Is Warne living on borrowed time?

[RoyMac5]

10 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

more about a lack of financial flexibility in the business plan/budget. In football nothing is more attractive than money and not wanting players other clubs also don't want perhaps isn't the alarm bell you think it is.

Loan move wise things won't happen til later he's already said, there's just no value in the market right now and that'll change when those clubs go into "we need to find a club for X to be loaned to now" mode.

Did you see the huge long list @GhostofClough put together of free/loans that had gone to other league 1 clubs? All the players listed on here and the ones that he has signed show that there are players but it seems he has concentrated on certain elements. He has spent on 8 signings that I imagine are on decent wages for this division, that is how he has spent his budget so far. He has suggested that it isn't worth spending £300k on a transfer as they have to be better than what we have, so money is there. No-one really expected our budget (even after sales) to be used to buy players at the price of Clarke-Harris did they?

 

[Gee SCREAMER !!]

12 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

So it's still all about splashing cash about then? I still think he can't attract the players he wants, and the ones that might come he doesn't want!

It's 2 in the morning, the DJ'S put on Move Closer by Phyllis Nelson and Paul's getting desperate.  Who's the lucky boy getting a mug with their face on Sunday morning having scored.  Lyle who's been sat there 3 months without the hint of any action despite having a new purple rinse, or his wingman Sharpy currently screaming at the bouncers that he's still got half a pint and is going nowhere but he will get a taxi easier.  

 

[BramcoteRam84]

24 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

Post match, Warne said "I think it's obvious... I feel like... possibly a couple of my players have had their heads turned", followed by "I feel like there's... they think there's a potential move or something. I don't know. It just feels... feels a bit strange to me really".Ed Dawes asked a second follow up question with Warne responding with "I do understand the human psychology of it all that it can have a feel and it might not happen for the players themselves, but it can happen the players around them"

 

 

It also got missed but he also said "I didn't have a lot more to change in the middle of the park". Well, other than giving Thompson a start... He stated players were doing 10-20% more running on the Saturday, so it confuses me why just a few days later our 3 man midfield is made up of players who played the full 90 (105) just a few days before whene there's an energetic youngster waiting to be given a chance to prove himself.

Warne may have been a fitness coach in the past, but his management of players' fitness levels is shambolic. It was also clear to everyone 60 minutes into the Wigan game that Mendez-Laing needed a rest. Instead, he was left on for a further 30 minutes, having played 97 in total. It may only be the 2 games which he misses (this time), but it's a key part of our season when our only other match fit attacking player is Collins. The same mistake was made time and time again last season which is why so many players were exhausted by the end of the campaign.

Clearly a comprehensive list of the reasons you’re unhappy with Warne, which you’re entitled to and some of which I agree with,  my point was regarding the heads turned comment. He’s dealt with it and we should all move on.

Your point on Thompson, I agree we need to utilise him more. I also don’t know what Rooney needs to do to get a game, he’s the best prospect in the entire squad IMO and could be one of the best players in the league this season if given the chance.

[RadioactiveWaste]

8 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

Did you see the huge long list @GhostofClough put together of free/loans that had gone to other league 1 clubs? All the players listed on here and the ones that he has signed show that there are players but it seems he has concentrated on certain elements. He has spent on 8 signings that I imagine are on decent wages for this division, that is how he has spent his budget so far. He has suggested that it isn't worth spending £300k on a transfer as they have to be better than what we have, so money is there. No-one really expected our budget (even after sales) to be used to buy players at the price of Clarke-Harris did they?

 

Again, we don't know the ins and outs of all those deals and why they went where they did. I'd be surprised if it's because they just didn't like Paul warne.

It's clear Warne can't attract the players you want

[Blondest Goat]

1 hour ago, BramcoteRam84 said:

I listened to it. Saying on second watch “it wasn’t as horrific as it felt at the time”, hardly a defence of the performance. He got a reaction second half, but collectively we weren’t at it including himself and coaching staff getting a couple of things wrong. 
 

He also clarified his comments post match. Explained it well, we should all move on. He also said we’re actively trying to address all the gaps in the team but it’s hard, they have to be affordable, available and better than what we have. Went into detail about one manager saying we can have this striker we’re interested in but only when he can bring two strikers in, one of those strikers Warne knows is wanted by another club. Highlighting how challenging the market is. He confirmed The gaps are we need a striker to help replace Didzy’s goals and we need a midfielder to replace Knighty’s energy. He also said we’re lacking pace and we desperately need Barkhuizen and Sibley back. He’s saying the same things we are saying, he’s not oblivious of the gaps and he’s playing his hand as best he can.

Reading between the lines, I don’t think he’s got much if any money to use as transfer fees. It does again raise the question on the budget/level of restrictions.

Thought it was balanced. Got no hint squad is unhappy and everyone is as focused as they can be on the next game as you would expect. 

Would have to disagree with you.  When he referenced the comments it was like he was talking about something completely different to what he had said Tuesday night.  Total backtrack.  

[RoyMac5]

2 minutes ago, RadioactiveWaste said:

Again, we don't know the ins and outs of all those deals and why they went where they did. I'd be surprised if it's because they just didn't like Paul warne.

It's clear Warne can't attract the players you want

I want the ones he wants - where is the pace he went on about? How many do you think we'll lose this window?

[Chris_Martin]

2 hours ago, DCFC Kicks said:

Is it a 5-3-2? Isn't it 3-5-3? would it be that difficult to just change from two strikers and a CAM to one striker and two wingers?

That would be great but i think the officials may spot it

[RadioactiveWaste]

1 minute ago, RoyMac5 said:

I want the ones he wants - where is the pace he went on about? How many do you think we'll lose this window?

Probably another 3 will leave.

Having pace AND not being rubbish I think is the sticking point on that, but, it might be his inherent unattractiveness,who knows ?

[Chris_Martin]

2 hours ago, DCFC Kicks said:

If we don't have a striker, why are we playing a formation with two of them? just play a 3-4-3 with NML on the wing 

warne seems to prefer the safer set up, giving the opponent no space through the middle (in theory)

[Wolfie20]

No

[Chris_Martin]

2 hours ago, DCFC Kicks said:

Is it a 5-3-2? Isn't it 3-5-3? would it be that difficult to just change from two strikers and a CAM to one striker and two wingers?

No it wouldnt, but that leaves us one shorter in the middle and warne seems to put defense first

[DCFC Kicks]

17 minutes ago, Chris_Martin said:

No it wouldnt, but that leaves us one shorter in the middle and warne seems to put defense first

They've not been playing as a flat 3 in midfield. Bird has been higher up as a CAM 

[Guest]

54 minutes ago, DiggerB said:

I’d be staggered if DC hadn’t been up front with him about available budget. As others have alluded to, I suspect the agreed business plan is perhaps more restrictive than any of us truly know.

So would I and that was not what I was alluding to; I should have expanded it a little. I was thinking that right after last season ended, David Clowes said that because the club had operated last season with a budget surplus, the EFL was amenable to an easing of the agreed business plan whereby there may be room to pay some transfer fees. It didn't seem that at that time the level of easing had been finalised. I thought that when we started our transfer business with the free transfers, we might have in reserve enough to purchase a striker but it seems not for one reason or another. Warne has expressed some frustration with how the transfer market is slightly unusual at the moment. I did not mean at all that David Clowes might have misled him and I feel sure that is not the case. The fact that none of us knows for sure the figures in the business plan, means that sometimes hopes exceed reality.

[May Contain Nuts]

24 minutes ago, Chris_Martin said:

No it wouldnt, but that leaves us one shorter in the middle and warne seems to put defense first

I'd argue that the very last thing Warne does is put defence first! (I know what you meant though)

Edited August 11, 2023 by Kokosnuss

[BramcoteRam84]

49 minutes ago, Blondest Goat said:

Would have to disagree with you.  When he referenced the comments it was like he was talking about something completely different to what he had said Tuesday night.  Total backtrack.  

Or explaining the same point with better clarity having had time to think? He said nothing different he just said it more thoughtfully and eloquently. 

I struggled with his interview on Tuesday I have to say, it was clumsy but it was Warne being Warne and I think saying (as some are) it’s throwing individuals under a bus is actually incorrect.
 

He’s given some people ammunition to use against him but I think those that continue to use it after today don’t want him here anyway and are looking for another angle to fuel their narrative. 

[Tyler Durden]

1 hour ago, RoyMac5 said:

So it's still all about splashing cash about then? I still think he can't attract the players he wants, and the ones that might come he doesn't want!

I put the list of players down whom have rejected a move to Klopp at Liverpool as a bit of bevilment to be fair but also to raise a point - there probably are valid reasons for each player turning down Klopp and it's a lazy, inaccurate insinuation to draw that the appeal of Klopp wasnt large enough for them to join the club.

Much in the same way that you can also use the same method of thinking to end up believing this is the same case with Warne.

And the largest difference between the two scenarios is that Liverpool will have had oodles of cash to fling about to attract thrses players when Warne has next to nothing. But they still turned Klopp down.

I don't know if anyone on here truthfully knows what players have actually turned us down as a club and where they went to instead so we can't even have a coherent debate about it.

But we can persist in jumping to the conclusion that it must be Warnes fault as he can't attract players to the club we want using effectively next to no money. 

Edited August 11, 2023 by Tyler Durden

[RoyMac5]

4 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

And the largest difference between the two scenarios is that Liverpool will have had oodles of cash to fling about to attract thrses players when Warne has next to nothing. But they still turned Klopp down.

I don't know if anyone on here truthfully knows what players have actually turned us down as a club and where they went to instead so we can't even have a coherent debate about it.

But we can persist in jumping to the conclusion that it must be Warnes fault as he can't attract players to the club we want using effectively next to no money. 

At the level of choosing between Liverpool and Chelsea I think it might be various reasons. 

At our level why has Warne had such difficulties bringing in players on their 'way up' in their careers? We have 'oodles of cash' compared to many in this league, so what else is it?

[hintonsboots]

1 minute ago, RoyMac5 said:

At the level of choosing between Liverpool and Chelsea I think it might be various reasons. 

At our level why has Warne had such difficulties bringing in players on their 'way up' in their careers? We have 'oodles of cash' compared to many in this league, so what else is it?

Did we improve Osula, White, Dobbin and Springett last season ? That’s what the parent clubs are looking for. I would say Mount, Tomori and Wilson improved massively when on loan here, all higher standard to start with I know. Maybe clubs don’t want to loan out players to run 20 k per game ?

[Tyler Durden]

1 minute ago, RoyMac5 said:

At the level of choosing between Liverpool and Chelsea I think it might be various reasons. 

At our level why has Warne had such difficulties bringing in players on their 'way up' in their careers? We have 'oodles of cash' compared to many in this league, so what else is it?

Whom are these players that have turned us down? I trawled that list of players from a Twitter account which is all based on rumour and gossip that Liverpool were ever interested in them in the first place? 

Some of them may have turned Klopp down some of them not.

But the posters agenda was to paint an inaccurate picture to suit their narrative which is that Klopp has no draw as a manager.

In the same way it could also be used against Warne if it suits your purposes.

[RoyMac5]

2 minutes ago, Tyler Durden said:

Whom are these players that have turned us down? I trawled that list of players from a Twitter account which is all based on rumour and gossip that Liverpool were ever interested in them in the first place? 

When you look at the players who have moved from one club in our league or below to another they number quite a few players. Do you believe we weren't after any of them? When you look in the leagues above you might ask similar. If we were in for none of them then I ask you why not?