Jump to content

How good is our squad?


CongletonRam

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

So who would they play instead of? Are you saying they didn't come here because we have better players already in their positions?

Like-for-like or positionally? 2 fullbacks, a CM, a #10, and a striker- all fit the formation we currently employ:

Harris for Collins/Waggy, Rodrigues for one of the roles behind the #9, Branagan in the midfield, then Brown for Fozzy, and Leigh for Wilson.

I've not once talked about why ''they didn't come here''; though ironically, the 2 linked- Rodrigues and Harris, were both swayed by money apparently, and it had nothing to do with Warne... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

Like-for-like or positionally? 2 fullbacks, a CM, a #10, and a striker- all fit the formation we currently employ:

Harris for Collins/Waggy, Rodrigues for one of the roles behind the #9, Branagan in the midfield, then Brown for Fozzy, and Leigh for Wilson.

I've not once talked about why ''they didn't come here''; though ironically, the 2 linked- Rodrigues and Harris, were both swayed by money apparently, and it had nothing to do with Warne... 

Harris has scored less than Collins and Waggy, both historically and this season. He'd be in our squad but not an absolute guaranteed starter.

Brannon is good but Rodrigues better than Bird or Sibley??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, RoyMac5 said:

I think Clowes would expect somewhat more than that for the money he has put into our budget.

I don’t think Dave Clowes expects to go up this season and  if we don’t he will come under pressure to sack Warne.

Its a building process from top to bottom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 17/10/2023 at 17:18, YorkshireRam said:

Not a fan of that rhetoric. If you're going to make claims with specifics like ''top 3'', you need some empirical data to back that up. The 3 relegated clubs may have retained players whose wages exceed ours- I don't know, but that's the point. Attempting to use an unqualified claim like that as a stick to beat Warne with isn't a great look...

Also in your final paragraph earlier- why is Warne the singular factor in whether a player decides to join? Money could be a factor ie. the rumoured Rhodes incident. There's so many factors outside Warne's control, why are you linking everything back to him? Stating ''it still ultimately falls back on Warne'' is untrue, and just reduces the credibility of your overall argument because it just appears reductionist. 

In most cases, the most recent accounts for clubs in this division are a useful indication of current budget.

There is a lack of financial information available regarding Port Vale, Leyton Orient, Cambridge, Cheltenham, Wycombe, Northampton and Stevenage. However, it it very reasonable to make the assumption that these "small companies" also have smaller wage bills than ours.

Whilst there is limited data for Bristol Rovers and Oxford, the data which is available would suggest an absolute maximum wage bill of £9.2m and 7.7m respectively. It seems fairly obvious that Oxford have pushed the boat out a bit this summer, and will likely be around the £9-10m mark.

Reading were put under a £16m wage cap for last season in the Championship. With a significant drop in revenue and an owner seemingly unwilling to put more money in the club, anything higher than £8m seems unlikely.

Wigan had a £13m wage bill when promoted last time, but are reportedly under tighter control this time.

That brings us on to the rest, who have all disclosed their wage bill in the most recent accounts.
Charlton - £10.6m
Bolton - £10.2m
Barnsley - £8.1m
Portsmouth - £7.9m
Blackpool - £7.7m
Peterborough - £7m
Fleetwood - £6.2m
Lincoln - £6.2m
Burton - £5.1m
Shrewsbury - £4.4m
Exeter - £4m
Carlisle - £3.4m

My "top 3" budget claim is therefore very valid since a conservative estimate would put us at £10m.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

In most cases, the most recent accounts for clubs in this division are a useful indication of current budget.

There is a lack of financial information available regarding Port Vale, Leyton Orient, Cambridge, Cheltenham, Wycombe, Northampton and Stevenage. However, it it very reasonable to make the assumption that these "small companies" also have smaller wage bills than ours.

Whilst there is limited data for Bristol Rovers and Oxford, the data which is available would suggest an absolute maximum wage bill of £9.2m and 7.7m respectively. It seems fairly obvious that Oxford have pushed the boat out a bit this summer, and will likely be around the £9-10m mark.

Reading were put under a £16m wage cap for last season in the Championship. With a significant drop in revenue and an owner seemingly unwilling to put more money in the club, anything higher than £8m seems unlikely.

Wigan had a £13m wage bill when promoted last time, but are reportedly under tighter control this time.

That brings us on to the rest, who have all disclosed their wage bill in the most recent accounts.
Charlton - £10.6m
Bolton - £10.2m
Barnsley - £8.1m
Portsmouth - £7.9m
Blackpool - £7.7m
Peterborough - £7m
Fleetwood - £6.2m
Lincoln - £6.2m
Burton - £5.1m
Shrewsbury - £4.4m
Exeter - £4m
Carlisle - £3.4m

My "top 3" budget claim is therefore very valid since a conservative estimate would put us at £10m.

That's a lot of words to not really dispute my point. Lots of ''likely'' and ''estimates''. I don't mind speculation, but it's immediately invalidated when utilised in a critical capacity because the easy defence, as I'll put up here, is you could be entirely wrong, and can't prove you aren't... 

How have you calculated your 'conservative estimate'? Salarysport lists us at £7,873,840 per annum. While that's likely also slightly wayward, they do break down individual wages. 

The original point, which I just had to check since this has become fairly convoluted, was that Warne had a big enough budget that any 'extenuating factors' are overridden- I don't believe that's true and I believe there's more to it than 'Paul Warne only wanted to sign free agents'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

That's a lot of words to not really dispute my point. Lots of ''likely'' and ''estimates''. I don't mind speculation, but it's immediately invalidated when utilised in a critical capacity because the easy defence, as I'll put up here, is you could be entirely wrong, and can't prove you aren't... 

How have you calculated your 'conservative estimate'? Salarysport lists us at £7,873,840 per annum. While that's likely also slightly wayward, they do break down individual wages. 

The original point, which I just had to check since this has become fairly convoluted, was that Warne had a big enough budget that any 'extenuating factors' are overridden- I don't believe that's true and I believe there's more to it than 'Paul Warne only wanted to sign free agents'.

However. Should, woulda, coulda or likely and estimates are all well and good.

The plain fact is we will or may never know how much the budget actually is or whether PW only wanted free agents.

All purely speculation

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming everyone is fit these are my squads .

Wildsmith 

Nyambe Nelson Cashin Fozzy 

Smith Fornah Bird 

Barks Collins Hourihane 

 

Vickers 

Wilson Rooney Bradley Elder 

Thomo Robinson Sibley 

NML Washington Waggy 

 

Difficult to find a spot for Ward albeit he could interchange with Wilson. 

Edited by Magicman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Magicman said:

Assuming everyone is fit these are my squads .

Wildsmith 

Nyambe Nelson Cashin Fozzy 

Smith Fornah Bird 

Barks Collins Hourihane 

 

Vickers 

Wilson Rooney Bradley Elder 

Thomo Robinson Sibley 

NML Washington Waggy 

 

Difficult to find a spot for Ward albeit he could interchange with Wilson. 

So your playing 4 x central midfield players in your 1st line-up? Is so thats bizarre.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BaianoPOTY98 said:

So your playing 4 x central midfield players in your 1st line-up? Is so thats bizarre.

Bird in the 10 role Hourihane on the left nothing bizarre about those - round pegs in round holes better than a knackered NML 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Magicman said:

Assuming everyone is fit these are my squads .

Wildsmith 

Nyambe Nelson Cashin Fozzy 

Smith Fornah Bird 

Barks Collins Hourihane 

 

Vickers 

Wilson Rooney Bradley Elder 

Thomo Robinson Sibley 

NML Washington Waggy 

 

Difficult to find a spot for Ward albeit he could interchange with Wilson. 

                 Wildsmith
Nyambe Nelson Cashin Fozzy
               Fornah Bird
          NML Sibley Barks
                Waghorn
        
                 Vickers
Wilson Bradley Rooney Elder
        Thompson Smith
 Ward Hourihane Washington
                 Collins

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, YorkshireRam said:

That's a lot of words to not really dispute my point. Lots of ''likely'' and ''estimates''. I don't mind speculation, but it's immediately invalidated when utilised in a critical capacity because the easy defence, as I'll put up here, is you could be entirely wrong, and can't prove you aren't... 

How have you calculated your 'conservative estimate'? Salarysport lists us at £7,873,840 per annum. While that's likely also slightly wayward, they do break down individual wages. 

The original point, which I just had to check since this has become fairly convoluted, was that Warne had a big enough budget that any 'extenuating factors' are overridden- I don't believe that's true and I believe there's more to it than 'Paul Warne only wanted to sign free agents'.

Individual salaries are put out in the public domain?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, The Scarlet Pimpernel said:

Individual salaries are put out in the public domain?

Nope, but it gives more context to the total figure; they've essentially 'showed their working' which is what I was wanting to compare with the methodology for how £10m was reached as a figure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, YorkshireRam said:

Nope, but it gives more context to the total figure; they've essentially 'showed their working' which is what I was wanting to compare with the methodology for how £10m was reached as a figure. 

When you've studied football club accounts as much as I have over the last however many years you tend to get a good idea of what a club is spending. Looking at anything like Salary Sport as an indication of what a club is spending on wages is a complete waste of time and are wildly out. You'd be just as well informed if you used the latest Football Manager as evidence of a club's wage bill.

As an example, Bolton had a wage bill of over £10m in 21/22, yet Salary Sport at the time had them down as just £3.3m
Other examples being Burton (£5.1m vs £3.8m), Charlton (£10.6m vs £6.1m), Portsmouth (£7.9m vs £4.3m), etc...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Ghost of Clough said:

When you've studied football club accounts as much as I have over the last however many years you tend to get a good idea of what a club is spending. Looking at anything like Salary Sport as an indication of what a club is spending on wages is a complete waste of time and are wildly out. You'd be just as well informed if you used the latest Football Manager as evidence of a club's wage bill.

As an example, Bolton had a wage bill of over £10m in 21/22, yet Salary Sport at the time had them down as just £3.3m
Other examples being Burton (£5.1m vs £3.8m), Charlton (£10.6m vs £6.1m), Portsmouth (£7.9m vs £4.3m), etc...

Again, a lot of words to still not explain how you've arrived at the arbitrary figure of £10m... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account.

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...