GenBr

41 minutes ago, littleover ram said:

im not sure how much the affect of parachute payments is overstated. Looking at the Champo this season, Burnley have gone straight back up and in the play off positions Luton, Millwall & Coventry don’t have them. Middlesbrough had a boost from the Mel Morris money but I doubt it was the £45m they were claiming.

it’s only really Sheff Utd who are benefiting, getting them for a second year in the Championship 

 

edit: forgot Coventry in the playoffs and Sunderland just outside them too 

2 out of the 3 promotion places are taken by parachute teams most seasons, so this one usnt unusual.

Although 8 of teams currently playing in the prem have done it without parachutes, so maybe it is overstated

1 hour ago, WystonRam said:

I sam not sure I said they put us to Shane, but their due diligence was way better than Quantuma.

Their due diligence was better than Quantumas despite him getting to the exact same stage with both us and Preston?

1 hour ago, WystonRam said:

Preston saw through him immediatley.

Yes it only took them choosing him as preferred bidder, giving him a couple of months of exclusivity in which he twice offered lower bids and then no sign of any money turning up for them to see straight through him. Truly Preston have put us to shame by doing the exact same thing as us

3 hours ago, ColonelBlimp said:

Why Everton? Why not, one of those clubs that has doing nothing for years, stinking out the place with their mid-table finishes. About time they had a reset. 

I think it will do these perpetual Prem clubs some good to see the lower leagues for a bit. Hopefully Chelsea next year as well.

24 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

Can't say that I blame him. Job security for coaches is a little uncertain to say the least whereas you can be pretty rubbish as a pundit but still keep getting work.

Yeh I think he would work well in the media though - talks well and whenever I see him in media stuff he seems to come across well.

On 28/04/2023 at 22:25, Foreveram said:

Always good to have a backup plan.

On 28/04/2023 at 22:20, CheshRam said:

He was on Question of Sport tonight. Looking to get into media rather than coaching?

Coaching is his backup plan. He's said a few times that he would prefer to go into media work. He has done his coaching badges though

The EFL should try and use similar methods to sell their product 😂. He is just trying to get them (FIFA) more money, but at the same time broadcasters still need to make a profit. The womens world cup won't bring anywhere near the same amount of cash as the mens does, so broadcasters aren't going to put big bids in. Not really much of a surprise.

Just now, strawhillram said:

How on Earth are we going to beat  any of the top teams over two legs. 
That’s if If we do stumble into the play offs

We've often gone into the playoffs as the form team and its never panned out. Maybe we've been doing it wrong all this time

8 hours ago, Crewton said:

Bournemouth sold a load of players for big money when they were first relegated, and brought through quite a few kids. Their signings thereafter were relatively modest. 

Of course Forest had to strengthen their squad, but how many of those signings have played more than 15 games as a starter? Their struggle isn't an indicator that it's the Toughest PL For Years (another Forest TM I note), it's an indicator that they've signed few players that have performed consistently. If they stay up, see how many are retained and how many get a Greek holiday.

They were able to sell those players for big money precisely because they'd just been in the Premier League and if transfermarkt is to be believed they broke our own transfer record 5 times this season. I know you are trying to twist it to make it look like Bournemouth werent spending money, but they lost £50 mill last time they were in the championship even when they still had parachutes. They kept a lot of their best players and spent mega bucks on wages to do so.

And i havent said its the toughest pl for years - think you're confusing me with someone else. It is imperative you spend money to compete. Forests transfer business is very hit and miss, but the fact that they are still in with a chance of staying up is astounding 

1 hour ago, Crewton said:

Bournemouth didn't need to spend anything like£200m - despite almost completely overhauling their squad last season.

It's more an indication of how much rubbish you've bought.

I dont want to defend Forest, but Bournemouth still spent a lot of money this season and haven't had to compete on a level playing field for a decade in the few times they've been in the championship.

Forest didnt have parachute payments and theyve been out of the top flight for 30 years. Some of the quality of the players they signed is dubious at best, but they had to spend money to have any chance of staying up. No other way to close the gap

9 minutes ago, Leeds Ram said:

They've made losses of 3 million on their investment already and invested 10 million overall. Now I don't follow conference football closely but those don't sound like modest sums for a team in the fifth tier of english football. This is just in the conference, let alone the money they'll spend once they get into league 1 or the championship. I don't know how deep their pockets are, which is why I questioned the sustainability. We've seen so many stories such as this go awry once the owners get stuck in the depths of League 2 or 1, the excitement dies down, and the investment becomes an anchor on them. 

My bet is Clowes won't be running the club for the next fifteen to twenty years, and my gut tells me that's not his vision. He seems like a sensible man who will know he'll, at some point, have to either sell or bring in other backers if we become a premier league team. He bought the club literally because we were probably a week away from extinction, and the bloke is a fan. We're not spending outrageous sums for the division or, as far as I know, living beyond our means. Who knows, given our strong crowds and thin squad we may not even post a loss. Not exactly the same as the whole Wrexham story is it... Some of the bigger stars are rumoured to be 3.5-4.5k a week, with teams complaining about them basically financially doping the league. 

Sky are the only one I can find to quote your £10 mill figure, but even so that's not all been spent on the squad. New academy, new stadium, new infrastructure etc - stuff they won't be spending money on again. As previously stated only a single transfer has involved a transfer fee since they took over and the club is only losing £2mill per year as it currently stands even with the slightly higher wages. They will have no issue funding that sort of loss for decades - there is no reason why they need to start spending big in League 1 or League 2 - what an odd take to have - both leagues are still very low on resources. 

As for your second paragraph I have no idea what you are trying to say. Derby are not living beyond our means, but nor are Wrexham. Derby are currently not allowed to spend money on transfer fees - its not because we are some altruistic club trying to avoid the temptations of money and we're doing the exact same with wages as Wrexham are where we are allowed to.  Breaking news - team with highest attendances in the National League and the biggest income also spends the most on wages. The other teams are complaining because they don't like the competition, same as the teams in the Prem complaining about Newcastle. But yes despite us doing the exact same thing Wrexham should be ashamed of themselves - Derby fans are a funny lot sometimes.

3 hours ago, Leeds Ram said:

It's way over the top, considering the money spent on the team. In reality, they've got a league 1 team albeit one that would likely struggle at this level. You've got to question just how deep their pockets are and how long they'll be able to subsidise that level of investment. If i was a conference team I'd be furious with what Wrexham have done tbh.

They've spent virtually nothing on transfers though. Yes the wages are probably a bit higher than other teams in that league, but they aren't exactly drowning the club with money. If the level of investment stays as it is they'd be able to do that indefinitely

And if you are going to question how deep Reynolds pockets are we'll have to do the same with Clowes. Reynolds doesn't just make his money from movies - he's sold a number of company stakes for very good money in the past. 

EDIT: Just had a quick look and turns out they have only paid one transfer fee in the entire time they have been there. They've also increased the revenue to record levels. Still made a loss of £2mill, but its not exactly massive is it. Not sure why you are all so upset about a club that nearly ceased to exist having a very modest amount of investment plugged into it.

8 hours ago, Highgate said:

Bayern's dominance often makes the title race in Germany boring it's true. Although this season there is only 2 points between themselves and Dortmund at the top.

However, the Bundesliga is actually a great league. Very entertaining games, in packed stadiums with great atmospheres. As well as that, ticket prices are affordable, and the teams are predominantly fan owned. It's actually an example of how football should be done. A much better model than the Premier League in my opinion.

I do prefer their ownership and pricing models, but it doesnt really matter if they have odd game that is entertaining when they are all utterly pointless if you're not bayern munich

7 hours ago, Wolfie said:

What, not awash with billions of pounds and match tickets for a tenner?.

I believe I could live with that.

Who is going to win the league this year? Oh its Bayern Munich... again... for the millionth time in a row.... how fun.

We might only have a handful of teams that the title rotates around but its infinitely better than watching the turgid s*** the bundesliga serves up.

Its excellent that teams like Man City, Chelsea, Newcastle, etc now have resources to compete with the established clubs and make the league at least semi interesting

On 14/04/2023 at 22:48, The Jeff Bourne Legacy said:

This could be viewed as a major problem with the club almost having to rebuild from scratch again, or as an ideal time for Paul Warne to bring in players of his choice to build for a promotion challenge.

I think its just going to be something we have to live with whilst we can only offer limited contracts in terms of both wages and duration. And unless we sell a load of players that allow us to spend some money we're also going to have to hope that the players Warne wants are free transfers or loans

12 hours ago, sage said:

20 shots to West 

20 shots to West Ham's 4. Hanging On...

Yes and 4 of those were on target. We had 29 shots against MK Dons and scraped a draw. We had 15 against Fleetwood and lost the match. Cherry picking random stats is beyond useless

1 hour ago, sage said:

They've just drawn with West Ham. They beat us easily. It's not the Premier League but it's not a pub league.

In your opinion. I'm sure they could give our team of pensioners and freebies a run for their money, but I don't think it would be a particularly one sided game even with us being in the third tier of our domestic league and with our imposed limitations.

Scraping a draw at home against the second string of a poor West Ham side does nothing to change my opinion.

19 minutes ago, sage said:

He is playing West Ham. We are playing Bristol Rovers.

And most of the time they are playing farmers and candle stick makers. If you are a good player in Belgium it doesn't mean you will be good in leagues that are actually competitive

The Premier League wouldnt be doing this if the tv rights weren't so huge. Won't be as easy for the EFL to do the same.

Not bothered either way though - i have no problem with gambling companies advertising themselves

If you've got massive stadiums like Tottenhams ground, West Hams ground, Arsenals ground and Wembley all with great transport links (ok maybe not tottenhams ground) that are surrounded by places to eat, pubs, etc why the f*** would you even consider a small stadium in a small city that has abysmal transport links and is placed in the deserted wasteland that is Pride Park industrial estate.

I love Derby and I love Pride Park Stadium, but anyone who thinks we can compete with the big stadiums needs to give their head a wobble.

8 minutes ago, Crewton said:

12 minutes ago, littleover ram said:

Only 5 away goals this season… we scored 8 during ‘that’ season. Will that be beaten?!

We want them to get less than 7 so they can take the record from norwich

5 hours ago, TigerTedd said:

I think my point is that a club like Bournemouth has a natural financial ceiling. They do t pull in massive crowds, they don’t have a fan base beyond Bournemouth, in any logical world, they shouldn’t be able to afford to lose £55m. 

like it or not, United are a global brand, which is why they really should be in a separate super league, and leave domestic football to the local clubs for local people. 

FFP is designed to stop clubs like Bournemouth challenging the like of Man Utd. It certainly doesnt protect clubs from financial oblivion.

As long as the owners dont leave the club in the s*** i think all clubs should be allowed to spend whatever they want. If we're just going to limit it to the point where bournemouth arent allowed to spend anything because they dont get as many fans whats the point. The big clubs would never be challenged ever again

As much as i hate to say it if you want to get established in the prem i still think cooper is the man to do it. Might not keep you up this year, but i reckon he could get you promoted again next go and you gradually build from there