The Usual Weasel Words From Glick

[CraigZ]

What are you saying then? You would prefer a short term gain (more money) than a future bigger gain, putting yourself in the premier shop window? So if Donny offered you more than Wolves you would go there? Cos not many would.

Donny is a smaller club than Wolves, so no. Derby is a bigger club than Wigan and that's part of my point. The bigger earning potential should be at Derby over Wigan.

But not if players think we haven't got a cat in hell's chance of getting up. And like I said, don't underestimate the power of cash.

Seeing as you kind of addressed me personally there and asked what I'd do, here goes. Three years back I was working for a company that employed 220 people. I spoke to a company that employed 70 people. They told me all about their ambitions to be big. I only half believed them until they offered me 25% more cash to move there. So I moved.

We've since grown to 200 people through a recession, all because of an aggressive growth and investment strategy - a willingness to pay top dollar for the best people.

[CraigZ]

Do you know how much Wigan are paying him per week? Do you know how "a couple of grand a week more" would have placed him in the pecking order at Derby? He's an unproven player, if Wigan are paying him 13k a week, for example, are you sure you'd want us to be giving him the 15k that we were prepared to pay Commons - a player whose abilities and limitations were known to us? How would you feel if we'd done that and he turned out to be a cart horse rather than the race horse we hoped we were buying? (I say hoped, because he is unproven.) And how would the rest of the squad feel if some new guy came in on top whack? They'd be shouting, "Where's mine?". Confidence is low in the squad at the moment, no need to go out of our way to sow discontent.

We're not shopping at TK Maxx, we're more like kids in an orchard - there'll always be some bigger kid come along and take the apples that are just too high up for us to pick quickly.

And the moral of the story is? Get a ladder in place under the tree for when the fruit ripens. Matty's response nails it.

[inglorious01]

The spin here is when the board say they have invested. If they had put 10p into the club they could turn round and say "hey everybody, we've invested in this club".

They have not invested ENOUGH in transfer fees and where necessary, competitive salaries, though apparently we still have a relatively high wage bill for this division.

They could show a lot more aggression and ambition within the transfer market through investment of the vast sums of wealth we suspect that some of them have. Speculate to accumulate. The premier league is where the money is to be made. Gamble on spending £x million now, with the opportunity to recoup that by x3 or x 4 on reaching the premier league. That is the gamble; a gamble they do not seem to be willing to take.

[WilkoRam]

Interesting thing is, in my eyes, you're both arguing the ends of the spectrum where as the reality is somewhere in between (I won't say which end I think it's nearer, just not right at the end as some would say).

We have, undoubtably, bid for players and they've not come off. We bid for Hooper, we tried to extent Commons contract and we've bid for Sammon. None of them came off, had they done it could be different, I would suggest if we signed Hooper we wouldn't have been in for Sammon though and we also probably wouldn't have the money to sign anyone else needed in this past window. So it's not that we're not looking to sign, we are and we have signed some players no question there.

On the flip side though are transfer strategy is somewhat confusing. We have, as already pointed out, had since Hulse's departure to identify and scout for a striker, we were in the window and still needed to watch him one more time before bidding. At that point we should have been ready to bid for players in positions that were needed. It has long been understood that Waghorn was unlikely to come too, but again no alternative target was apparent. Ayala is injured yet he is our CB target and can't sign as he's not fit enough, this despite only having one proper CB available, did not result in us finding an alternative.

The transfer stratergy is not working at the moment. I'm not suggesting the board are making bids safe in the knowledge that players won't arrive but it'll appease the fans because it will look like they've tried. Merely that the lack of options identified is hindering us. To take the extreme opposite view, look at Spurs. They sign people out of left field, they can be linked to this that and the other but when they don't come off they have a replacement indentified ready to bid for. We don't seem to do that.

There's a number of idea's why this may be. I favour more the idea that we don't have the scouting network ready to identify enough alternatives should our priority target become unavailable.

Is Glick nothing but spin? No, he's doing what everyone in that position does and putting out the good points. I wouldn't expect him to come out and just say how bad it all is. He's not lying to us at all, he doesn't strike me as a horrible person that deserves such venom from people. He's just doing his job, being the face of GSE, he has to look after their interests as well as try and keep the fan base, I don't envy him.

As for the old 'spending a load of money in the hope of going up is gamble'. Well I think the opposite is surely just as much a gamble. We currently have a small squad, lacking on confidence and no ability to freshen the side up with new players, giving those lacking confidence a break and a boost. Look at Chelsea, looked poor and short of confidence, they've got some good players back from injury and have just signed two great players giving the whole place a life and renewed belief. Contrast that to our situation. We are gambling just as much, we're ga,boing that we won't go down and that investing a small amount each year will eventually bring success. Just because someone says it's a 10 year plan it doesn't make it anymore realistic that someone throwing money in. We have no guarantee that in 10 years this plan will have worked.

I appear to have gone on a bit......sorry

[superam]

The press conference from Glick does seem like last minute desperation though. They are obviously concerned and so they should be. They need to highlight more targets in the summer and they need to act more quickly. It's just embaressing how our club goes to teams like Notts County and Killmarnock and make stupendous bids for their players. And for some reason we expect them to except these stupid bids. We are insulting these teams and it is slowing the process down. Glick may be a businessman but he seems to have a lack of knowledge when it comes to signing players. I know many people hated Pearson but he could work a lot more successfully in the transfer market.

[rynny]

Donny is a smaller club than Wolves, so no. Derby is a bigger club than Wigan and that's part of my point. The bigger earning potential should be at Derby over Wigan.

But not if players think we haven't got a cat in hell's chance of getting up. And like I said, don't underestimate the power of cash.

Seeing as you kind of addressed me personally there and asked what I'd do, here goes. Three years back I was working for a company that employed 220 people. I spoke to a company that employed 70 people. They told me all about their ambitions to be big. I only half believed them until they offered me 25% more cash to move there. So I moved.

We've since grown to 200 people through a recession, all because of an aggressive growth and investment strategy - a willingness to pay top dollar for the best people.

The thing is we never got to tell sammon of our plans as he saw the chance to play in the prem straight away.

Ok who would you choose out of Blackpool and Middlesboro? What about West brom and Leeds?

Congrats on the job, it's nice when things like that turn out for the good.

[Hartley Hare]

And the moral of the story is? Get a ladder in place under the tree for when the fruit ripens. Matty's response nails it.

And the moral of that story is that if you leave your ladder in the orchard some other little kid will get to the fruit before you do - or your ladder will get knicked.

When Clough has signed unproven, lower league players he's done it for small fees to mitigate the level of risk. He could have offered more than Wigan for Sammon, but we'd have had to go over a million (as that's what Sammon will cost Wigan if all the extra's for appearances and goals are triggered). If you hire a cherry picker to get those apples at the top of the tree that look nice but turn out to be blighted and maggot eaten on close inspection, then you've spent big money with no prospect of any return for it. Luke Varney, anyone....?

[CraigZ]

Interesting thing is, in my eyes, you're both arguing the ends of the spectrum where as the reality is somewhere in between (I won't say which end I think it's nearer, just not right at the end as some would say).

We have, undoubtably, bid for players and they've not come off. We bid for Hooper, we tried to extent Commons contract and we've bid for Sammon. None of them came off, had they done it could be different, I would suggest if we signed Hooper we wouldn't have been in for Sammon though and we also probably wouldn't have the money to sign anyone else needed in this past window. So it's not that we're not looking to sign, we are and we have signed some players no question there.

On the flip side though are transfer strategy is somewhat confusing. We have, as already pointed out, had since Hulse's departure to identify and scout for a striker, we were in the window and still needed to watch him one more time before bidding. At that point we should have been ready to bid for players in positions that were needed. It has long been understood that Waghorn was unlikely to come too, but again no alternative target was apparent. Ayala is injured yet he is our CB target and can't sign as he's not fit enough, this despite only having one proper CB available, did not result in us finding an alternative.

The transfer stratergy is not working at the moment. I'm not suggesting the board are making bids safe in the knowledge that players won't arrive but it'll appease the fans because it will look like they've tried. Merely that the lack of options identified is hindering us. To take the extreme opposite view, look at Spurs. They sign people out of left field, they can be linked to this that and the other but when they don't come off they have a replacement indentified ready to bid for. We don't seem to do that.

There's a number of idea's why this may be. I favour more the idea that we don't have the scouting network ready to identify enough alternatives should our priority target become unavailable.

Is Glick nothing but spin? No, he's doing what everyone in that position does and putting out the good points. I wouldn't expect him to come out and just say how bad it all is. He's not lying to us at all, he doesn't strike me as a horrible person that deserves such venom from people. He's just doing his job, being the face of GSE, he has to look after their interests as well as try and keep the fan base, I don't envy him.

As for the old 'spending a load of money in the hope of going up is gamble'. Well I think the opposite is surely just as much a gamble. We currently have a small squad, lacking on confidence and no ability to freshen the side up with new players, giving those lacking confidence a break and a boost. Look at Chelsea, looked poor and short of confidence, they've got some good players back from injury and have just signed two great players giving the whole place a life and renewed belief. Contrast that to our situation. We are gambling just as much, we're ga,boing that we won't go down and that investing a small amount each year will eventually bring success. Just because someone says it's a 10 year plan it doesn't make it anymore realistic that someone throwing money in. We have no guarantee that in 10 years this plan will have worked.

I appear to have gone on a bit......sorry

A very good post. Just want to make it clear that I'm not advocating that we spend a huge amount of money - just that, having identified targets, we make the cash necessary to land them. Sometimes this will mean paying more than we'd bargained for, either in a fee, wages or both.

My constant frustration is our undervaluation of what players are worth and what they should be paid. Such values are determined by the market, not what we're willing to pay. We're in our own little bubble and it's seeing us miss out on talent and lose what talent we already have.

I also agree with your Chelsea observation. When players at a club see it showing ambition, it lifts them. When they see good players leaving, it adds to the gloom.

[Hartley Hare]

And the moral of the story is? Get a ladder in place under the tree for when the fruit ripens. Matty's response nails it.

And the moral of that story is that if you leave your ladder in the orchard some other little kid will get to the fruit before you do - or your ladder will get knicked.

When Clough has signed unproven, lower league players he's done it for small fees to mitigate the level of risk. He could have offered more than Wigan for Sammon, but we'd have had to go over a million (as that's what Sammon will cost Wigan if all the extra's for appearances and goals are triggered), plus wages on top would also have needed to be higher than Wigan were offering. I've not seen enough of Sammon tog et that excited about signing him, or about not signing him. Most people's frustration comes from the club not signing anyone - Sammon was the permanent signing we were linked with so it's all being focussed on that deal.

To return to the orchard analogy, if you hire a cherry picker to get that one apple at the top of the tree that looks absolutely perfect but turns out to be blighted and maggot eaten on close inspection, then you've spent big money and you can neither use the apple yourself nor sell it on at anything approaching what it cost you to get it in the first place. Luke Varney, anyone....?

[CraigZ]

And the moral of that story is that if you leave your ladder in the orchard some other little kid will get to the fruit before you do - or your ladder will get knicked.

When Clough has signed unproven, lower league players he's done it for small fees to mitigate the level of risk. He could have offered more than Wigan for Sammon, but we'd have had to go over a million (as that's what Sammon will cost Wigan if all the extra's for appearances and goals are triggered). If you hire a cherry picker to get those apples at the top of the tree that look nice but turn out to be blighted and maggot eaten on close inspection, then you've spent big money with no prospect of any return for it. Luke Varney, anyone....?

Hmm. I was seeing the 'ladder' here as getting everything in place for an early bid, both in terms of identifying a target and putting the finance in place. No other club can stop you doing either of these two things. Again, See Matty's Bent example.

Every transfer is a possible maggot-ridden apple. You either have to back your manager's judgement or sack him and get someone in whose judgement you do trust.

[Ambitious]

I'm sorry but I struggle to believe him whatsoever, we've let go of Hulse been promised a replacement, yet, nothing.

We're so many players short of a squad, they just seem on patching it up rather than actually building.

[Hartley Hare]

And clearly they back Clough's judgement. Again, I remind you, the board backed PJ's judgement and ended up with a crock of crap that they had to pay to get rid of. Not just Varney And you wonder why they're not in a rush to go the same way? Would you if it were your money?

[CraigZ]

Is Glick nothing but spin? No, he's doing what everyone in that position does and putting out the good points. I wouldn't expect him to come out and just say how bad it all is. He's not lying to us at all, he doesn't strike me as a horrible person that deserves such venom from people. He's just doing his job, being the face of GSE, he has to look after their interests as well as try and keep the fan base, I don't envy him.

I forgot to comment on this very important aspect of your post. It's spot on. Glick is paid to optimise profitability, which includes getting as many supporters to each game as possible. That isn't achieved by telling everyone we haven't a hope of climbing the table or of signing a player.

Do I think he's an out-and-out liar? No. Do I think he's tactical with the truth in the way that a politician is? Absolutely yes. As Wilko suggests, that's a big part of his job.

What's clear now from this BB is that more and more people see through the PR spin. After all, you can only squirt someone in the eye with a plastic flower so many times before they learn not to sniff it.

[Hartley Hare]

Glick says, "We're looking to buy in the transfer window." = Glick spin.

Glick says, "We're close to a deal to keep Kris Commons." = Glick spin

Glick says, "Kris Common's was offered everything he asked for but chose not to stay, as was his right." = Glick spin (even though this has not been denied by Commons or his agent, btw)

Glick says, "We worked hard to get the players in that we wanted during the transfer window but couldn't close the deals." = Glick spin

Presumably, if Radio Derby run a story on the 1 o'clock news saying that Glick has fallen to his death from the top of the West stand, some people will say it's Glick spin to encourage people to buy a season ticket for next season. The guy can't win whatever he says or does. Why the heck should he even want to do even a competent job for Derby with all the "support" he gets from fans?

[WilkoRam]

But if I wasn't prepared to invest the money into the managers choices then surely I would have to ask myself either a) do I want to tie my money up in the club and if not I should go or b) do I trust our managers judgement and if not then why did we appoint him and why dint we sack him for someone we do trust?

I'm not sure any other company would appoint someone to 'turn the ship around' but not trust them enough with the funds to do it, so I doubt that's the case here.

[CraigZ]

And clearly they back Clough's judgement. Again, I remind you, the board backed PJ's judgement and ended up with a crock of crap that they had to pay to get rid of. Not just Varney And you wonder why they're not in a rush to go the same way? Would you if it were your money?

They have no option but to back their manager. If what we're seeing is the board's reticence to back Clough (or any manager), then they'll soon find themselves in League 1.

I say again: why employ someone at all if you don't trust their judgement?

[Hartley Hare]

I forgot to comment on this very important aspect of your post. It's spot on. Glick is paid to optimise profitability, which includes getting as many supporters to each game as possible. That isn't achieved by telling everyone we haven't a hope of climbing the table or of signing a player.

Do I think he's an out-and-out liar? No. Do I think he's tactical with the truth in the way that a politician is? Absolutely yes. As Wilko suggests, that's a big part of his job.

What's clear now from this BB is that more and more people see through the PR spin. After all, you can only squirt someone in the eye with a plastic flower so many times before they learn not to sniff it.

I think you'll also find that a lot of people on this BB don't consider it to be spin in the first place.....

I think we read WilkoRam's post in different ways. You seem to use it to support your apparently negative view of Glick and everything he says and does, while I read it as a sympathetic assessment of Glick's position. Perhaps WilkoRam could clarify....?

[Hartley Hare]

They have no option but to back their manager. If what we're seeing is the board's reticence to back Clough (or any manager), then they'll soon find themselves in League 1.

I say again: why employ someone at all if you don't trust their judgement?

But they do back Clough's judgement in terms of incoming player selection. And Clough backs Glick's judgement in the value of incoming players. They work together. But for some reason it's always all Glick's fault....

[WilkoRam]

Glick says, "We're looking to buy in the transfer window." = Glick spin.

Glick says, "We're close to a deal to keep Kris Commons." = Glick spin

Glick says, "Kris Common's was offered everything he asked for but chose not to stay, as was his right." = Glick spin (even though this has not been denied by Commons or his agent, btw)

Glick says, "We worked hard to get the players in that we wanted during the transfer window but couldn't close the deals." = Glick spin

Presumably, if Radio Derby run a story on the 1 o'clock news saying that Glick has fallen to his death from the top of the West stand, some people will say it's Glick spin to encourage people to buy a season ticket for next season. The guy can't win whatever he says or does. Why the heck should he even want to do even a competent job for Derby with all the "support" he gets from fans?

There are some that say "Glick Spin" for everything that comes out of his mouth and I think that's harsh, he's not spinning everything he's more than likely telling the truth. It's the actual events themselves that leaves most fans annoyed. For one reason or another the transfer policy isn't working, and who within DCFC is to blame I don't know as I'm not part of the ongoings. It could be a lack of investment and proper negotiating from a board level as demonstrated by constant lower bids for targets and the targets being from lower leagues. But it could equally be a lack of other options as given by the manager and staff, every team misses out on targets but when we do it seems that's it and there's no other option. In the afternoon on deadline day we were told by Nigel there would be no more business to be done. We weren't ringing around our other back-up targets trying to get a deal done, we had missed out on Sammon and that was that.

Something needs to change and the club need to identify where it needs to change.

[Hartley Hare]

Once upon a time, the manager got the blame for any players not signed, players leaving, etc. With us, everything is always Glick's fault. I don't live in such a black and white world. as you say WilkoRam, there is something(s) not working in the setup at Pride Park, and it needs to be rectified asap. But blaming Glick for everything is not the answer.