CBX1985

Just now, IlsonDerby said:

I’m not saying sack him but don’t kid yourself, there’ll be tens upon tens of applications for our job. We are still massive in terms Of club size and ambition. Facilities etc. 

Thousands of applicants, maybe.  Football management sounds much more fun than finance; I might apply - I've watched thousands of games over the years, how hard can it be.  

Number of applicants is a totally irrelevant point.  The core question is how many of them have the requisite skill experience and be within our cost bracket, not withstanding the three year payoff of Warne?  They will need to be better than Warne by at least the cost of three years payoff and the new salary they will take.

Very few, if any, applicants remain.  That is the point.

3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Lots thought Rosenior would be here for the long haul. It didn't take DC long to change our minds. We've got a budget, he can spend it how he wants. As for who else, well it seems there are plenty of managers about...

There are plenty of managers about, but it is a merry-go-round.  I don't think Clowes wants that for this club.

LR was a hangover from a previous regime, but was an obvious option (I disliked his tactics, but thought he deserved a season to show what he could do).  Not sure he required any major payoff or anything like that.  Warne would be very expensive.

The second point on budget is unknown.  The EFL "loosened" restrictions, not eliminated then,  We don't know what restrictions we are under.  A three year payoff of a manager is going to dent any business plan.  Let's say we were three or six months into the season - you may have a point.

At the moment, we are one real game in.  There is much to do.  But chucking the manager at this stage sounds like madness.  The tacticcs need to be worked on, improved on.  Same, too, the selection.  But that is what he is paid for; getting rid of him without giving him the ability to experiment is unreasonable.

1 hour ago, WarneOut said:

Well, I've had enough. The results have been beyond awful, Warne-ball is awful to watch. The players either look like they've got no idea what they're supposed to be doing, or they just can't be bothered to do it. Defending has been comical, the Blackpool goals being perfect examples. What are the players and coaches doing in training, standing around watching TikTok on their phones?

Warne is not good enough. I don't care how long he's got left on his contract, get rid before he drags us down to League 2.

Who do you think we are going to get as manager if he does go?  I don't think the penny is dropping: We are not getting a Lampard, Rooney or Cocu.  We'll get someone obscure, or new, or out in the cold - the one thing they will be is cheap.  The three years we'd need to pay for would further limit the field.  

Whether you like it or not, he is the best shot we have got.  It is easy to snipe, but that is the reality we live in.  

The grass is often greener until it isn't.  And PS, I was sad LR went - but when he did, and a four year deal, means we are where we are.

1 hour ago, Kernow said:

I don’t think such clause exists where if you lose x amount on the trot, you’re gone.

Obviously he will be gone if we have 0 points after 11 games. And obviously that is never, ever going to happen. I don’t even think we lost that many on the bounce in 2007/08.

Reading some of the responses makes it really hard to believe that we’ve only gifted a team 3 points in our first game, then got knocked out the cup. That’s it.

That was my point.

The Cup is a blessing.  I'd rather try in the Papa Johns - at least we'd have a chance of actually winning it.  The league cup, whilst producing a little revenue, if you have a good tie, is essentially a drag on resources.

A league match we should have done better is another matter.  But we are talking one game of substance.  What Warne needs to do is concentrate of the defensive frailties.  We cannot enact a defenestration of the manager for a few minor, but costly, mistakes; this is when he needs to coach the problem away.

4 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

Warne did, given he played a very strong team. Otherwise he might have started a few others like Rooney, Robinson, Bardell, Thompson and Brown. I suspect Clowes might have liked some future gate receipts too.

Probably.  But we are not going to win the thing and it sucks resources away from the core task in hand.  You basically play several games in the hope of winning a tie against Man Utd.  

It was a strong team.  But we were two nil down at half time.  I'm not sure the energy exertion is worth it.

3 minutes ago, Ellafella said:

We didn’t just lose a game though. We have lost because our pawns are all over the place, our king is exposed, and our bishops are moving in zig-zags to no avail and we’ve lost our Knight. Our castles are empty and we’ve been done by a fool’s mate again. 

I didn't watch the match tonight as not broadcast and have little interest in travelling to bothersome cup games, so I will take your word for today. 

I was at PP on Saturday, however.  There were several significant weaknesses that were evident.  Your laugh out loud clever analogy isn't far off the mark.  But, I personally think it is a bedding in process rather than check-mate.  

6 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

Warne made a mistake tonight. He will have created divisions in the dressing room by those comments. On Saturday he was supposedly worried to whisper possible substitutions/player performances to Barker on the bench. Tonight on the radio he is calling out at least two of his players as part of his explanation as to why things aren’t gelling at the mo. Substituting both Hourihane and Bradley at half-time is unusual behaviour too. 

It was a League Cup match.  We are playing on Saturday in the league.  

He said before the Liverpool match last year that he will only play big names so long in cup games.   

15 minutes ago, Caerphilly Ram said:

Ignoring Warne as the manager for the moment, or if Rosenior had stayed, or if Stevie Mac got the band back together or whatever managerial circumstance. I’ve always been accepting of the fact it could take a while to get out of this league, the club was left in a horrific state and the rebuild is ongoing, there were never any guarantees of promotion at the first, second or even third attempt. Maybe it’s easier for me to say as I’m an armchair fan due to geography and that, but I’ve long accepted the next few years may not be a smooth ride regardless of who the manager was or is. 
As for the original post, I don’t think Warne is on borrowed time as yet. It’s clear the fans more opposed to Warne are becoming more vocal and emboldened in their stance, and some more neutral fans are starting to question the project more, I get the impression from what’s been said in his interviews that Clowes will stick to his guns more than some fans will. 

What I think those anti-Warne fans are thinking is: we'll get a big name manager.  Truth to be told, we'll get someone else similar.  Just like players; the disappointment of signing Waghorn is code for: "we didn't sign Ronaldo".

Personally, I am delighted we lost tonight.  With the size of the squad, do we really want to be in the League Cup?

9 minutes ago, alram said:

it's the reality because we keep buying old players and having to do business next season to replace them

We have been under strict rules due to what happened just one year ago. Let's say we get promoted, we would probably want a greatly changed squad.  

Short termism to get us up might be a pretty good strategy.  

2 hours ago, Srg said:

He's fine for the squad, but isn't the answer to any problems we have. Still need more pace.

I come to this thinking that he is in the same position today that McGoldrick was twelve months ago. Good player a few years back, better than this level but his days in the game are numbered.

He might be an inspiration.  An ageing player dropping a league or two will often outshine those around them.  If we went up this would be an ordinary signing, but the fact we are in Lg1 might mean he is naturally better than those around him (even accounting for age).  

34 minutes ago, i-Ram said:

I was very grateful to David Clowes when he stepped in, because he saved our club. He made it pretty clear that his objective was that it should not die. He also made it pretty clear I felt that he was a reluctant owner, and certainly not one with deep pockets, and that during his tenure he would have to run it as a sustainable business model. There isn't a couple of million that can be found from anywhere, unless its from his pocket. I dont expect him to dig deeper than he has, and no one else should either. He has given Warne what looks a resonable budget to compete in League 1. He has put his faith in the League 1 Guardiola.

Notes:

1) A sustainable business model will never satisfy the average football fan. 

2) Not getting out of League 1 quickly will create issues as to attendances, goodwill, etc.

3) I wonder how much work is being done by Clowes in terms of finding his future successor. I suspect he would very much like to find someone in his 5 year plan that has the deeper pockets to take the club forward.

What is to say we are not allowed to make those transfers.  Even if Saudi Arabia decides, madly, to buy us, we might be limited to what we are doing now until the end of the season.

We were told the restrictions against us had been loosened, note: not removed.

2 hours ago, RoyMac5 said:

What he didn't know before now? Blackpool didn't up their offer then do you think?

I hate being cynical, but perhaps he gauged the strength  of the attack and as someone else said, knew he was a mile better. 

His negotiating position is we need him more than we he needs us.  Last contract so needs to get all the money he can, as to all intents and purposes needs to last the rest of his life.  

11 minutes ago, Mick Brolly said:

Postponed waterlogged pitch 

It 's  not April Fools Day.

2 hours ago, David said:

Just to chime in here and say I like the idea of letting the players decide.

In fact, I would go as far as saying it's a great idea.

They are all professional footballers, most will have played in numerous teams under various captains.

They will know individually more than anyone what they want from their captain and vote accordingly.

As a fan, I couldn't care less who gets the armband, it's not going to affect my life in any way other than see them lead the team out the tunnel.

The captain announcement is on par with the squad numbers announcement. Just a formality. 

I would go further and say that if it doesn't work out it will be changed.  If someone is unsuitable words will be had.  Warne is only going to give the job to someone he thinks is able.  It is like the pick a card trick: you have the illusion of choice.

1 hour ago, Animal is a Ram said:

Wouldn't expect it to be any more than 22k, as that's roughly the cap.

Not sure if there is a glitch, but when you click on seats none are available for ST.  It gives a total, but click through and nothing there.

On 25/07/2023 at 23:17, oldtimeram said:

Never seen that interview before that I recall.  Very interesting 

Don't you mean: "interesting, very interesting" - as Barry Davies once said.

On 11/07/2023 at 15:56, ram59 said:

None of those players are Warne signings, some he'll want keep, depending on which division we'll be playing in. If we do get promoted, we'll need a certain amount of clearing of the decks in order to get better players in to compete at a higher level.

The trouble with offering certain players extended contracts now, is that those who aren't offered new contracts will feel put out. Warne is a big one on harmony within the squad, a sure way to spoil this is to effectively say to a few of the team 'I'm not interested in keeping you'.  I think that Warne will also need to evaluate how these players fit into the new dynamics of the team, which we will see this season.

I think that new contracts will be looked at in the lead up to the new year, when we have a better idea of where we are headed and how the players fit into the project.

A further point to that is: we might go up.  Our needs in the Championship will be different.  And players will get more money from us if we go up and negotiate.

It isn't really in anyone's interest to negotiate a contract at this stage

21 hours ago, Foreveram said:

Reading could be following them according to some on their forum.

Looking to Mike Ashley to save them.

Chris Kirchner has put in a bid.  He can't do the whole lot, so he's leaving the purchasing of the ice cream van and chip shop to someone else. 

3 hours ago, Foreveram said:

Assuming a capacity of 33,000 we were at 82.6% last season despite the away end rarely being full.

Sold capacity not percentage sold or used.

Reversed, we would need to be selling (or have applications) for 120% of existing seats.  We need people missing out on attending the games for lack of space to demonstrate any demand to exists to expand the seats.

There is a demand for the south stand, but they can sit elsewhere.    

16 minutes ago, Gerry Daly said:

No, because it is the young supporters, like my 16 year old son and his mates that want to get into the South stand. The ones that sing and do the bounce and get behind the team. They don't want to go in the North stand. Increase the size of the South stand and lower the prices in the North stand

What you say is true in so far as atmosphere, but there is only so much money to go around.  What you suggest would cost millions and bring nothing more in. That is my point.  

The club has clearly made the choice to allow SS to fill up (by selling the experience relatively cheaply).  They are not going to extend it whilst there are seats left unsold.  We would need to operate at 80% of sold capacity (i.e. having capacity for 80 seats where 100 could be sold) before any extension is nessassary.

Whilst Season Ticket sales are fantastic, we are nowhere near that.  

1 hour ago, Will Hughes Hair said:

Massive respect to everyone who travels for the Rams home games. I spent nearly 20 years in a similar position but the efforts of @Inverurie Ram and @MadAmster to pick two are way above and beyond the call of duty.

I am though slightly disappointed that after two decades of an inferiority complex because I didn’t have a season ticket, I’m now not allowed to be smug 😂

And finally capitalists? You mean like the ones that have done such a fine job of running the country over the past five years? Here’s an idea. I’m not likely to move my 9 year old son and myself from the North (West) stand into the South Stand at any point regardless of capacity or pricing. How does that fit with your immutable laws of supply and demand? Thought so.

Systems of economy have little to do with incompetents running them.  

Perfectly well.  My point was very simply that we are not going to increase capacity in south stand because it is over-subscribed, as there are plenty of other seats that do not need building.  That is knee jerk to put it mildly.  There are other methods that can be used to moderate.  I suspect the club will - perhaps sensibly - do nothing.  

1 hour ago, Foreveram said:

You do realise the West upper is the same price as the West lower and also the same as the whole of the East stand and has been for a few years now.

Not sure what that has to do with anything.

South stand is oversubscribed; the North stand is undersubscribed.  Basic economic theory postulates that you increase pricing structure to moderate the demand in the oversubsribed part.  

I don't see the demand for an extension because we are not filling the stadium.  If the whole stadium was oversubscibed, you either a) raise all prices to maximise on price b) increase supply to meet the demand.

You do not increase supply in one part if it would canabalise the sales elsewhere.  That is a dead cost for the Club.

15 minutes ago, Gerry Daly said:

OK fair enough. There is a need to have some capacity available for walk ups. However as the stadium is not completely full each week, there is clearly enough. as I said I think they could usefully extend the South stand, I think demand outstrips supply there    

Well, yes, but is it really worth it?

The cost of extension would be high and we already have the seating capacity - the club might be of the view extension of other areas will canabalise sales - so we will have fewer in north stand than we do now, but higher numbers in south. 

The key question would be: does this bring in more customers in (i.e. those who will only sit in SS) or would those who miss out sit elsewhere?

I suspect the latter, so not worth the development cost.

The capitalist in me would say what we need to do is raise the price of the south stand, to obtain greater value (it is so popular, I think for the atmosphere it could be priced the same as west upper (which is more salubrious, but less raucous). 

23 minutes ago, Gerry Daly said:

I don’t understand why there has to be a percentage for walk ups. Who would make such a rule? I can understand the regulations regarding the FA cup etc but other than that I see no reason why a club, as a business cannot sell all of the rest as season tickets if it wants. I think it’s much more likely that the club itself sets a limit knowing that it will sell walk up tickets at a higher price than season tickets on a per game value

They are marked up, but the cost of sale is much higher - all that posting, needing staff on duty etc.  The fewer available the more expensive it becomes per ticket.  I suspect the club would move to a Season Ticket only model if it could guarantee it would sell them all.

1 hour ago, Caerphilly Ram said:

 

Astonishing figures.  No other words to put to it.  They are on sale for another two months.  

Does anyone know the regulation maximum?  I have a feeling it has to do with FA Cup allocation - i.e. so that you can ensure all season tickets have the right to tickets (if, say Man U come to town), plus the additional max requirements for housing away FA Cup fans.