Redslo

Do they rate him highly or do they rate him 'highly"?

It could have been worse. You could have repeatedly called upon the Board to clean their windows so they could see what was really going on.

Well, I could have meant a 1-1 draw, but clearly the "by a single goal" element of the sentence modified only the word "won". Oh wait. This was a joking rhetorical question. Never mind.

According to transfermarkt, Burnley only spent about 11 million pounds this season. http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-burnley/transfers/verein/1132/saison_id/2014 Leicester only spent around 20 million pounds, nearly half of it on Andrej Kramaric in January. http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/leicester-city/transfers/verein/1003/saison_id/2014 QPR, on the other hand, spent over 40 million pounds but clearly not on the right players. http://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/queens-park-rangers/transfers/verein/1039/saison_id/2014 I think the critical element is the willingness of ownership to spend, the ability of management to spend wisely, and the existence of players on the newly promoted club that were ready to play at the Premier League level. We were lucky enough to have 7 premier league caliber players already on our roster when we were promoted. (Shaw, Fonte, Cork, Schneiderlin, Puncheon, Lallana, and Lambert). Our ownership was willing to spend 35 million and not much of it was wasted. (Even Ramirez was helpful during our first season.) Given FFP and the limits imposed by other circumstances (stadium size, for example) Bournemouth will have difficulty doing as well. Very likely they will not have 30 million to spend this summer.

And because if he is healthy we can sell him for more money.

Lukaku's new agent seems to think that Everton was a mistake. http://www1.skysports.com/transfer/news/20876/9787180/romelu-lukaku-is-better-than-diego-costa-and-should-not-have-joined-everton-says-mino-raiola

Setting aside the possibility of finishing 5th, 4th, 3rd, and 2nd, of course.

For most purposes I don't. I was just reacting to the claim that referring to him as black was inherently racist, which it was not.

If Aston Villa (for example) wins the FA Cup and Liverpool finishes seventh, we make the Europa League but have to play the two rounds of qualifiers. Aston Villa and the fifth place club would qualify directly for the group phase. That is what I meant by bad.

From an American perspective this is strange in another way in that we would normally refer to a mixed race person with African heritage as black although the current politically correct term is African-American. Obviously, however, that last term would not apply to Walcott and he would probably find it more offensive than black or white.

Sixth would be bad if Liverpool or Arsenal do not win the FA Cup.

The same day.

I just posted "Greg Dyke and His Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad Ideas (Part Two)." This post consists of a detailed roster analysis of all 20 clubs in the Premier League to see just how far out of compliance they would be if the new rules were in effect now. Spoiler alert, the Premier League as whole needs at least 49 more home grown players to fill its rosters.

I used "BPL" because the website calls itself the official website of the Barclay's Premier League. Normally I call the league the Premier League. I actually considered which to use in this post and then decided to got with BPL just to see if there were be a response to that choice of nomenclature. Budweiser is not becoming the sponsor of the FA cup. They are just the official beer of the FA Cup which is sillier but, I suppose, less offensive. http://www.thefa.com/news/the-fa-cup/2015/mar/budweiser-fa-cup-official-beer

Possibly. On the other hand, if he will have a changed attitude about this issue like Bertrand does now he might be good for us. Also, we are getting slightly more massive and he is getting somewhat less world class.

BPL official site lists Rodriguez, Targett, Forster, Tadic, and Mayuka as injured. http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/clubs/profile.squads.html/southampton

I feel slightly bad for the owner of QPR. Everyone says that he is a nice person. I can't help but feel that he has been the victim of successive con artist managers each of who convinced him that spending lots of money on over the hill players was the way to go. Of course, he should have learned his lesson the first time.

Perhaps to avoid this kind of confusion in the future everyone should respond to every post with which they disagree with a simple "I disagree" so that we can accurately keep track of what the majority really thinks. Remaining silent should always be interpreted as agreement.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/teams/southampton/11506759/Southampton-owner-staves-off-mass-player-sale-by-lending-club-an-extra-20-million.html Jeremy Wilson has, in the past, demonstrated that he has access to reliable information about Southampton. He says that the Vibrac loan was paid off and that the club debt stands at 50 million all of which is owed to Liebherr.

The problem is that there are ways that increased ticket revenue can be more useful than increased TV revenue and a reduction in non-TV revenue can potentially create problems. This would only matter if we have substantially increased our payroll for players but it is still something to think about. One good reason would be because that move would probably reduce revenue. That only makes sense if you consider what happened last summer a miracle rather than a favorable result arising out of good planning. In any case, they have undoubtedly planned even better for this summer. Management almost certainly knows whether Schneiderlin is going and probably has a good idea about Clyne.

True--although many households aren't profitable.

Which is nothing exceptional. Virtually every profitable business has some debt.

But that statement is as of June 30, 2014. The 20 million loan could have been used to pay off Vibrec or maybe not. The Echo's report doesn't say that the loan had been paid off but it can be interpreted as expressing an intent to pay it off. Or it could have been an intent to pay off the money owed for already incurred expenses that had not yet come due--like the money that was owed for past transfers. We simply have no way of knowing until we see the report and, quite possibly, there will be no way of knowing even then absent inside information or newly announced information from the club.

I am only speculating here but maybe the terms of a loan from Vibrac give them some kind of power that the football powers that be view as being equivalent to management authority and it is against the rules to have management authority over more than one club.