How impressive is PW as a coach?

[G STAR RAM]

35 minutes ago, IlsonDerby said:

Perhaps but I think it’s hardly condescending to think you don’t need to know all 24 clubs wage bills to have an idea of where we’d be when we have last years wages as a starting point. 
 

I think people flying the ‘we can’t possibly know until the financial reports come out’ are those that are having people on a bit 😂

Its condescending to tell people they are making erroneous comments, without actually knowing the facts yourself, simple as that.

Clearly we will be up there with the wage bill but to state as fact that it is the highest is having people on because the information is not available on the public domain for either ourselves or the other teams in the league.

[sage]

6 hours ago, G STAR RAM said:

Its condescending to tell people they are making erroneous comments, without actually knowing the facts yourself, simple as that.

Clearly we will be up there with the wage bill but to state as fact that it is the highest is having people on because the information is not available on the public domain for either ourselves or the other teams in the league.

I see you are still going on with this.

We had the highest wage budget the previous season and have expanded the squad since. 

DC said at the start of the season we could pay fees. It was later stated we instead chose to increase our wage budget meaning we no longer had money left for fees.

Both facts.

Goodbye.

 

[Tamworthram]

18 minutes ago, sage said:

I see you are still going on with this.

We had the highest wage budget the previous season and have expanded the squad since. 

DC said at the start of the season we could pay fees. It was later stated we instead chose to increase our wage budget meaning we no longer had money left for fees.

Both facts.

Goodbye.

 

Could we afford both though? Surely if we’d paid a fee for a player still under a contract elsewhere we would still have had to offer them a decent wage?

[Crewton]

19 hours ago, AndyinLiverpool said:

Fortunately, points per game is not the only metric by which the quality of coach is judged

It tends to matter eventually though.

[sage]

4 minutes ago, Tamworthram said:

Could we afford both though? Surely if we’d paid a fee for a player still under a contract elsewhere we would still have had to offer them a decent wage?

At the start of the season we could have paid a fee for someone. It wasn't forbidden like the previous season.

However we still had an overall budget. All clubs operate on a budget, ours was different in that we had to send it to the EFL for approval.

Obviously if we paid £300k for someone and paid them £6k a week, it would cost us £600k that year. 

Therefore if we paid fees it would reduce our wage budget by the size of that fee.

Effectively every fee of that size would cost us one off the squad size (based on a 6k pw presumption).

 

[Crewton]

I don't remember the DC quote about us being able to pay fees, though I do remember him saying that our budget was generous enough for a promotion challenge (or words to that effect). I also remember at the time of the CBT signing the DET reporting that we had no money left in the "transfer pot" but did in the "loan pot" and the EFL agreed we could use that to sign CBT (it's all detailed in old threads from the time).

It sounds like the EFL wanted to control the limits of what we could spend on the 3 elements: player wages, permanent transfers and temporary loan transfers. It wasn't, it seems, simply an approved overall budget but more sophisticated than that?

[sage]

22 minutes ago, Crewton said:

I don't remember the DC quote about us being able to pay fees, though I do remember him saying that our budget was generous enough for a promotion challenge (or words to that effect). I also remember at the time of the CBT signing the DET reporting that we had no money left in the "transfer pot" but did in the "loan pot" and the EFL agreed we could use that to sign CBT (it's all detailed in old threads from the time).

It sounds like the EFL wanted to control the limits of what we could spend on the 3 elements: player wages, permanent transfers and temporary loan transfers. It wasn't, it seems, simply an approved overall budget but more sophisticated than that?

So we could at the start of the season have paid fees.

 

[Nuwtfly]

1 hour ago, sage said:

I see you are still going on with this.

We had the highest wage budget the previous season and have expanded the squad since. 

DC said at the start of the season we could pay fees. It was later stated we instead chose to increase our wage budget meaning we no longer had money left for fees.

Both facts.

Goodbye.

 

Highest wage budget. That doesn’t mean we had more money to use for buying players than other teams in this league. We had restrictions that other teams didn’t. 

In what interview was it later stated precisely that we couldn’t spend money on players because we chose to increase the wage budget?

I assume you can quote this verbatim as it is a “fact” ?

Edited May 7 by Nuwtfly

[sage]

10 minutes ago, Nuwtfly said:

Highest wage budget. That doesn’t mean we had more money to use for buying players than other teams in this league. We had restrictions that other teams didn’t. 

In what interview was it later stated precisely that we couldn’t spend money on players because we chose to increase the wage budget?

I assume you can quote this verbatim as it is a “fact” ?

Good Lord.

You appear to have now accepted he had the highest wage budget. Fact.

Thank You.

At the start of the season DC said we could pay fees. Fact.

Other posters have agreed and other posters remember the 'we don't have fee money left' interview. I don't know the date. 

I have given you enough evidence on wage budget and fees. That was my evidence to counter your 'shoestring' budget claim.

You keep going on ad nauseum.

I'll leave you with this. Please provide the evidence that we had a 'shoestring budget'. That was your claim. Unlike you and in the spirit of Allo Allo, I shall ask this only once.

[G STAR RAM]

1 hour ago, sage said:

I see you are still going on with this.

We had the highest wage budget the previous season and have expanded the squad since. 

DC said at the start of the season we could pay fees. It was later stated we instead chose to increase our wage budget meaning we no longer had money left for fees.

Both facts.

Goodbye.

 

You stated as fact that we had the biggest wage budget this year.

Point me in the ddirection of where you got ours and other clubs wages information from and I'll gladly give you an apology.

 

[Nuwtfly]

30 minutes ago, sage said:

Good Lord.

You appear to have now accepted he had the highest wage budget. Fact.

Thank You.

At the start of the season DC said we could pay fees. Fact.

Other posters have agreed and other posters remember the 'we don't have fee money left' interview. I don't know the date. 

I have given you enough evidence on wage budget and fees. That was my evidence to counter your 'shoestring' budget claim.

You keep going on ad nauseum.

I'll leave you with this. Please provide the evidence that we had a 'shoestring budget'. That was your claim. Unlike you and in the spirit of Allo Allo, I shall ask this only once.

I never didn't accept that we had highest wage budget. I've at least seen a graphic suggesting this, though as I understand it, that graphic isn't confirmed as being accurate. There is at least some evidence to back this claim up, but it's not perfect.

I would genuinely love to hear that interview and see the quote. That way I could see where you were coming from a bit more and perhaps even agree with you, rather than just thinking you are pointlessly rude and deliberately condescending. 

I mean accusing me of "going on ad nauseum" and then simultaneously stating the two same "facts" as the your only evidence to support your argument and then constantly circling around my use of the term 'shoestring'. Seriously? More than a bit hypocritical. 

I've already explained to you why I used that term on page 5 of this thread, but I'll copy and paste it for you here as I doubt you'll show me the courtesy to go back and look for it: 

"let me just clarify that I used that word simply to describe the small amount of money we had to work with and the balancing act the club had to go through to sign a player: CBT being the most obvious example of this. Fornah and Kane Wilson two others."

You know that I don't have any evidence for it being shoestring because, like you, I don't know the ins and outs of the clubs finances.

Unlike you though, I don't pretend otherwise. I just look at what money we actually spent, and give an opinion on what that looked like. 

Edited May 7 by Nuwtfly

[Wolfie]

Blimey.

What's next?. Politics or Religion?

[sage]

45 minutes ago, Nuwtfly said:

I never didn't accept that we had highest wage budget. I've at least seen a graphic suggesting this, though as I understand it, that graphic isn't confirmed as being accurate. There is at least some evidence to back this claim up, but it's not perfect.

I would genuinely love to hear that interview and see the quote. That way I could see where you were coming from a bit more and perhaps even agree with you, rather than just thinking you are pointlessly rude and deliberately condescending. 

I mean accusing me of "going on ad nauseum" and then simultaneously stating the two same "facts" as the your only evidence to support your argument and then constantly circling around my use of the term 'shoestring'. Seriously? More than a bit hypocritical. 

I've already explained to you why I used that term on page 5 of this thread, but I'll copy and paste it for you here as I doubt you'll show me the courtesy to go back and look for it: 

"let me just clarify that I used that word simply to describe the small amount of money we had to work with and the balancing act the club had to go through to sign a player: CBT being the most obvious example of this. Fornah and Kane Wilson two others."

You know that I don't have any evidence for it being shoestring because, like you, I don't know the ins and outs of the clubs finances.

Unlike you though, I don't pretend otherwise. I just look at what money we actually spent, and give an opinion on what that looked like. 

If you keep asking the same question. I'll keep giving the same answer.

So just to be clear. I have to give evidence but you don't.

Seems perfectly fair.

 

Edited May 7 by sage

[Nuwtfly]

3 minutes ago, sage said:

If you keep asking the same question. I'll keep giving the same answer.

So just to be clear. I have to give evidence but you don't.

Seems perfectly fair.

I think you should have to give evidence if you keep stating that what you are saying is fact. Perfectly fair. 

Unlike you, I'm not doing that. I just praised Warne for working on a shoestring budget. Perhaps I should have used the word "restricted" or "tight", but it wouldn't have changed the point I was making or my opinion on how impressive a coach he is. 

 

 

[sage]

1 minute ago, Nuwtfly said:

I think you should have to give evidence if you keep stating that what you are saying is fact. Perfectly fair. 

Unlike you, I'm not doing that. I just praised Warne for working on a shoestring budget. Perhaps I should have used the word "restricted" or "tight", but it wouldn't have changed the point I was making or my opinion on how impressive a coach he is. 

 

 

I agree you shouldn't have used the term 'shoestring'

Let's leave it at that.  

[nottingram]

2 minutes ago, Nuwtfly said:

I think you should have to give evidence if you keep stating that what you are saying is fact. Perfectly fair. 

Unlike you, I'm not doing that. I just praised Warne for working on a shoestring budget. Perhaps I should have used the word "restricted" or "tight", but it wouldn't have changed the point I was making or my opinion on how impressive a coach he is. 

 

 

I do think, though, that a club being able to pay fees is kind of overstated at this level. 

I wonder how many players moved for a fee in L1 over the last two windows are players we’d be bothered about. Maybe May and Collins? Probably others if I cared to think - so I can perhaps sympathise with Warne over how we ended up up front (and credit him for how we got by!) as the best strikers at the level have cost fees but I think being able to compete with Championship clubs on wages is probably more of a needle mover, which we seemed to be able to do. 

[Nuwtfly]

2 minutes ago, nottingram said:

I do think, though, that a club being able to pay fees is kind of overstated at this level. 

I wonder how many players moved for a fee in L1 over the last two windows are players we’d be bothered about. Maybe May and Collins? Probably others if I cared to think - so I can perhaps sympathise with Warne over how we ended up up front (and credit him for how we got by!) as the best strikers at the level have cost fees but I think being able to compete with Championship clubs on wages is probably more of a needle mover, which we seemed to be able to do. 

Potentially - you do see a lot more free transfers/loans due to the spending power of the clubs. 

But he had to fight for automatic promotion against teams that could go and spend the money on players like Collins and May. Our rivals at the top of the league didn't have the EFL looming over them like we did. 

So yes, like you said, he should be commended for the job he has done with what little money we did have, and under those restrictions. I'm not sure why that is so hard for some people to deal with, but I could take a guess.

[Van der MoodHoover]

@sage have you lost the will to live yet?

😎

[Returning ram]

17 minutes ago, Nuwtfly said:

I think you should have to give evidence if you keep stating that what you are saying is fact. Perfectly fair. 

Unlike you, I'm not doing that. I just praised Warne for working on a shoestring budget. Perhaps I should have used the word "restricted" or "tight", but it wouldn't have changed the point I was making or my opinion on how impressive a coach he is. 

 

 

Clowes always said "competitive" budget", he never once to my knowledge said there was a lot of money available for transfer fees, nor did he say we had the highest in the league.

The EFL lifted restrictions for us to spend money, however we still had to stay within the budget agreed and although there was money available as confirmed by PW as being left over from the summer budget, we wasn't allowed to spend that on a permanent deal, instead we had to loan a player in to get around the agreed plan.

Therefore I can only assume (guess) that it wasn't that easy for the club to bring in permanent deals using a transfer fee regardless of money being available. 
 

No one knows for definite what his budget was, for wages or transfer fees, they are only guessing. However I don't think PW has once moaned about it and not only that but delivered a record points total, record games won away and was it goals scored as well 😏

Irony is that I have seen on social media today a lot of Derby fans saying LR sacking was harsh as although he has the budget not the time, the same ones wanting PW gone after 2 months of the season 😏

 

[sage]

Just now, Van der MoodHoover said:

@sage have you lost the will to live yet?

😎

If I do, I know what to hang myself with and keep within budget.