Embargo.

[Marriot Ram99]

1 hour ago, RamLad1884 said:

If three points penalty was the end of things now, no more chance for the EFL to have us for our accounts or late submission I'd take it all day. 

Think we have all acted a little entitled about the fight with the EFL and we're lucky we come out of this still in the championship. Three points at this stage of the season is more than enough time to prepare and make up ground. 

At the end of the day it will probably be the difference between finishing 5th and 6th so there's no point crying over split milk. 

[jono]

2 hours ago, RamLad1884 said:

If three points penalty was the end of things now, no more chance for the EFL to have us for our accounts or late submission I'd take it all day. 

Think we have all acted a little entitled about the fight with the EFL and we're lucky we come out of this still in the championship. Three points at this stage of the season is more than enough time to prepare and make up ground. 

I think it is only natural amidst the complexity of these things, to fight your own corner. I might be tempted to agree if every other club was as pure as driven snow. I don’t think for a minute the EFL were wrong to investigate .. It is there job to administer the rules and enforce them . What sticks in the craw and makes us seemingly “entitled” is that other clubs haven’t been scrutinised or hauled over the coals to the same degree or for such a long drawn out period .. or at least it seems not from our perspective 

[chezzyram]

1 hour ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

I was round at neighbours for dinner yesterday and he's an ex partner at Ernst and young plus a Leeds fan so I described our accounting issues. 

He snorted with derision at the EFL - there is no theoretical justification as to why a straight line amortisation method is superior to any other. 

In the context of football players he made the further point that a better amortisation method would likely be age dependent as players values typically increase whilst young/gaining experience then flat then decline as they age and lose physicality. 

Thankfully the dinner conversation moved on.... ?

 

The only thing I can find to disagree with in that is having dinner with a Leeds fan. 

[Ghost of Clough]

2 hours ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

I was round at neighbours for dinner yesterday and he's an ex partner at Ernst and young plus a Leeds fan so I described our accounting issues. 

He snorted with derision at the EFL - there is no theoretical justification as to why a straight line amortisation method is superior to any other. 

In the context of football players he made the further point that a better amortisation method would likely be age dependent as players values typically increase whilst young/gaining experience then flat then decline as they age and lose physicality. 

Thankfully the dinner conversation moved on.... ?

 

Something similar to this (pre-bosman)?

 

From the accounts:

 

The wording in their accounts changed slightly in 1992:

 

Then tweaked again in 1995:

 

Bosman kicked in the following year with clubs adopting the straight-line approach.

Edited August 23, 2021 by Ghost of Clough

[EnigmaRam]

This would be welcome news. 8 might seem a lot but it depends on the make up of the 8. Our CBs are all getting on about and all out of contract at the end of the season. IF there’s an option for a permanent here that can give us 3-4 years service plus bringing in Mengi then that would be a sensible option. So there’s 2 gone. 
Lawrence and Joz are the only senior wife forwards and Lawrence is out of contract end of season. Roberts perm plus a loan here, so that’s 4 signings.
CKR and Baldcock, yes I spelt it wrong I know, both out of contract jan and end of season, Carrol for experience and physicality, Delap and someone on a free that can give a few years like a Diedhiou if not gone anywhere. So that’s 6 gone just on shoring up the gaps and still allowing for our own to get game time. 

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

I wonder if the likes of Morrison and Jaglielka have an agreement with the club (verbal or otherwise) where their deals are lengthened and the wages increased upon the lifting of the embargo? Given that Jags is only here until January and Morrison until the end of the season we have a potential issue there.

If Morrison keeps his nose clean and keeps up his level of performances we want him tied up so we can at least command a fee if someone pops up with some interest.

Edited August 23, 2021 by JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta

[RadioactiveWaste]

3 minutes ago, JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta said:

I wonder if the likes of Morrison and Jaglielka have an agreement with the club where their deals are lengthened and the wages increased upon the lifting of the embargo? Given that Jags is only here until January and Morrison until the end of the season we have a potential issue there.

If Morrison keeps his nose clean and keeps up his level of performances we want him tied up so we can at least command a fee if someone pops up with some interest.

I would imagine this has been promised to a number of our summer signings (if not all of them).

 

[Igor Igor Whats the Score?]

I hope the max limit of 23 pros is increased but the restrictions on free transfers only remains. We are far more effective without transfer fees ?

[Ghost of Clough]

1 hour ago, cheron85 said:

I think that's about what we actually do need - I know everyone has been saying we don't need that many but I think we do

GK - Marshal is off (it seems almost certain), Alsopp is on a 12 month contract, Roos contract expires end of season

RB - Byrne (contract up EOS) + youth players who will benefit more from occasional action/starts than pressure of playing every week

LB - Fozzy (contract EOS) is getting on a bit, Buchanan gives us 2nd option - Probably fine here

CB - We have 3, all old, all on 1 year (max) deals - Need to bring in minimum 2 options

CM - Shinnie (Contract EOS), Bird, Knight, Bielik - If all were fit we'd be fine but I still think we need some proper cover for Bielik

AM - Morrison and Lawrence (contract EOS), Sibley (for me) needs to be rotated out more often - A few weeks playing impact sub role and ease him back in - Think he needs protecting from the constant pressure of games like Boro (get kicked all over the pitch, barely and time/space etc)

Wide-Mids - Jozwiak? Is that it? Definitely need more here

ST - Baldock (contract Jan?) plus Stretton who I still think would benefit from taking away the pressure of being a 'starter' - Would bring in someone who's a 'different option'

 

On Saturday we ended the game with Bird, Watson, Buchanan and Stretton in our 'attacking 5' - That (for me) is too much responsibility on too many young players - If you have 2/5 they have chance to blend in, mess things up, get told where to go and what to do a bit more by the experienced heads - Stretton looks a real talent but when he comes on he legs it around the pitch chasing everything because his adrenaline is up so much from playing first team football - Compare that to Baldock who's physically very similar, who holds his position so the defence/midfield know where to aim for to pick him out

Those EOS players should only be replaced at the end of season or contract extended, unless we sell now and get a replacement in. They currently can't be extended due to embargo rules. 

A healthy squad (wage bill wise) is 2 first teamers per position - maybe a 3rd GK and CF (let's say 24 man squad).
The inexperienced players including Watson, Ebosele, etc would be either loaned out or wait in the U23s for a chance. Also assume Marshall is out.

That leaves a first team squad of this:

That means we need GK, RB, CB, AM, LW and CF to complete the 24 man squad. With Knight and Bielik out for a few months, 2 short term CM loans would be ideal. That takes us up the magic 8.

[kevinhectoring]

2 hours ago, Van der MoodHoover said:

He snorted with derision at the EFL - there is no theoretical justification as to why a straight line amortisation method is superior to any other. 

That’s not the point for the EFL. What the EFL wants to ensure is a level playing field - it can’t have clubs tinkering around with levels of amortisation, and their policies,  in order to scrape through P&S. A straight line approach is the cleanest way to do this 

[Ghost of Clough]

1 minute ago, kevinhectoring said:

That’s not the point for the EFL. What the EFL wants to ensure is a level playing field - it can’t have clubs tinkering around with levels of amortisation, and their policies,  in order to scrape through P&S. A straight line approach is the cleanest way to do this 

Then that has to be voted in by the clubs. As of right now it hasn't, so we don't have to use it if we can 'formulate' a suitable alternative.

[duncanjwitham]

3 minutes ago, kevinhectoring said:

That’s not the point for the EFL. What the EFL wants to ensure is a level playing field - it can’t have clubs tinkering around with levels of amortisation, and their policies,  in order to scrape through P&S. A straight line approach is the cleanest way to do this 

Then the EFL need to make a decision as to whether they're just going to continue to outsource accounting competency (i.e. just keep with the single line rule that says clubs must comply with FRS102 and let the accountants deal with it), or whether they're going to take full control and write their own set of football-specific approved accounting standards. Obviously if they choose the later, it will need a proper vote by clubs, it will need an extensive process to decide what those rules are, it will need them to employ a bunch of accountancy experts to individually approve each clubs books, they will need proper enforcement processes in place, they'll need to deal with how it affects clubs being promoted/relegated in and out of the EFL, and it will obviously need the clubs to vote to pay for all of that.

What can't carry on is for the EFL to have that single line rule, and then every now and then arbitrarily decide it wants to enforce some fantasy accounting standard that doesn't seem to exist in the real world because one club did something it arbitrarily decided it didn't like.

[JuanFloEvraTheCocu'sNesta]

4 minutes ago, duncanjwitham said:

Then the EFL need to make a decision as to whether they're just going to continue to outsource accounting competency (i.e. just keep with the single line rule that says clubs must comply with FRS102 and let the accountants deal with it), or whether they're going to take full control and write their own set of football-specific approved accounting standards. Obviously if they choose the later, it will need a proper vote by clubs, it will need an extensive process to decide what those rules are, it will need them to employ a bunch of accountancy experts to individually approve each clubs books, they will need proper enforcement processes in place, they'll need to deal with how it affects clubs being promoted/relegated in and out of the EFL, and it will obviously need the clubs to vote to pay for all of that.

What can't carry on is for the EFL to have that single line rule, and then every now and then arbitrarily decide it wants to enforce some fantasy accounting standard that doesn't seem to exist in the real world because one club did something it arbitrarily decided it didn't like.

This is the logical conclusion to their current actions against Derby. The problem is that the EFL are nowhere close to competent enough to make it work in reality, they will also claim that it's simply too expensive to implement.

[cheron85]

39 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Those EOS players should only be replaced at the end of season or contract extended, unless we sell now and get a replacement in. They currently can't be extended due to embargo rules. 

That leaves a first team squad of this:

I would normally 100% agree with you about trying to replace EOC players towards the end of the season (and obviously aware that we're currently under embargo but this thread is about post-embargo right?)

However - It seems unlikely to me that Jags or Davies will be continuing as our first choice pairing after this season - So I'd be looking for the club to identify a couple of CBs who could settle in and be a good option (at least) by the end of the season 

I think the injury to Kaz has been bad news and think replacing him is now desperate - Plus if we get another season of him being a first choice player I'd be surprised

This season we started in the poop cos we weren't able to tie down contracts - I'd be prioritising getting people in / re-signed who will be in a Derby shirt at the start of next season

[oomarkwright]

54 minutes ago, EnigmaRam said:

This would be welcome news. 8 might seem a lot but it depends on the make up of the 8. Our CBs are and all out of contract at the end of the season. So there’s 2 gone. 
Lawrence and Joz are the only senior wife forwards and Lawrence is out of contract end of season. Roberts perm plus a loan here, so that’s 4 signings.
CKR and Baldcock, yes I spelt it wrong I know, both out of contract jan and end of season.. 

I know Lawrence is a bit metro-sexual but a wife??!! ?

[Ghost of Clough]

6 minutes ago, cheron85 said:

I would normally 100% agree with you about trying to replace EOC players towards the end of the season (and obviously aware that we're currently under embargo but this thread is about post-embargo right?)

However - It seems unlikely to me that Jags or Davies will be continuing as our first choice pairing after this season - So I'd be looking for the club to identify a couple of CBs who could settle in and be a good option (at least) by the end of the season 

I think the injury to Kaz has been bad news and think replacing him is now desperate - Plus if we get another season of him being a first choice player I'd be surprised

This season we started in the poop cos we weren't able to tie down contracts - I'd be prioritising getting people in / re-signed who will be in a Derby shirt at the start of next season

The problem is we can only sign players on for this season whilst under embargo so we'd be no better off

[Ambitious]

I'm surprised we are yet to hear anything considering the last few EFL vs Nick De Marco's Derby County has been played out in the press prior to official announcement. Also, I find it odd how Rooney supposedly told BBC that we are going to be out of an embargo on Tuesday but no tabloid, local or otherwise, has picked up on it? I'd imagine if true it would be everywhere by now. 

[RIMBAUD]

1 hour ago, chezzyram said:

The only thing I can find to disagree with in that is having dinner with a Leeds fan. 

Unless they were your servant. ?

[cheron85]

3 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

The problem is we can only sign players on for this season whilst under embargo so we'd be no better off

At the moment yes - But if the embargo was ending (as per the title of the thread and the content within it) then we should be able to sign players for longer - Hence the speculation tied into the embargo being released...

[Dean (hick) Saunders]

Anyone else think that due to COVID and the apparent low level of transfer activity across the division, that we could have a more successful season than would otherwise have (normal none COVID) where other teams will have been able to recruit much better than our freebies.. IE things have been levelled down to our mediocre standing.