Financial Results 2015/2016

[Day]

18 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I would not for 1 minute thought that the signings we made would have added £10m a year to the wage bill!

Johnson, Ince, Butterfield, Shackell, Weimann, Blackman, Olsson, Peace, Bent, Carson. 

10 players right there, you average those at 19k per week, soon hits that £10m, then throw in Baird and Camara. Not all will be on 19k but we signed a couple from the Premier League, won't be on peanuts.

Russell was also given a new contract that season

Times have changed with players wages. Scary.

[ilkleyram]

14 minutes ago, G STAR RAM said:

I would not for 1 minute thought that the signings we made would have added £10m a year to the wage bill!

If you want to see where a chunk - and I would guess a significant chunk as well - has gone, then do the Moor Farm tour. Not only will the running costs be greatly enhanced but a quick look at the 'team photos' on the walls will show you how many extra staff have been employed over the last few years. Sure, some will be part time and not all will be individually expensive but Mel has certainly invested a lot into it. 

[cannable]

I'm not bothered about the wages or the money spent unless you put it into context. We spent £25,000,000 on a team that already looked too good for the division whilst increasing the wage bill by 50% only to make it worse.

Somebody wants bloody shooting.

[RiddingsRam]

I think there's way too much emphasis on the increase in wages and amount spent on players with no improvement on the field . Let's not forget that Mel spent the best part of £11 million of that figure on Johnson and Butterfield, to replace Hughes and Bryson who were ruled out for the season . Now we're would we or could we have been if that figure had not been spent.  There weren't too many complaining at the time . 

Regarding the wage increase , I'm afraid that's part and parcel of modern football , like it or not every club will see a massive hike in wages. Can you imagine Newcastle, Villa , Norwich or even f##ests wage bill ?? 

We have signed some **** granted , but it's by far the not the only reason we seemed to have gone "backwards" . Vydra , Ince, Nugent, Baird , Carson, Pearce, Johnson, Butterfield , Bent , have any of them really been bad signings ? In my opinion the only bad signings have been Blackman and Camara.

[Mr Tibbs]

2 hours ago, RiddingsRam said:

We have signed some **** granted , but it's by far the not the only reason we seemed to have gone "backwards" . Vydra , Ince, Nugent, Baird , Carson, Pearce, Johnson, Butterfield , Bent , have any of them really been bad signings ? In my opinion the only bad signings have been Blackman and Camara.

Not digging you out here, genuine question.. if the only two bad signings we've made have been two players that have hardly played, why have we gone backwards? Purely down to the managers?

8 players listed there, surely if they were all good signings we'd have seen some progress. 

[RiddingsRam]

27 minutes ago, Mr Tibbs said:

Not digging you out here, genuine question.. if the only two bad signings we've made have been two players that have hardly played, why have we gone backwards? Purely down to the managers?

8 players listed there, surely if they were all good signings we'd have seen some progress. 

I think there was too much emphasis on how good we were . Yes we played well and mainly for the last 12 games of that season. But it wasn't sustainable, the squad over achieved and we had to take improve the squad and did so how the club saw fit. There could be several reasons we haven't reached the heights. Managerial changes could certainly have had some bearing on this. 

[cannable]

3 hours ago, RiddingsRam said:

I think there's way too much emphasis on the increase in wages and amount spent on players with no improvement on the field . Let's not forget that Mel spent the best part of £11 million of that figure on Johnson and Butterfield, to replace Hughes and Bryson who were ruled out for the season . Now we're would we or could we have been if that figure had not been spent.  There weren't too many complaining at the time . 

Regarding the wage increase , I'm afraid that's part and parcel of modern football , like it or not every club will see a massive hike in wages. Can you imagine Newcastle, Villa , Norwich or even f##ests wage bill ?? 

We have signed some **** granted , but it's by far the not the only reason we seemed to have gone "backwards" . Vydra , Ince, Nugent, Baird , Carson, Pearce, Johnson, Butterfield , Bent , have any of them really been bad signings ? In my opinion the only bad signings have been Blackman and Camara.

BJ becomes an abysmal signing when you take into account the fact we only signed him because he was available, blocked Hendrick and Hanson getting game time and just isn't good enough on the ball for what we were. He came good in our hour of need but we literally just signed him because he was available.

Johnson and Butters have actually since revealed to be £6,000,000 and £7,000,000.

It's not about signing good players. It's about signing players who fit. They may come good due to a system change etcetera but if they make you worse at the time then they absoloutely are not good signings.

Ince, Nugent and Carson are our only good signings since 2014. Butters was a necessity in light of Hughes' injury so gets a reprieve. Anya and Vydra were signed with a new system intended so just go down to Pearson being a ****.

[DesertRam]

If we had bought Shelvey, Ritchie, Gayle, Dunk and Knockeart we would be in the top 2 now,

I seem to remember we were linked to Gayle and Dunk.

 

[RiddingsRam]

8 minutes ago, cannable said:

BJ becomes an abysmal signing when you take into account the fact we only signed him because he was available, blocked Hendrick and Hanson getting game time and just isn't good enough on the ball for what we were. He came good in our hour of need but we literally just signed him because he was available.

Johnson and Butters have actually since revealed to be £6,000,000 and £7,000,000.

It's not about signing good players. It's about signing players who fit. They may come good due to a system change etcetera but if they make you worse at the time then they absoloutely are not good signings.

Ince, Nugent and Carson are our only good signings since 2014. Butters was a necessity in light of Hughes' injury so gets a reprieve. Anya and Vydra were signed with a new system intended so just go down to Pearson being a ****.

To fit into what system? What system do we have or did we have at the time ? The only time we've had a rigid system and recognised style of play was under Mac and even he seemed to question his own system. Granted certain players are required for certain systems but finding them players at this level can he challenging. Therefore different players are required to allow for flexibility in playing style. Is it that the wrong players were signed ? Or is it that we failed to adapt system to suit the players ?

[RiddingsRam]

1 minute ago, DesertRam said:

If we had bought Shelvey, Ritchie, Gayle, Dunk and Knockeart we would be in the top 2 now,

I seem to remember we were linked to Gayle and Dunk.

 

How can you possibly guarantee that? Because they've done well ? Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Plus the players you talk about would cost an absolute astronomical amount of money. Think of the moaning then .

[cannable]

12 minutes ago, RiddingsRam said:

To fit into what system? What system do we have or did we have at the time ? The only time we've had a rigid system and recognised style of play was under Mac and even he seemed to question his own system. Granted certain players are required for certain systems but finding them players at this level can he challenging. Therefore different players are required to allow for flexibility in playing style. Is it that the wrong players were signed ? Or is it that we failed to adapt system to suit the players ?

Clement wanted to play out from the back so he signed Shackell who can't pass. He signed a striker to play as a winger. He wanted to keep the ball at all cost and so signed a midfielder who's uncomfortable on the ball. A left winger who's first thought is to get his head down and run. Nick Blackman. Baird to play as our first choice right-back only to cast him off after a few months. 

[i-Ram]

5 hours ago, ilkleyram said:

If you want to see where a chunk - and I would guess a significant chunk as well - has gone, then do the Moor Farm tour. Not only will the running costs be greatly enhanced but a quick look at the 'team photos' on the walls will show you how many extra staff have been employed over the last few years. Sure, some will be part time and not all will be individually expensive but Mel has certainly invested a lot into it. 

Those diamond incrusted gold frames don't come cheap either.

[Sparkle]

40 minutes ago, cannable said:

Clement wanted to play out from the back so he signed Shackell who can't pass. He signed a striker to play as a winger. He wanted to keep the ball at all cost and so signed a midfielder who's uncomfortable on the ball. A left winger who's first thought is to get his head down and run. Nick Blackman. Baird to play as our first choice right-back only to cast him off after a few months. 

Clement actually seems to have done a lot to stop the progress of the team with his very average signings and negative boring style 

[G STAR RAM]

8 hours ago, cannable said:

BJ becomes an abysmal signing when you take into account the fact we only signed him because he was available, blocked Hendrick and Hanson getting game time and just isn't good enough on the ball for what we were. He came good in our hour of need but we literally just signed him because he was available.

Johnson and Butters have actually since revealed to be £6,000,000 and £7,000,000.

Just out of interest, where was this revealed?

[G STAR RAM]

8 hours ago, DesertRam said:

If we had bought Shelvey, Ritchie, Gayle, Dunk and Knockeart we would be in the top 2 now,

I seem to remember we were linked to Gayle and Dunk.

Linked by who?

There are no guarantees of promotion from this division.

What if 2 of them players got injured in the first game of the season and missed the majority of it...that can happen. 

[Mafiabob]

7 hours ago, Sparkle said:

Clement actually seems to have done a lot to stop the progress of the team with his very average signings and negative boring style 

This makes me chuckle..... we are blaming a manager FOUR MANAGERS AGO for where we are now...... that in itself is pretty ludicrous 

[Derbados]

8 hours ago, cannable said:

Baird to play as our first choice right-back only to cast him off after a few months. 

Who he also made club captain. . . . Bizarre 

[QuitYourJibbaJivin]

3 minutes ago, Mafiabob said:

This makes me chuckle..... we are blaming a manager FOUR MANAGERS AGO for where we are now...... that in itself is pretty ludicrous 

Wellll not that ludicrous, I mean it might be 4 managers ago but it's only 18 months ? I think the point is we're still and will be for a while saddled with a lot of average players that regime brought in. We signed 13 players Under that manager, only 3/4players have joined since. 

[angieram]

12 minutes ago, Mafiabob said:

This makes me chuckle..... we are blaming a manager FOUR MANAGERS AGO for where we are now...... that in itself is pretty ludicrous 

Except that the next manager in has to live with the recruitment decisions he made. The timescale has been far too short for it not still to be having an effect.

I think it's a fair point and the manager to succeed will be the one who can work out how to improve and adapt with the squad he has inherited - I think that's what Rowett might just do.

Sorry @QuitYourJibbaJivin, we must have been typing at the same time!

[Sparkle]

27 minutes ago, Mafiabob said:

This makes me chuckle..... we are blaming a manager FOUR MANAGERS AGO for where we are now...... that in itself is pretty ludicrous 

I am referring to the personnel brought in under Clements time, I don't mind you finding it ludicrous but I don't