do we have the most financial restrictions..?

[Thedelldays]

I have read many times on here that we cannot afford this...the formation in the only way we can play due to financial restrictions...no other option etc..

 

it had me wondering...

 

are we the most financially hard-up club in the league..? do we have LESS money to spend than every other club in the CCC?

[bungle]

I think the problem stems from the fact we have overspent in the past couple of years. I believe that once we have got our house in order again then we will be able to spend a bit more. Other CCC clubs probably have a lower turnover, but are on a much more sound financial footing and so can spend a bit more.

[Andy_Porter]

Massive stadium debt, lots of high earners and lots of loan players and we're below average in terms of attendance, not sure about gate recipts but I think most clubs charge about the same as us.

 

http://soccernet.espn.go.com/stats/attendance?league=ENG.2&year=2008&seasontype=1&&cc=3888

 

 

We could probably do with a takeover. . .

[Alanh]

I shouldn't think we're the most hard up, but we've got a ridiculously large wage bill compared to our turnover, and our turnover is falling. We've also got a large mortgage to service on our loan for the stadium so we need to generate cash to pay the interest. That's something that few other clubs in the CCC have to do.

 

I reckon that next season we'll be in a much better position because we'll lose most of the high earners from the wage bill and that will free up space in the salary budget for a few more experienced CCC players on more sensible wages. It's always possible to find another player cheaper than the ones you've got. You will generally pay for it in terms of less quality or less experience, but I reckon we could replace the likes of Rasiak, Stern and Saga with the sort of players who have scored against us regularly in the last year or so for a lot less wages.

[badgerx16]

I don't see how financial restrictions dictate the formation. As for a lack of money, how much did Morgan Schneiderlin cost ? And isn't Rupert supposed to have commented before the C Pal game that the squad is fully financed, the only budgetry concern was the stadium debt ?

[Legod Third Coming]

I have read many times on here that we cannot afford this...the formation in the only way we can play due to financial restrictions...no other option etc..

 

it had me wondering...

 

are we the most financially hard-up club in the league..? do we have LESS money to spend than every other club in the CCC?

 

 

While the finance doesn't directly dictate formation, here is my view on how it works:

 

1. We have no money now and limited income so we have to learn to live within our means.

 

2. This means lower salaries which means cheaper players.

 

3. Lowe's view is that young, mainly home-grown talent is cheaper and represents a better revenue opportunity than buying players in.

 

4. This means having a coach/manager used to working on limited resources and with younger players.

 

5. This means JP.

 

6. This means playing the way JP knows.

 

It also happens to be a system the academy have been using and are familiar with.

[hughieslastminutegoal]

I shouldn't think we're the most hard up, but we've got a ridiculously large wage bill compared to our turnover, and our turnover is falling. We've also got a large mortgage to service on our loan for the stadium so we need to generate cash to pay the interest. That's something that few other clubs in the CCC have to do.

 

I reckon that next season we'll be in a much better position because we'll lose most of the high earners from the wage bill and that will free up space in the salary budget for a few more experienced CCC players on more sensible wages. It's always possible to find another player cheaper than the ones you've got. You will generally pay for it in terms of less quality or less experience, but I reckon we could replace the likes of Rasiak, Stern and Saga with the sort of players who have scored against us regularly in the last year or so for a lot less wages.

 

 

I can't really see how you come to the conclusion "we've got a ridiculously large wage bill compared to our turnover".

 

Half of the high earners are out on loan so I would imagine much, if not all, of their wages are being paid by other clubs. Are you saying that we have a lot more experienced and therefore more highly-paid players left on the payroll than other CCC clubs?

 

Give us a few examples of teams who have cheaper squads than ours

 

I would think that is pretty clearly not the case as I can't think of any other CCC club renowned for following the "cheap and inexperienced players" route. Most have more experience in their squads, players who many on here say we can't even afford .....

 

Or are you perhaps referring to the players we have loaned in who aren't even fit enough/good enough to play?

[70's Mike]

Only Rupert/michael and David Jones know at the moment, and of course the bank.

But i expect a significant improvement to be quoted when the half year accounts are submitted early next year as the propaganda machine tells us what a financial miracle Rupert has achieved

[up and away]

I have read many times on here that we cannot afford this...the formation in the only way we can play due to financial restrictions...no other option etc..

 

it had me wondering...

 

are we the most financially hard-up club in the league..? do we have LESS money to spend than every other club in the CCC?

 

Financially we must be about the worse off in the CCC, because of the debt we have accumulated and our stadium payments. Sheffield Wednesday are the closest to us in that respect, but no where near as ham strung and with average gates several thousand higher.

[Alanh]

I can't really see how you come to the conclusion "we've got a ridiculously large wage bill compared to our turnover".

 

Half of the high earners are out on loan so I would imagine much, if not all, of their wages are being paid by other clubs. Are you saying that we have a lot more experienced and therefore more highly-paid players left on the payroll than other CCC clubs?

 

Give us a few examples of teams who have cheaper squads than ours

 

I would think that is pretty clearly not the case as I can't think of any other CCC club renowned for following the "cheap and inexperienced players" route. Most have more experience in their squads, players who many on here say we can't even afford .....

 

Or are you perhaps referring to the players we have loaned in who aren't even fit enough/good enough to play?

 

Obviously I'm saying that we had a ridiculously high wage bill prior to loaning out the likes of Saga, Stern and Greg, and the reason for loaning them out was because we needed to get their salaries off the bill. I'd guess we have to get more off the wage bill in January as well, hence the rumours about Skacel leaving for Ipswich.

 

Based on who we've got now I'd say we've got a squad nearer a sustainable cost, however things will improve (in terms of flexibility in the salary bill) as several of the higher earners contracts expire at the end of the season.

[View From The Top]

While the finance doesn't directly dictate formation, here is my view on how it works:

 

1. We have no money now and limited income so we have to learn to live within our means.

 

2. This means lower salaries which means cheaper players.

 

3. Lowe's view is that young, mainly home-grown talent is cheaper and represents a better revenue opportunity than buying players in.

 

4. This means having a coach/manager used to working on limited resources and with younger players.

 

5. This means JP.

 

6. This means playing the way JP knows.

 

It also happens to be a system the academy have been using and are familiar with.

 

Thank you Rupert's PR spokesman.

[um pahars]

While the finance doesn't directly dictate formation, here is my view on how it works:

 

1. We have no money now and limited income so we have to learn to live within our means.

 

2. This means lower salaries which means cheaper players.

 

3. Lowe's view is that young, mainly home-grown talent is cheaper and represents a better revenue opportunity than buying players in.

 

4. This means having a coach/manager used to working on limited resources and with younger players.

 

5. This means JP.

 

6. This means playing the way JP knows.

 

It also happens to be a system the academy have been using and are familiar with.

 

You were sort of OK until I got to points 5. and 6.!!!!!!

[hughieslastminutegoal]

Obviously I'm saying that we had a ridiculously high wage bill prior to loaning out the likes of Saga, Stern and Greg, and the reason for loaning them out was because we needed to get their salaries off the bill. I'd guess we have to get more off the wage bill in January as well, hence the rumours about Skacel leaving for Ipswich.

 

Based on who we've got now I'd say we've got a squad nearer a sustainable cost, however things will improve (in terms of flexibility in the salary bill) as several of the higher earners contracts expire at the end of the season.

 

You said "we have (present tense) a ridiculously high wage bill..."

 

I can't see how our current wage bill can possibly be higher than many in the CCC. As I said, most squads are more experienced than ours, and will as a result be more expensive than ours now. I doubt you can come up with a lesser-paid squad, Donny excepted.

[Greenridge]

I hate to put the mockers on a good topic for debate but the reality is unless you are on the Board at SFC, or part of the Barclays team that 'manages' SFC and you have access to all the financial ins and outs of every other CCC team then no one can actually know.

 

I have a wry smile when I hear comments like 'if Saga comes back in Jan we will HAVE to sell Surman (Lallana etc)'. It's stated like it's fact when of course it's purely supposition.

 

It's clear we are not in a strong financial position but the depth of it (even with audited accounts) and comparison to other CCC teams can only be subjective.

[tombletomble]

I hate to put the mockers on a good topic for debate but the reality is unless you are on the Board at SFC, or part of the Barclays team that 'manages' SFC and you have access to all the financial ins and outs of every other CCC team then no one can actually know.

 

I have a wry smile when I hear comments like 'if Saga comes back in Jan we will HAVE to sell Surman (Lallana etc)'. It's stated like it's fact when of course it's purely supposition.

 

It's clear we are not in a strong financial position but the depth of it (even with audited accounts) and comparison to other CCC teams can only be subjective.

 

 

But stating opinions as facts is one of the main hobbies of many posters on this site.

[Alanh]

You said "we have (present tense) a ridiculously high wage bill..."

 

I can't see how our current wage bill can possibly be higher than many in the CCC. As I said, most squads are more experienced than ours, and will as a result be more expensive than ours now. I doubt you can come up with a lesser-paid squad, Donny excepted.

 

I'll rephrase for the avoidance of confusion - at the start of the season our wage bill was unsustainably high and as a result we needed to shift some of the higher earners.

 

If I could edit my posts I would change my original post to put that first sentence into the past tense.

 

In terms of lower paid squads than our current one, nope I agree, we are probably down towards the bottom of the list. Possibly Plymouth, Barnsley Notts Forest, Swansea and Donny, but I'm guessing really.

[Gorgiesaint]

Obviously I'm saying that we had a ridiculously high wage bill prior to loaning out the likes of Saga, Stern and Greg, and the reason for loaning them out was because we needed to get their salaries off the bill. I'd guess we have to get more off the wage bill in January as well, hence the rumours about Skacel leaving for Ipswich.

 

Based on who we've got now I'd say we've got a squad nearer a sustainable cost, however things will improve (in terms of flexibility in the salary bill) as several of the higher earners contracts expire at the end of the season.

 

Agreed, if Skacel does go then with Greg on loan til the end of the season, that leaves us Saga, Stern, Kelvin & Euell as the high wage earners. Kelvin must be kept, together with one of Saga/Stern if finances allow.

 

And isn't Rupert supposed to have commented before the C Pal game that the squad is fully financed, the only budgetry concern was the stadium debt ?

 

I seem to remember this quote as well, in response to Crouch being interviewed. It's an interesting one as it does seem to contradict the comment made in the accounts that the cash flow projection to Nov 2009 included asset sales, which I can only determine as players.

 

If its not true then he has left himself in a very difficult position, and as such if Surman and/or Lallana do get sold in Jan then this quote should be dug out and used as a presssure point on Lowe.

[um pahars]

I seem to remember this quote as well, in response to Crouch being interviewed. It's an interesting one as it does seem to contradict the comment made in the accounts that the cash flow projection to Nov 2009 included asset sales, which I can only determine as players.

 

If its not true then he has left himself in a very difficult position, and as such if Surman and/or Lallana do get sold in Jan then this quote should be dug out and used as a presssure point on Lowe.

 

In Lowe's defence I don't think he has said this anywhere.

 

The only place I think it was mentioned was by Martin Tyler in an off the cuff soundbite halfway through his commentary and I wouldn't rely too heavily on that one. I would refer back to David Jones comment about cost reductions and asset sales still being required.

[Legod Third Coming]

You were sort of OK until I got to points 5. and 6.!!!!!!

 

Er, them (and VFTT) are the facts.

 

I ain't pointed out anything other than WHY JP is here...

 

But again, for explaning the thinking - which by the why is perfectly legitimate thinking whether you agree with it or not - I am lambasted as some Lowe Luvvie.

 

What do I have to do, kill him to prove that I have a brain of my own?

 

JP is here becuase Lowe believes he was the best cheapest option to work with the best cheapest kids.

 

Ah, but this does not fit the profile of Lowe as Bealzebub (spelling)...

 

The guy is just a well-educated aristo who thinks he knows best.

 

If he's wrong, he's wrong. We'll find out...

[L1Minus10]

While the finance doesn't directly dictate formation, here is my view on how it works:

 

1. We have no money now and limited income so we have to learn to live within our means.

 

2. This means lower salaries which means cheaper players.

 

3. Lowe's view is that young, mainly home-grown talent is cheaper and represents a better revenue opportunity than buying players in.

 

4. This means having a coach/manager used to working on limited resources and with younger players.

 

5. This means JP.

 

6. This means playing the way JP knows.

 

It also happens to be a system the academy have been using and are familiar with.

 

7. And it doesn;t work in this league with the players we have.

 

8. And we will get relagated if JP and the system are still here at the end of the season

[Gemmel]

Er, them (and VFTT) are the facts.

I ain't pointed out anything other than WHY JP is here

 

So you think that Jan + 3 coaches equals less than Pearsons salary :confused:

[Legod Third Coming]

7. And it doesn;t work in this league with the players we have.

 

8. And we will get relagated if JP and the system are still here at the end of the season

 

 

Both supposition. I try to stick to historical analysis or explanation, me. But then, in my nostredamus moments I do make the odd prediction. For those interested, here are they:

 

1. Alpine will make twice as many posts on Saturday if we lose as win - five times probably, fifty even.

 

2. Um Pahars will post something financial soon that means feck all to me, but I am sure is 100% economically accurate - he should be the bloody Chancellor, maybe he is...

 

3. Vectis will say Jan needs to go even if we beat Forest 8-0 with six players on the pitch and five in the stands riding unicylces.

 

4. DD will say that Plymouth could have beaten Forest by 9 under the same conditions, oh and the unicylists would have been blindfold.

 

5. Lowe will still be Public Enemy Number One long after he has been removed and our results are exactly what they were before...

 

Odds available at: http://www.oddschecker.com

 

Get On Now!!!!

 

anyway off to watch Universally Challenged - learning feck all here!!!!

[aintforever]

While the finance doesn't directly dictate formation, here is my view on how it works:

 

1. We have no money now and limited income so we have to learn to live within our means.

 

2. This means lower salaries which means cheaper players.

 

3. Lowe's view is that young, mainly home-grown talent is cheaper and represents a better revenue opportunity than buying players in.

 

4. This means having a coach/manager used to working on limited resources and with younger players.

 

5. This means JP.

 

6. This means playing the way JP knows.

 

It also happens to be a system the academy have been using and are familiar with.

 

Makes sense right up until the Limited resources = JP bit.

 

We're skint and have to use youngsters like loads of teams have to, the dutch total football thing is a completely unecessary gamble.

[benjii]

I've never heard anyone say the Academy played toothless gash-formation until recently.

 

I'm a bit sceptical personally.

 

Certainly they played 4-4-2 every time I ever bothered watching them.

[Legod Third Coming]

I've never heard anyone say the Academy played toothless gash-formation until recently.

 

I'm a bit sceptical personally.

 

Certainly they played 4-4-2 every time I ever bothered watching them.

 

Only saw em a couple of times but Llloydy assures me they played 4-3-3 most of the time - which is the formation we also apparently play now.

 

I confess I do not understand formations and subscribe to the Arry view that if the players are good enough they could play anything and win.

[saintwarwick]

So you think that Jan + 3 coaches equals less than Pearsons salary :confused:

 

I'm sure Pearson would need his own coaching squad as well as himself which would equal more wages.

[saintwarwick]

Both supposition. I try to stick to historical analysis or explanation, me. But then, in my nostredamus moments I do make the odd prediction. For those interested, here are they:

 

1. Alpine will make twice as many posts on Saturday if we lose as win - five times probably, fifty even.

 

2. Um Pahars will post something financial soon that means feck all to me, but I am sure is 100% economically accurate - he should be the bloody Chancellor, maybe he is...

 

3. Vectis will say Jan needs to go even if we beat Forest 8-0 with six players on the pitch and five in the stands riding unicylces.

 

4. DD will say that Plymouth could have beaten Forest by 9 under the same conditions, oh and the unicylists would have been blindfold.

 

5. Lowe will still be Public Enemy Number One long after he has been removed and our results are exactly what they were before...

 

Odds available at: http://www.oddschecker.com

 

Get On Now!!!!

 

anyway off to watch Universally Challenged - learning feck all here!!!!

 

Five very good and accurate points

[benjii]

6. Legod Third Coming will post something banal, snide and jaded.

[aintforever]

I'm sure Pearson would need his own coaching squad as well as himself which would equal more wages.

 

The managers/coaches wages are pretty irrelivant in the whole scheme of things.

 

We have had the money to bring in:

 

Forecast

Cork

Pearce

Scheiderlin

Wotton

Smith

Robertson

Peckhart

Holmes

Pulis

Gasmi

 

Hiring a manager because they are cheap is NEVER cost effective. A few bad signings and you are blowing thousands a week on bench warmers. **** knows how much Forecast, Pulis, Gasmi, Peckhrt, Wotton, Holmes etc are costing us for doing naff all.

[benjii]

Only saw em a couple of times but Llloydy assures me they played 4-3-3 most of the time - which is the formation we also apparently play now.

 

I confess I do not understand formations and subscribe to the Arry view that if the players are good enough they could play anything and win.

 

Don't know who Lloydy is.

 

Have you seen the first team play lately?

[Legod Third Coming]

Don't know who Lloydy is.

 

Have you seen the first team play lately?

 

No, I prefer not to watch but to speculate from the comfort of my sofa what our problems are and who is to blame.

[NickG]

The managers/coaches wages are pretty irrelivant in the whole scheme of things.

 

We have had the money to bring in:

 

Forecast

Cork

Pearce

Scheiderlin

Wotton

Smith

Robertson

Peckhart

Holmes

Pulis

Gasmi

 

Hiring a manager because they are cheap is NEVER cost effective. A few bad signings and you are blowing thousands a week on bench warmers. **** knows how much Forecast, Pulis, Gasmi, Peckhrt, Wotton, Holmes etc are costing us for doing naff all.

 

those can't cost much at all. Pekhart and Cork probably no loan fee and quite possibly not even paying all their wages. Rest all low wages and virtually no fee.

[saintwarwick]

So you think that Jan + 3 coaches equals less than Pearsons salary :confused:

 

The managers/coaches wages are pretty irrelivant in the whole scheme of things.

 

We have had the money to bring in:

 

Forecast

Cork

Pearce

Scheiderlin

Wotton

Smith

Robertson

Peckhart

Holmes

Pulis

Gasmi

 

Hiring a manager because they are cheap is NEVER cost effective. A few bad signings and you are blowing thousands a week on bench warmers. **** knows how much Forecast, Pulis, Gasmi, Peckhrt, Wotton, Holmes etc are costing us for doing naff all.

 

My post was in answer to Gemmel's post as highlighted. As for the 11 names published, eight have played a part during this season, Pulis and Gasmi are still injured and Forecast was part of the closure of the Bale deal. You say we had the money to bring these in but we had to replace the ones we shipped out to save money, whereby it through shipping out on loan, contract ceased or players transferred. All those released for one reason or another cost a lot more than the current crop so it's not the case we had the money to spend on these players but merely using some of the money saved getting in cheaper players. Had we not replaced these we would be playing the under 11's.

[aintforever]

My post was in answer to Gemmel's post as highlighted. As for the 11 names published, eight have played a part during this season, Pulis and Gasmi are still injured and Forecast was part of the closure of the Bale deal. You say we had the money to bring these in but we had to replace the ones we shipped out to save money, whereby it through shipping out on loan, contract ceased or players transferred. All those released for one reason or another cost a lot more than the current crop so it's not the case we had the money to spend on these players but merely using some of the money saved getting in cheaper players. Had we not replaced these we would be playing the under 11's.

 

Of course they were all brought in to replace more expensive players, but you cannot argue that Jan has had the resources to build his own team. Paying Forecast's wages is a complete waste of money, dito Pulis and Gasmi - Jan chose to sign them when they were injured - is that a good use of resources? Smith - another complete waste of money. Scheiderlin - good player but for 1.5mill he hasn't done nearly enough. Holmes - looked OK but another player we knew was injury prone. Peckhart - waste of money. Wotton - could do a job but not suited to Jans style - waste of money.

 

We are not in a situation where we can waste any money, can you honestly tell me that bringing this lot in has been good management in our situation?

[NickG]

Holmes, Schneiderlin, Wooton yes, others not done anything yet

[Legod Third Coming]

Of course they were all brought in to replace more expensive players, but you cannot argue that Jan has had the resources to build his own team. Paying Forecast's wages is a complete waste of money, dito Pulis and Gasmi - Jan chose to sign them when they were injured - is that a good use of resources? Smith - another complete waste of money. Scheiderlin - good player but for 1.5mill he hasn't done nearly enough. Holmes - looked OK but another player we knew was injury prone. Peckhart - waste of money. Wotton - could do a job but not suited to Jans style - waste of money.

 

We are not in a situation where we can waste any money, can you honestly tell me that bringing this lot in has been good management in our situation?

 

 

Jaun Sebastian Veron? Diego Forlan?

 

Find me a manager who has not bought some milk as well as some cream...

[Legod Third Coming]

Holmes, Schneiderlin, Wooton yes, others not done anything yet

 

Cork and Pearce?

[aintforever]

Jaun Sebastian Veron? Diego Forlan?

 

Find me a manager who has not bought some milk as well as some cream...

 

Of course all managers buy some rubbish, it's just a case of how many.

 

That's why it is vital to get the best manager possible, hiring someone just because they are cheap or will just be a yes man is the best way to waste money.

 

When you're skint and have to blood on kids, a talented manager is the first thing you need.

[Legod Third Coming]

Of course all managers buy some rubbish, it's just a case of how many.

 

That's why it is vital to get the best manager possible, hiring someone just because they are cheap or will just be a yes man is the best way to waste money.

 

When you're skint and have to blood on kids, a talented manager is the first thing you need.

 

You are preaching to the vicar old son. But that is not the current incumbent's fault and I find the vitriol expressed towards him quite distasteful.

Edited 15 December, 2008 by Legod Third Coming

[Chez]

7. And it doesn;t work in this league with the players we have.

 

8. And we will get relagated if JP and the system are still here at the end of the season

 

just a thought, but maybe if we had played a 4-4-2 with this crop of players then we might have been in an even worse position than we are now.

[Legod Third Coming]

just a thought, but maybe if we had played a 4-4-2 with this crop of players then we might have been in an even worse position than we are now.

 

Hush you heretic! Think before you post...

[Thedelldays]

442 might mean we could be a couple of places higher too...

 

or, jan might have the nouse to mix it up and play 442 at different parts of the game/season..

 

but hey, LGTC and chez know best

[Legod Third Coming]

442 might mean we could be a couple of places higher too...

 

or, jan might have the nouse to mix it up and play 442 at different parts of the game/season..

 

but hey, LGTC and chez know best

 

You can't ask a Leopard to change spots DD. I thought everyone would know that? I don't know football but I know you can't teach an old dog new tricks...

 

442 is an alien concept to a man from the continent.

[Thedelldays]

You can't ask a Leopard to change spots DD. I thought everyone would know that? I don't know football but I know you can't teach an old dog new tricks...

 

442 is an alien concept to a man from the continent.

 

 

so...jan is incapable of changing the formation/system as a game/season dictates..

 

we are in the ****e then...

[Legod Third Coming]

so...jan is incapable of changing the formation/system as a game/season dictates..

 

we are in the ****e then...

 

Look, I don't want to get into this debate again, but I bet you find Mourinho played 433 his entire managerial career and didn't do too bad.

[Thedelldays]

Look, I don't want to get into this debate again, but I bet you find Mourinho played 433 his entire managerial career and didn't do too bad.

 

 

im sorry..but you are ridiculous...now you are comparing jan and CCC to the world jose manages in..

 

is this how stupid you will go to defend the system...

 

from the best football ever, to we have the least money to spend in the CCC (when that is not true) to mourinho played 433 so jan will..

 

ffs, you can tell when you are clutching at straws as the points you use to back up a view get more and more ludacris..

 

ok...fergie has played 442 for like....ever and he is one of the most successful managers of all time...lets compare his trobphy cabinet to jose's?..

 

what is the point im making here...NONE WHAT SO EVER..

[Chez]

Of courseScheiderlin - good player but for 1.5mill he hasn't done nearly enough.

 

Tranfers fees for foreign signings can be paid over the entirity of their contract ie four years in Morgans case, and the 1.5m Euros fee mentioned COULD make 1.5m euros (hopefully the agreement was actually in pounds) depending on appearances etc. Rest assured he cost us peanuts up front as we had peanuts.

[L1Minus10]

just a thought, but maybe if we had played a 4-4-2 with this crop of players then we might have been in an even worse position than we are now.

 

I have to say that it's possible that we would be worse.

 

If we didn't have that extra man in midfield then the midfield wouldn't be as solid defensively as it is now.

 

Also, if we didn't have that extra man in midfield then we might not create as many clear cut goalscoring chances as we do now.

 

Maybe when you're in trouble you need to go back to basics which of course is 4-2-1-2-1

[Legod Third Coming]

im sorry..but you are ridiculous...now you are comparing jan and CCC to the world jose manages in..

 

is this how stupid you will go to defend the system...

 

from the best football ever, to we have the least money to spend in the CCC (when that is not true) to mourinho played 433 so jan will..

 

ffs, you can tell when you are clutching at straws as the points you use to back up a view get more and more ludacris..

 

ok...fergie has played 442 for like....ever and he is one of the most successful managers of all time...lets compare his trobphy cabinet to jose's?..

 

what is the point im making here...NONE WHAT SO EVER..

 

No son, you are ridiculous. We in this country are wedded to 442.

 

Continental managers don't play it.

 

We have a continental manager.

 

He aint going to play it.

 

It didn't do any of the succesful continental managers any harm.

 

Just as there are crap managers who employ 433 so there are CRAP managers who play 442.

 

To suggest that a guy who has never employed 442 can suddenly make it work is bonkers.

[Thedelldays]

how many success stories are there in the CCC NOT playing 442...

 

it is not my fault that 442 is the most successful in the country and/or definately in this league...it is not my fault what so ever..but it is a fact...