Negative parasites

[needles]

Either I've not explained things properly,or you've misinterpreted what I said,needles.I'm talking about a total wages bill of around £12m (including ENIC,as all the other figures do).If we have greater numbers of non playing staff,then non players' wages becomes higher,and thus players' lower,so I'd be fairly confident it's less than £10m.Even in 10/11 we were told it fluctuated between £9m and £10m.As Hulse and Commons left during the year,we might expect that the lower end of the fluctuation came towards the end of the season.

I see. Mild confusion, entirely at my end. 'http://www.dcfcfans.co.uk/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/biggrin' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':D' />

[ramblur]

I said some time ago that I had grave doubts about this sustainability model,not because it can't work,but because you couldn't expect it to work.

Many have said that other clubs have gone up on low budgets,but over a period of years have even 50% of promoted clubs carried this model (which is the bare minimum to be able to say you'd expect it to work)? This year looks as though it may revert back to norm.

Therefore,those who want a change are looking for a demon manager good enough to work against the odds.Would the arrival of a new manager bring about a sudden change of policy,followed by the release of transfer funds? I think not.

I like to have the odds working in my favour.The odds are telling me that changing manager is unlikely to get us into the top 6 with the current squad,and that we might easily be worse off.

[mcsilks]

You appear to take an unusual stance by both supporting Clough and the board.Yet on 2 other posts on this

thread you say he has been underfunded.I wish you would make your mind up.

My position is very clear.

I fully support Clough and I fully understand the boards position.

I have never stated anything different.

Every club should be made to work by a sustainable blueprint. You can only spend 120% of what you earn. It would make football more entertaining and bring the game back to the supporters.

[mcsilks]

I understand that in the past 7 years the following teams have finished in the top 6 in the PL.. Man Utd, Man City, Arsenal, Chelsea, Spurs, Everton, Liverpool and Newcastle... 8 different teams have occupied the top 6 spots in each of the last 7 years..

I also understand that the following teams have occupied a top 6 spot in the NPC... WHU, Reading, Derby, Southampton, Norwich, QPR, WBA, Newcastle, Sunderland, Stoke City, Swansea, Cardiff, Leicester, Birmingham, Hull, Burnley, Forest, Bristol City, Blackpool, Watford, Crystal Palace, Sheffield Utd and Preston...

They all must have been loaded...

Am I suggesting that DCFC can compete with clubs that fork out $10mill a season on new players? Erm didn't Bradford beat 3 PL teams en route to the League Cup final? Isn't there a 10 point gap between Blackburn (who spent over $10mill this season) and the top 6.. 2 of those clubs which haven't spent anything (Palace, Watford)

The 3 clubs that have spent the most and occupy the biggest wage bill with all those parachute payments are 15th, 16th and 18th..

I understand modern day football quite well.. You on the other hand simply don't understand that Clough is just average.

Are you seriously citing Bradford City's run in the cup as a tool with which to beat Clough and his inability to get us near the top of our league?!

Where are Bradford in the league standings? They struggle to compete with Division Two sides for the most part.

I simply don't understand some fans. It's quite simple in any form.

If you have no money, you cannot buy quality. If you have money, you can buy quality and that quality will result in a better product.

Clough has no money. I don't care about history and what remarkable feats other clubs have achieved on a smaller budget.

I deal in cold hard facts.

The facts are we haven't given our manager a pot to piss in and he has managed to improve our product.

He has turned us from the nations laughing stock to a well respected Championship outfit.

He has developed the club into a position where we actually have assetts.

And you fail to see this.

How can you not see it?

I suggest it's your support where your favourite term 'average' should be applied.

[Ash]

Would it make Clough a good manager if all clubs worked within their means? I don't think so. For the record i think his transfer dealings have been ok, its on the pitch tactically where he falls short, very short imo.

[uttoxram75]

Clough gets loads of grief for his tactics yet against Forest and Blackburn we actually started off well. Derby were the better side for the first 15 minutes of each match I thought. The passing and movement was crisp and fluent and we looked to get forward with a bit of oomph about us.

For some reason though the team failed to keep the momentum going and lacked confidence to keep playing it on the deck once the opposition got into the game. This I do blame Clough for. He should drill into the players to ignore the crowd at all cost and play the game they've trained for all week.

The whinging numpties who shout "get it forward" after two possession retaining passes are the same ones who moan like feck if we lose the ball.

[mcsilks]

Would it make Clough a good manager if all clubs worked within their means? I don't think so. For the record i think his transfer dealings have been ok, its on the pitch tactically where he falls short, very short imo.

Yes, it would.

If all clubs worked within their means, I think we would have success. That is what I am hoping

with FFP.

[Bris Vegas]

Are you seriously citing Bradford City's run in the cup as a tool with which to beat Clough and his inability to get us near the top of our league?!

Where are Bradford in the league standings? They struggle to compete with Division Two sides for the most part.

I simply don't understand some fans. It's quite simple in any form.

If you have no money, you cannot buy quality. If you have money, you can buy quality and that quality will result in a better product.

Clough has no money. I don't care about history and what remarkable feats other clubs have achieved on a smaller budget.

I deal in cold hard facts.

The facts are we haven't given our manager a pot to piss in and he has managed to improve our product.

He has turned us from the nations laughing stock to a well respected Championship outfit.

He has developed the club into a position where we actually have assetts.

And you fail to see this.

How can you not see it?

I suggest it's your support where your favourite term 'average' should be applied.

You say that you can't be near the top unless you have money.. I just proved you wrong and made a huge list of clubs that have been near the top on a smaller budget, including Derby under George Burley, and now you say you don't care about other clubs past successes..

What are you on about buddy? You mean if Clough doesn't have much money, he can't find quality, because many other clubs can and have done.. Anyone can say they'll do better with more money.. We could all be manager of Man Utd.. Sam Allardyce even said managing Real Madrid would be easy..

But what seperates the good managers from the average is those who can get the best out of their own situation and do something more.. If you're suggesting NC is doing a damn good job and there's no-one else better out there despite us being 13th then you're seriosuly deluded buddy..

You go on about as if NC has taken us to Europe.. He's taken us to far reaches of NPC midtable obscurity..

I'm going to leave you to it mcsilks.. You'd defend him if he set off a nuclear bomb..

[mcsilks]

You say that you can't be near the top unless you have money.. I just proved you wrong and made a huge list of clubs that have been near the top on a smaller budget, including Derby under George Burley, and now you say you don't care about other clubs past successes..

What are you on about buddy? You mean if Clough doesn't have much money, he can't find quality, because many other clubs can and have done.. Anyone can say they'll do better with more money.. We could all be manager of Man Utd.. Sam Allardyce even said managing Real Madrid would be easy..

But what seperates the good managers from the average is those who can get the best out of their own situation and do something more.. If you're suggesting NC is doing a damn good job and there's no-one else better out there despite us being 13th then you're seriosuly deluded buddy..

You go on about as if NC has taken us to Europe.. He's taken us to far reaches of NPC midtable obscurity..

I'm going to leave you to it mcsilks.. You'd defend him if he set off a nuclear bomb..

I have never said there isn't any out there any better than Clough. Maybe there is but while he is doing a good job, I see no reason to take that risk.

Football has changed a lot in the last few years and the climate is completely different to that when Burley was manager.

You obviously don't see that or recognise that.

Clough has brought in quality players for next to nothing and he had been willing to throw our youth into the mix. I applaud that.

[Brammie Steve]

I can't sleep and have just read the last few posts. It's good to read balanced opinions.

It is absolutely true that the "modern game" has changed beyond measure from what was played in the 1970s.

The World Cup of 1970 introduced the world to what rightly became known as the "beautiful game" when players of individual skill and flair passed the ball fluently to each other and ran into positions where they could help each other as part of a team.

They had worked together and knew each other so well that they knew where another player would be without looking.

Every player did the job that they were paid for and managers like Brian Clough could send "agents" packing because they were not prepared to give him a money back guarantee that a striker would score goals!

Many players seem now seem to have no other incentive than playing to increase their transfer fee and might almost forget the name of the team they are playing for this week!

As far as changes of manager are concerned, look at Chelsea and, if you can stand it, Aston Villa!

Clough IN!!!

[froggg]

http://dappersociety.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/20130121-022655

[ladyram]

....."You're gonna need a bigger packet..."

[Guest]

....."You're gonna need a bigger packet..."

That's what all the ladies say to him :-)

[ladyram]

Dirty! Filthy! Pigdog!!

[ramblur]

Yes, it would.

If all clubs worked within their means, I think we would have success. That is what I am hoping

with FFP.

If FFP were based around break even,with just a reasonable amount of leeway in acceptable deviation,then you might have a hope (but it doesn't,and by quite a long way).Even if it did,I think I pointed out elsewhere that 10 clubs might receive a parachute payment next year.This means that these 10 would have a head start of at least an impressive minimum £8m.There's evidence that relegated clubs struggle initially,but then (because payments are now spread over 4 years,and much more than we got) are able to acclimatise and make a challenge.I expect this to happen with this year's relegated clubs.However improbable,in certain circumstances you could find a max 12 clubs with this advantage.

Glick pointed out that relegated clubs usually don't go back up straight away (at least not all),implying that chute payments wouldn't give the advantage some thought under FFP.However,we don't know what would happen when FFP comes in.Although clubs not in receipt of chute payments could steal a march by utilising all the allowable losses,no club in this category would be able to do a Cardiff or Leicester.This seems to work in favour of chute recipients-only competing amongst themselves for best available talent,without any interference from sugar daddy clubs.

Heaven only knows what would happen if these chute payments were increased/extended under the forthcoming deal-it's usually happened in the past.

[top 6 finish]

If FFP were based around break even,with just a reasonable amount of leeway in acceptable deviation,then you might have a hope (but it doesn't,and by quite a long way).Even if it did,I think I pointed out elsewhere that 10 clubs might receive a parachute payment next year.This means that these 10 would have a head start of at least an impressive minimum £8m.There's evidence that relegated clubs struggle initially,but then (because payments are now spread over 4 years,and much more than we got) are able to acclimatise and make a challenge.I expect this to happen with this year's relegated clubs.However improbable,in certain circumstances you could find a max 12 clubs with this advantage.

Glick pointed out that relegated clubs usually don't go back up straight away (at least not all),implying that chute payments wouldn't give the advantage some thought under FFP.However,we don't know what would happen when FFP comes in.Although clubs not in receipt of chute payments could steal a march by utilising all the allowable losses,no club in this category would be able to do a Cardiff or Leicester.This seems to work in favour of chute recipients-only competing amongst themselves for best available talent,without any interference from sugar daddy clubs.

Heaven only knows what would happen if these chute payments were increased/extended under the forthcoming deal-it's usually happened in the past.

In fact any side not in receipt of paracchute payments were to get promotion they wouldnt be able to strengthen

the side.They would get slaughtered.Onthe other hand they would receive their own parachute payments

when they got relegated.

TBH I cant see it happening.

[ramblur]

In fact any side not in receipt of paracchute payments were to get promotion they wouldnt be able to strengthen

the side.They would get slaughtered.Onthe other hand they would receive their own parachute payments

when they got relegated.

TBH I cant see it happening.

Not particularly true.If we,for instance, were to get promoted the minimum income we would be likely to get in the first Prem year would be about £56m (no doubt soon to go up).Plenty of scope there for signings and running a reasonable wage bill.As I worked out recently that expenses other than wages seem to be running at a little over £7m,even if you made that £8m there's still potentially £48m to cover total wages (£26m last time,including some expensive clowns) and capital expenditure,including signings.

The bigger problem is getting there in the first place.

[JohnClement]

I think Nigel Clough is a 5/10 manager. The trouble is if we sack him, we may end up with a 1/10 manager like Paul Jewell because unless we can spot and recruit an uncut diamond like Brian Clough 10/10 managers are out of our league, literally & financially.

[JohnClement]

Cynical enough to think that these investors are not just dropping money down the well for little return, I would like to know the extent of "Management charges" and who they are going to because given the low rate of prevailing world interest rates, it might well be that GSE are not the benevolent benefactor, that they would have us believe.

[top 6 finish]

Not particularly true.If we,for instance, were to get promoted the minimum income we would be likely to get in the first Prem year would be about £56m (no doubt soon to go up).Plenty of scope there for signings and running a reasonable wage bill.As I worked out recently that expenses other than wages seem to be running at a little over £7m,even if you made that £8m there's still potentially £48m to cover total wages (£26m last time,including some expensive clowns) and capital expenditure,including signings.

The bigger problem is getting there in the first place.

I had considered that but decided that it really didnt make a lot of difference for 2 reasons.

The first is that it applies to all clubs in the prem so it is no advantage to us because we will be coming

from a lower financial base.Also the money isnt given equally the higher your position the more you get.

I agree the biggest problem is getting there.