a deliberate agenda. The article as a whole shows how screwed this league is financially. Maybe it could be argued that Evans should sell up to a multi billionaire who'll crack on and put us into the silly money group towards the top of this league, and I'd find it hard to argue with a change in management, or at the very least style. BUT arguing about the specifics of the intricacies of the finances of ITFC seems like rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic. That report shows how there are clubs who commit tens of millions more than us and who risk getting on for double their turnover on wages alone. ME put's in an okay amount, arguing about a few million here or there makes no difference. It's about the direction of the club, the 5 point plan, that is the talking point. Unless we truly want to compete financially in which case we need to start from scratch and attract a billionaire and pretty much sell our souls. Fine if that's the plan, but what's the point nit-picking ME? | | | |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:35 - Jan 24 with 882 views | textbackup |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:22 - Jan 24 by Axeldalai_lama | But picking bit's like that out surely shows a deliberate agenda. The article as a whole shows how screwed this league is financially. Maybe it could be argued that Evans should sell up to a multi billionaire who'll crack on and put us into the silly money group towards the top of this league, and I'd find it hard to argue with a change in management, or at the very least style. BUT arguing about the specifics of the intricacies of the finances of ITFC seems like rearranging the deck chairs on the titanic. That report shows how there are clubs who commit tens of millions more than us and who risk getting on for double their turnover on wages alone. ME put's in an okay amount, arguing about a few million here or there makes no difference. It's about the direction of the club, the 5 point plan, that is the talking point. Unless we truly want to compete financially in which case we need to start from scratch and attract a billionaire and pretty much sell our souls. Fine if that's the plan, but what's the point nit-picking ME? |
I get what you are saying, but maybe 3 or 4 million may have pushed us over the line? Told on here many times that MM just needed that little extra, £3/4m when we were 2nd would have been massive | |
| | Login to get fewer ads
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:38 - Jan 24 with 876 views | PhilTWTD |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:22 - Jan 24 by textbackup | So really for that one year he could have taken that risk to see what his best manager could achieve |
Can't really add much to Darth's post above. I think turning a club in our position into one with a more realistic chance of going up is more about spending over a number of years rather than splashing out a few million in one season. Brighton being an example of a club who seem to have taken that sort of risk and are on the way to winning, one or two others, Derby, Sheffield Wednesday, seem less likely to do so. I do tend to agree with Kieron's point that ME has seen Town compete for the play-offs under MM and expects that year on year. But given the way the division has developed, I don't think that's possible every year and he will have to put his hand deeper into his pockets year on year just to stay anywhere near where we've finished for the previous two seasons.
This post has been edited by an administrator | | | |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:46 - Jan 24 with 841 views | Axeldalai_lama |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:35 - Jan 24 by textbackup | I get what you are saying, but maybe 3 or 4 million may have pushed us over the line? Told on here many times that MM just needed that little extra, £3/4m when we were 2nd would have been massive |
Yes, it could have made a bigger difference then, agreed, but that ship has sailed. Since then, money seems to have got much worse, more gets you less. We are where we are, and spending tens of millions is the only way to really kick on, bar going back to basics and investing from the bottom over a good few years. Many angry at ME still seem to think a few bigger names for a couple of million each will make us miles more competitive than a few cheaper lower leagues with the odd loan/free. On balance it really doesn't, so ME doesn't bother. | | | |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:57 - Jan 24 with 824 views | SWGF |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 09:58 - Jan 24 by Radlett_blue | Right. And as our wage bill is around 14th highest in the league, we are currently pretty much where we should expect to be in the league. |
Should we expect better footballers/football for the 14th highest wage bill in the division? | |
| |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 11:02 - Jan 24 with 822 views | itfcjoe |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:57 - Jan 24 by SWGF | Should we expect better footballers/football for the 14th highest wage bill in the division? |
Yes, but without looking around the league to compare - a presumably large chunk of our 14th highest wage bill is wasted on creative players and better footballers that are (again) sat in the treatment room. This season should just really be written off as a poor season for a number of reasons, with an attempt to go again in the summer with players fit, Murphy replaced and youngsters with more experience - it won't be and the club will be reset in the summer for better or worse. | |
| |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 14:32 - Jan 24 with 700 views | Radlett_blue |
A fantastic piece by Swiss ramble on us on 10:57 - Jan 24 by SWGF | Should we expect better footballers/football for the 14th highest wage bill in the division? |
The quality of football has been poor for at least a couple of years. But, in terms of results, even this season Mick is performing at about par. I don't buy the argument that most supporters would be happier if we were lower in the league, while playing more attractive football - if we were much lower, we would be in a relegation battle & that could still happen, with no meaningful recruitment in the window & some tough fixtures coming up. This season seems rather like BFJ's last season & I would be happy if it was Mick's last as well as I think he's far too conservative to risk a different style. | |
| |
| |