Who would be your next offload to reduce the wage bill if required?

[TopGun]

This is not a thread about whether we should sell or offload players btw.

It is about if we still have to sell or offload for financial reasons, who would be the player that we need least?

Jason Euell for me.

[Weston Super Saint]

Can we choose Rupert?

[Saint Martini]

Skacel, Euell has had a decent pre-season and Skacel hasn't really seamed to be up for it.

[VectisSaint]

Can we choose Rupert?
Great minds think alike, it was my first thought as well.

[JohnnyFartPants]

This is not a thread about whether we should sell or offload players btw.

It is about if we still have to sell or offload for financial reasons, who would be the player that we need least?

Jason Euell for me.

How much cheaper than Euell would you work out at?

[TopGun]

How much cheaper than Euell would you work out at?

You've rumbled me JFP.

AC

[SaintDonkey]

Tempted to say Thomas but with Davies gone we need the experienced cover at centre back and right back. Having said that it's evident that Poortvliet doesn't rate him so maybe best if he did go.

Euell I think could yet be a valuable player for us but Skacel's heart doesn't seem in it so bye bye Rudi. BWP's place looks vulnerable - he should be a natural to slot into this style of play but he doesn't really offer anything we haven't got from the youth.

[mitch01]

Thomas and Skacel. And Euell

[Ashby Saint]

Skacel!

[toofarnorth]

Thomas, then BWP. Would like to see Skacel and Euell stay.

[offix]

The terrible two-some of failed chairmen

[saintrich]

Why Thomas? We are ridiculously short of cover at the back, as it is.

[scooby]

BWP, Skatcel, Euell and Surman.

[Weston Super Saint]

The terrible two-some of failed chairmen

Well apparently one of them doesn't get paid, so perhaps he could stick around and make the tea or something??

[Doctoroncall]

Sod it - let's have a clear out!

Skacel
Thomas
BWP
Dyer
Euell
John

In that order and hope there would be funds left over for three decent loans: a left and right fullback and a striker.

[slickmick]

BWP, Skacel, Euell and Dyer.

[ottery st mary]

Get rid of the kit man and bring back Woggy he just has so much more experience/class
and now he is much older will be a lot cheaper.

[the scud]

I would first sell Euell and then maybe Skacel and Dyer. Thomas will now stay as Davies has departed for Stoke, can't see John moving yet as Saga and Rasiak have already gone out on loan and with the reported bust up between BWP and JP on the coach after the Exeter game, wouldn't be surprised to see BWP be sold to another Championship club.

[stevegrant]

I would first sell Euell and then maybe Skacel and Dyer. Thomas will now stay as Davies has departed for Stoke, can't see John moving yet as Saga and Rasiak have already gone out on loan and with the reported bust up between BWP and JP on the coach after the Exeter game, wouldn't be surprised to see BWP be sold to another Championship club.
That would be assuming anyone else in this division would be bonkers enough to pay him £8k a week. The only teams who would be able to afford that already have much better alternatives in their squad.

[TopGun]

BWP's place looks vulnerable - he should be a natural to slot into this style of play but he doesn't really offer anything we haven't got from the youth.

That's a valid comment f'sure.

What is this purported bust up between JP and BWP on the Exeter coach... I've missed that one...

[mitch01]

BWP, Skatcel, Euell and Surman.

Interesting that as Surman's move to reading starts to happen, it becomes a 'good idea' to get rid of him.

[Master Bates]

Euell

[adriansfc]

Great minds think alike, it was my first thought as well.

Why, how much money would it save and what would be the overall benefit?

[adriansfc]

Interesting that as Surman's move to reading starts to happen, it becomes a 'good idea' to get rid of him.

It's not a good idea to get rid of any of them, it's a sad necessity.

[TopGun]

It's not a good idea to get rid of any of them, it's a sad necessity.

Have to disagree to a point. If players like Skacel give up heart (which I think happened) then what use are they for a team that requires complete commitment whatever the circumstances?

[Saint Mikey]

That would be assuming anyone else in this division would be bonkers enough to pay him £8k a week. The only teams who would be able to afford that already have much better alternatives in their squad.

Any idea when his contract is up? And all these other supposed high earners? Do we get rid of any next season?

[labibs]

It's difficult to make a decision unless you know exactly how much each of the players are on, plus what bonuses they get for appearances etc.

Having said that, I feel we could afford to lose BWP. One of the most infuriating players ever. Thing is, if he truly is on 8k p/w, I cannot see anyone else mad enough to pay that for him.

[TopGun]

It's difficult to make a decision unless you know exactly how much each of the players are on, plus what bonuses they get for appearances etc.

Having said that, I feel we could afford to lose BWP. One of the most infuriating players ever. Thing is, if he truly is on 8k p/w, I cannot see anyone else mad enough to pay that for him.

Do lifestyle issues come into the equation also? Irrespective of the court case that BWP has got himself into, is it better to have a squad that doesn't have liabilities or deadheads? Maybe that was why Nile Ranger was released. JP seems quite tough on this stuff.

[66East]

Have to disagree to a point. If players like Skacel give up heart (which I think happened) then what use are they for a team that requires complete commitment whatever the circumstances?

If Skacel doesn't want to be here, then he's got to seriously think about his wage demands. Ipswich and Hertha, both appeared to want him but aren't prepared to match his wages. Over to you Rudi.

[adriansfc]

Have to disagree to a point. If players like Skacel give up heart (which I think happened) then what use are they for a team that requires complete commitment whatever the circumstances?

True, but if we had enough money he'd never have left in the first place, he'd no doubt now be a valued part of the team and be trying his best. I only ever saw commited performances from him. Not surprised he got fed up being treated like crap by Burley. God knows why he doesn't have a club after doing well for Hertha.

[TopGun]

True, but if we had enough money he'd never have left in the first place, he'd no doubt now be a valued part of the team and be trying his best. I only ever saw commited performances from him. Not surprised he got fed up being treated like crap by Burley. God knows why he doesn't have a club after doing well for Hertha.

I think mental stamina is an important issue. Why sign a player who wants £10K a week if it seems his head goes down at the slightest team setback? Skacel hardly fought for his place. By talent he would have been a shoe in every Saturday. Surman displaced him at both left midfield and left back really by attitude.

[scooby]

Having said that, I feel we could afford to lose BWP. One of the most infuriating players ever. Thing is, if he truly is on 8k p/w, I cannot see anyone else mad enough to pay that for him.

If Chelsea can dismiss Mutu then fine him multi-millions for taking a spot of charlie, why can't we ship out that nasty BWP on the basis that his criminal actions have taken the club into ill repute?

[John B]

Surman because I feel he is overated.

Mills will soon take over his position so where will he play then?

[Andy_Porter]

Whoever we can get money for.

I'd like to keep John, the rest are less important.

[sunrise]

If Chelsea can dismiss Mutu then fine him multi-millions for taking a spot of charlie, why can't we ship out that nasty BWP on the basis that his criminal actions have taken the club into ill repute?

Perhaps Rupes is hoping someone will be mug enough to buy BWP.

[Johnny Shearer]

If Chelsea can dismiss Mutu then fine him multi-millions for taking a spot of charlie, why can't we ship out that nasty BWP on the basis that his criminal actions have taken the club into ill repute?

Because sometimes people do stupid things. Dont get me wrong I do not condone his actions but if he is remorseful and willing to show the Club that he is trying then I'm for that.

However at the moment he isn't exactly doing that.

[TopGun]

If Chelsea can dismiss Mutu then fine him multi-millions for taking a spot of charlie, why can't we ship out that nasty BWP on the basis that his criminal actions have taken the club into ill repute?

He is the Coke kid anyway. Fruit juice all the way now for me.

[TopGun]

If Chelsea can dismiss Mutu then fine him multi-millions for taking a spot of charlie, why can't we ship out that nasty BWP on the basis that his criminal actions have taken the club into ill repute?

Indeed, for all the charges he is not yet guilty of. Are you an advisor to Bush Scooby?

[John D]

If Chelsea can dismiss Mutu then fine him multi-millions for taking a spot of charlie, why can't we ship out that nasty BWP on the basis that his criminal actions have taken the club into ill repute?

because fortunately we live in a society where you are innocent until proven guilty. bwp has pleaded not guilty so we cannot do anything till after the court case

[St Paul]

If Chelsea can dismiss Mutu then fine him multi-millions for taking a spot of charlie, why can't we ship out that nasty BWP on the basis that his criminal actions have taken the club into ill repute?
Where does Rupert giving Dyer a new contract sit with your holier than thou statement?

[aintforever]

Might as well flog the whole ****ing lot and prepare for life in league 1 with a better bank balance. We are nailed on for relegation now so why not?

[alpine_saint]

This is not a thread about whether we should sell or offload players btw.

It is about if we still have to sell or offload for financial reasons, who would be the player that we need least?

Jason Euell for me.

Rupert Lowe

[alpine_saint]

Interesting that as Surman's move to reading starts to happen, it becomes a 'good idea' to get rid of him.

LOL. Just like how Andrew Davies was a waste of time, despite those individuals voting for him in the Player of the Season vote.

[kipstryker]

Scooby, Sundance and the Professor

[TopGun]

LOL. Just like how Andrew Davies was a waste of time, despite those individuals voting for him in the Player of the Season vote.

Trying to be positive Alps, I can't see why the board would have sold Davies if they believe that is route one to relegation. It doesn't serve their interests either.

I guess we may see a bit of Lancashire at some stage (about time) and the rest goes from there.

[Saint Fen]

Skacel
Euell
Thomas
Wright-Phillips

[slickmick]

Another question, how many more do we need to shift to get the wage bill to a managable level.
I would like to hear Lowe and Wilde tell us when we are living within our means.

[chivvy1664]

I would also like to know when this is going to end. When are we going to within our means. Thomas should start alongside svensson that would be a strong central defensive partnership.

Skacel is made for the lallana or Holmes role.

I think BWP would do better than Mcgoldrick or Thompson at AMR.

Looks like euell would go first for me.

[Andy_Porter]

I guess we may see a bit of Lancashire at some stage (about time) and the rest goes from there.

if he can stay injury free.....


It's a stupid gamble to rely on Lancashire, Perry and Svensson.

[Andy_Porter]

Another question, how many more do we need to shift to get the wage bill to a managable level.
I would like to hear Lowe and Wilde tell us when we are living within our means.

It must be quite a few more considering we've just sold our best player for peanuts.

I assume it will be a while before we're even close to breaking even.

[Pongo]

Rupert Lowe and Andrew Cowen.

[ulstersaint]

BWP for me - showed promise but never delivered.

[buctootim]

Yep BWP. TBH if we could offload BWP, Euell and Skacel I dont think they'd even be missed.

[saint63]

I'm beginning to think that the fire sale is moving into the area of Rupert's revenge on the club in a very personal way. Surely even he must realise that relegation is a certainty if we keep getting rid of experienced players. The gap between us and the other clubs is getting greater daily. This experiment is going too far too fast. Barclays must see the nonsense in us getting relegated - even smaller crowds, less other income....

[Colinjb]

Skacel

[buctootim]

I'm beginning to think that the fire sale is moving into the area of Rupert's revenge on the club in a very personal way.

Thats just plain stupid, sorry.

[Professor]

Scooby, Sundance and the Professor
A shame some people, Weston, Alpine, Offix, etc., find it too difficult to conduct a debate but at least its brightened up by such fantastic wit. Imagine suggesting Lowe should be offloaded instead of Skacel, Euell, along with anyone who disagrees with their defeatist propaganda on the forum. Such a clever post, laugh, I nearly shat my pants.

One day, someone other than Lowe will take over the running of the club, but we need that to happen when it is someone who can run the club for the better. Wilde, and then Crouch, showed that they couldn't, and it was nearly a disaster.

Should the great wish of the anti-Lowe obsessives come to pass while there is no one capable of replacing Lowe waiting to take over, that is what could see the club in freefall, just as it was last season. Ironic indeed, that if Lowe walked away because he got sick and tired of being the object of so much abuse, the people who would suffer most would be the fans, including the very ones who wanted him to go. On the other hand, if he stays in charge until someone better is willing to take on the role, that would be a different matter, but presently, the anti-Lowers are simply Turkeys voting for Christmas.

Or, as they spread so much anti-saints stuff, are they skates in disguise?

[Mole]

A shame some people, Weston, Alpine, Offix, etc., find it too difficult to conduct a debate but at least its brightened up by such fantastic wit.

Are you as obnoxious in real life?

[Torbay Saint]

Whilst I dont agree that it is Lowe's revenge, the youth policy is becoming stupid. Our last 3 games all of which I have attended have been men against boys. There is only one place we are going this year and that is league one.

[alpine_saint]

I'm beginning to think that the fire sale is moving into the area of Rupert's revenge on the club in a very personal way. Surely even he must realise that relegation is a certainty if we keep getting rid of experienced players. The gap between us and the other clubs is getting greater daily. This experiment is going too far too fast. Barclays must see the nonsense in us getting relegated - even smaller crowds, less other income....

You would like to think so, wouldnt you ? Putting aside their officiousness, bankers arent complete dullards (apart from the dropouts that work for CCC football clubs).

I would have argued that if Barclays play too much hardball, they are likely to get less money back than with a softly-softly approach.

I dont buy this global credit crunch bollllox. That sounds like a convenient excuse. They could just raise the interest rate on the overdraft, and as long as we kept paying, they wouldnt give a shiny one.

[Legod Second Coming]

You would like to think so, wouldnt you ? Putting aside their officiousness, bankers arent complete dullards (apart from the dropouts that work for CCC football clubs).

I would have argued that if Barclays play too much hardball, they are likely to get less money back than with a softly-softly approach.

I dont buy this global credit crunch bollllox. That sounds like a convenient excuse. They could just raise the interest rate on the overdraft, and as long as we kept paying, they wouldnt give a shiny one.

Bankers apply only banking business brains to the issue.
They want to see costs coming down and the business making a concerted attempt to live within its means. Right now, they'll care about precious little else.

And if you don't buy the credit crunch ****** might I suggest you buy a tin hat??

I would have thought of all people, you would recognise when the sky is falling in...

[alpine_saint]

Bankers apply only banking business brains to the issue.
They want to see costs coming down and the business making a concerted attempt to live within its means. Right now, they'll care about precious little else.

And if you don't buy the credit crunch ****** might I suggest you buy a tin hat??

I would have thought of all people, you would recognise when the sky is falling in...

Maybe I should have expanded that point. I dont buy that the global credit crunch has any impact on Barclays attitude in their dealings with SFC.

[Legod Second Coming]

Maybe I should have expanded that point. I dont buy that the global credit crunch has any impact on Barclays attitude in their dealings with SFC.


It will.

I'm sure their lending criteria across the board will have been tightened. Four years with RBS and 17 years marriage to one of their senior managers tells me that...

They will be sh!tting themselves about their debts to SFC. Doesn't take too many £30M debts going TU to feck up your accounts.

Look at A&L - if they are not bought by Santander, they'll probably go bust.

Like Freddie and Fannie.

I sometimes wonder whether people really get the size of the storm, or whether they are simply happy with the brollies because they can only feel a spatter right now...

But someone from Barclays might come on and know better.

[alpine_saint]

It will.

I'm sure their lending criteria across the board will have been tightened. Four years with RBS and 17 years marriage to one of their senior managers tells me that...

They will be sh!tting themselves about their debts to SFC. Doesn't take too many £30M debts going TU to feck up your accounts.

Look at A&L - if they are not bought by Santander, they'll probably go bust.

Like Freddie and Fannie.

I sometimes wonder whether people really get the size of the storm, or whether they are simply happy with the brollies because they can only feel a spatter right now...

But someone from Barclays might come on and know better.

We are not talking about new loans. We are talking about servicing current debt.

As I said, they could have bumped up the interest rate, and they would have been happy-as-larry.

[John B]

Maybe I should have expanded that point. I dont buy that the global credit crunch has any impact on Barclays attitude in their dealings with SFC.

I think since the credit crunch banks are being more prudent in what money they are loaning so it may well be having an effect on SFC's overdraft

[alpine_saint]

Not convinced, but willing to be corrected by someone ITK.

[Legod Second Coming]

We are not talking about new loans. We are talking about servicing current debt.

As I said, they could have bumped up the interest rate, and they would have been happy-as-larry.


I doubt that the debt is not agreed already at say LIBOR +1 or something, so 'bumping up the rate' is hardly likely to be an option.

And it is the servicing of current debt that the banks are sh!tting themselves about.

They have NO liquid funds of their own. They need ALL their debts serviced or they simply will run out of cash.

That's why they had to ask the markets for 12Billion. Do you watch the news at all in Vienna??

[Saint Billy]

A shame some people, Weston, Alpine, Offix, etc., find it too difficult to conduct a debate but at least its brightened up by such fantastic wit. Imagine suggesting Lowe should be offloaded instead of Skacel, Euell, along with anyone who disagrees with their defeatist propaganda on the forum. Such a clever post, laugh, I nearly shat my pants.

One day, someone other than Lowe will take over the running of the club, but we need that to happen when it is someone who can run the club for the better. Wilde, and then Crouch, showed that they couldn't, and it was nearly a disaster.

Should the great wish of the anti-Lowe obsessives come to pass while there is no one capable of replacing Lowe waiting to take over, that is what could see the club in freefall, just as it was last season. Ironic indeed, that if Lowe walked away because he got sick and tired of being the object of so much abuse, the people who would suffer most would be the fans, including the very ones who wanted him to go. On the other hand, if he stays in charge until someone better is willing to take on the role, that would be a different matter, but presently, the anti-Lowers are simply Turkeys voting for Christmas.

Or, as they spread so much anti-saints stuff, are they skates in disguise?

Oh please, what utter and complete bullsh*t.

Surely a case of If you can't convince them, confuse them.

[alpine_saint]

I doubt that the debt is not agreed already at say LIBOR +1 or something, so 'bumping up the rate' is hardly likely to be an option.

And it is the servicing of current debt that the banks are sh!tting themselves about.

They have NO liquid funds of their own. They need ALL their debts serviced or they simply will run out of cash.

That's why they had to ask the markets for 12Billion. Do you watch the news at all in Vienna??

If SFC/SLH are managing their interest payments, is the debt not being serviced ???

[Legod Second Coming]

If SFC/SLH are managing their interest payments, is the debt not being serviced ???

No, they had to go cap in hand to the bank and increase their borrowing.

At which point the bank no doubt agreed providing they could see costs reduce significantly.

Which is what is now happening.

But the bank will be meeting with them every few days to make sure that this is the case, I am sure.

And they probably have given a 'revenue/amount' target that they want to see paid off by the end of the transfer window.

[Saint Billy]

I am sure banks will also raise an eyelid if you asset strip your own business to such an extent that it is no longer a viable business.

[alpine_saint]

No, they had to go cap in hand to the bank and increase their borrowing.

At which point the bank no doubt agreed providing they could see costs reduce significantly.



You know this for a fact ?

[alpine_saint]

I am sure banks will also raise an eyelid if you asset strip your own business to such an extent that it is no longer a viable business.

I would have thought so too.

[Legod Second Coming]

I am sure banks will also raise an eyelid if you asset strip your own business to such an extent that it is no longer a viable business.

But results don't bear that out do they?
We are no worse having reduced debt than we were with it.

If anything we are better.

They simply want to see coste restrained.

[Legod Second Coming]

You know this for a fact ?

Err yes. Lowe talked about it openly either on the OS or at a forum somewhere.

[Legod Second Coming]

"The financial results will show an increase in the level of borrowings which has necessitated extensive discussions with the Company's bank..."

R Lowe

[Saint Billy]

But results don't bear that out do they?
We are no worse having reduced debt than we were with it.

If anything we are better.

They simply want to see coste restrained.

Results do bear that out at the moment but time will indeed tell on that one as I know it is early days.

[Legod Second Coming]

Results do bear that out at the moment but time will indeed tell on that one as I know it is early days.


Agreed, but Lowe says the bank are fully supportive of his approach and that no doubt included the acquisition and installation of a new management team and reliance on youth, etc.

Now imagine the bankers.

They get these presentations from companies all the time.

Only usually not from a director of another bank who was no doubt extremely convincing.

So the bankers make a choice. Do they buy the strategy?

And in this case, they have. But only with certain caveats no doubt.

[Saint Billy]

Agreed, but Lowe says the bank are fully supportive of his approach and that no doubt included the acquisition and installation of a new management team and reliance on youth, etc.

Now imagine the bankers.

They get these presentations from companies all the time.

Only usually not from a director of another bank who was no doubt extremely convincing.

So the bankers make a choice. Do they buy the strategy?

And in this case, they have. But only with certain caveats no doubt.

I appreciate what you are saying, but the problem I have with all of this is that Lowe was tinkering with this idea of using the dutch guys and playing the youth before he was ousted, and yet he basically states now that these new reforms have been forced on him because of our financial state.

I tend to smell a rat in all of this and in my opinion, after making good profits in the past by selling our home grown talent, he intends to do the same but more frequently. In one way, this is good business, but on the other hand it is no good for the fans of this club as it causes instability with the numerous comings and goings of playing staff, and does not guarantee success because of that.

[Amesbury Saint]

It would be interesting to know the cheapest wages a CCC team has - a squad of 25 players on YTS?

[broncoboy]

It will.

I'm sure their lending criteria across the board will have been tightened. Four years with RBS and 17 years marriage to one of their senior managers tells me that...

They will be sh!tting themselves about their debts to SFC. Doesn't take too many £30M debts going TU to feck up your accounts.

Look at A&L - if they are not bought by Santander, they'll probably go bust.

Like Freddie and Fannie.

I sometimes wonder whether people really get the size of the storm, or whether they are simply happy with the brollies because they can only feel a spatter right now...

But someone from Barclays might come on and know better.


Never liked Fredidie annd Fannie was just a cow

[Legod Second Coming]

I appreciate what you are saying, but the problem I have with all of this is that Lowe was tinkering with this idea of using the dutch guys and playing the youth before he was ousted, and yet he basically states now that these new reforms have been forced on him because of our financial state.

I tend to smell a rat in all of this and in my opinion, after making good profits in the past by selling our home grown talent, he intends to do the same but more frequently. In one way, this is good business, but on the other hand it is no good for the fans of this club as it causes instability with the numerous comings and goings of playing staff, and does not guarantee success because of that.

You could well be right you know.

Everything has fallen right for Rupert and he can use the lack of funds to do exactly what he always wanted anyway!

This way he cuts players salaries to the bone, promotes youth and marginalises the role of manager to coach.

And the bank have bought it. And he has all the evidence he needs to prove it courtesy of the previous adminsitration!!

[slickmick]

It would be interesting to know the cheapest wages a CCC team has - a squad of 25 players on YTS?


A survey in 2006 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/4898392.stm) revealed that the average Championship footballer earns £195,750 per year, or to put it another way £3,764 a week. The figure dropped to £67,850 in League One and £49,600 in League Two.

By the time we have got rid of Euell and co, we should fall within this bracket. With a squad of 24 averaging this wage, we would have a player salary of approx £100,000 a month.
Compare that to last season, I would have a guess that we will be reducing the debt somewhere in the region of £100,000 to £150,000 per month.
I'm sure I'll be corrected by the financial wizards.;)

[slickmick]

I appreciate what you are saying, but the problem I have with all of this is that Lowe was tinkering with this idea of using the dutch guys and playing the youth before he was ousted, and yet he basically states now that these new reforms have been forced on him because of our financial state.

I tend to smell a rat in all of this and in my opinion, after making good profits in the past by selling our home grown talent, he intends to do the same but more frequently. In one way, this is good business, but on the other hand it is no good for the fans of this club as it causes instability with the numerous comings and goings of playing staff, and does not guarantee success because of that.


He will also know that the rewards of premiership football would be far greater.

[Saint Mikey]

Doing a bit of research on the main site, I've found all of those players the club would like to get rid of have the following time left on their contracts:

BWP - Signed 3 year deal - 1 year left
Skacel - Signed 4 year deal - 2 years left
Saganowski - Signed 3 year deal - 2 years left
Euell - Signed 2 year deal - 1 year left
Thomas - Signed 3 year deal - 2 years left
Rasiak - Couldn't find the exact contract but would presume 4 years, which would leave 2

So, this time next year Skacel and Thomas will still be kicking about our reserves!!

[Rasiak-9-]

Honestly i'd be happy with letting Jason Euell go for a free as he must be on a good 15k a week at least.

If we can get a million or so for Skacel I think that'd be a good price, the problem is that clubs know just how desperate we are for money and can pretty much rape us on the negotiating table. I wouldn't be suprised if Skacel was sold for 250k or so.

[dubai_phil]

Honestly i'd be happy with letting Jason Euell go for a free as he must be on a good 15k a week at least.

If we can get a million or so for Skacel I think that'd be a good price, the problem is that clubs know just how desperate we are for money and can pretty much rape us on the negotiating table. I wouldn't be suprised if Skacel was sold for 250k or so.

TBH, nobody wants Skacel at his wage level, so I would expect the only way to reduce the wage costs is for him to be sent out on loan and we pay say 40% of his wages - saves us a bunch more money each week. If he goes on a month's loan with an option to extend once that month is up we could recall him if 1) He actually "gets his head together and is playing football" or 2) If we got offered a better deal.

Ditto Euell I would expect.

That option would also save us appearance money and potential goal/win bonuses.

AND would allow us to bring in some loan players to cover positions we need even IF not as good as we would have wanted if they were off the books completely.

[killer fan]

loweeeeeeeeee out lowe out someone please take us over

[Arizona]

Cannot see a case for getting rid of anyone before we get rid of BWP and Euell. Finding someone to take them off our hands may prove difficult, but surely there is someone out there.

Skacel I'd keep just to make the football vaguely interesting to watch. I don't care if he waves and claps till his arms fall off, or he needs CPR after 60 minutes. He is one of the few players since we got relegated that I actually felt excited knowing he was going to play, or at least during the playoff season.

[Arizona]

A survey in 2006 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/4898392.stm) revealed that the average Championship footballer earns £195,750 per year, or to put it another way £3,764 a week. The figure dropped to £67,850 in League One and £49,600 in League Two.

By the time we have got rid of Euell and co, we should fall within this bracket. With a squad of 24 averaging this wage, we would have a player salary of approx £100,000 a month.
Compare that to last season, I would have a guess that we will be reducing the debt somewhere in the region of £100,000 to £150,000 per month.
I'm sure I'll be corrected by the financial wizards.;)

I'd have thought if you replace the word 'month' with 'week' you'd be nearer the truth.

If we assume:

J. Wright - £6k
R. Wright - £10k
Vignal - £10k
II - £12k
Saga - £10k
Rasiak - £12k
Claus - £15k
Powell - £10k
Ostlund - £8k
Hammill - £5k
Baseya - £2k
Licka - £4k
Viafara - £10k
Safri - £10k
Lucketti - £5k
Makin - £5k
Pericard - £5k

I make that £139k a week saved on wages. Now taking into account 4 or 5 signings on very low wages and assuming costs have been cut elsewhere. Closing corners, no busses etc. We're looking at over £600k a month saved compared to the a*se end of last season. I'm not ITK BTW, that's just maths.