Batman Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Keep taking them. Dream manager for me to replace RK......Diego Simeone..... Unfortunately never going to happen. I'd settle for De Boer. Reality.....I think we have reached our ceiling with high profile managers so it will be a mediocre nobody. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk mine would be Eddie Howe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S-Clarke Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Keep taking them. Dream manager for me to replace RK......Diego Simeone..... Unfortunately never going to happen. I'd settle for De Boer. Reality.....I think we have reached our ceiling with high profile managers so it will be a mediocre nobody. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Like Adkins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 mine would be Eddie Howe mine would be Tony Pulis circa 2011. #whycantwebelikestoke #why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pedro Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Not read through this thread so apologies if already said but RK has put himself on the spot by declaring no one is leaving in January but it looks like Mane or Wanyama may force the Clubs' hand and RK may decide to walk, I sincerely hope not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 The higher up we are the more the club is worth it's not rocket science. Not really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 (edited) And its for that very reason the dullards saying we should simply accept bouncing around the midtable, with the occasional good season a la Stoke, Watford, Palace or Bolton, WBA or Fulham before are speaking complete b*****ks. We've enjoyed a massive windfall that none of these clubs have to reinvest in a quality squad. But to the extent that a large portion has been spent on replacing quality players we've lost, though some of our sales have certainly commanded a premium, the club has shown minimal interest beyond this in strengthening. Koeman's comments about us being the only club to turn a transfer profit are not the ravings of a man who wants to spend, spend, spend his way of trouble, as is dimly and disingenously asserted on here, but are a fact and it is a fact that we lag even the most conservatively run clubs in the division on these measures. Arf. Keep trying. Just another variation on your openly weeping about net-spend routine. I then mention clubs with gigantic net spends - like Sunderland and Newcastle and you start spluttering about how no no no you don't mean them, you mean other clubs. Guess what, Southampton will have lots of seasons where we knock about mid table and then with a fair wind we will hit the heights of seventh. I couldn't give two sh its whether you and your non-dullards "accept" this or not, because that is what is going to happen. Waaa waaaah waaaah it's so unfair that howwible German woman took our windfall away, our windfall our windfall waaaah. Edited 3 January, 2016 by CB Fry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 (edited) Arf. Keep trying. Just another variation on your openly weeping about net-spend routine. I then mention clubs with gigantic net spends - like Sunderland and Newcastle and you start spluttering about how no no no you don't mean them, you mean other clubs. Guess what, Southampton will have lots of seasons where we knock about mid table and then with a fair wind we will hit the heights of seventh. I couldn't give two sh its whether you and your non-dullards "accept" this or not, because that is what is going to happen. Waaa waaaah waaaah it's so unfair that howwible German woman took our windfall away, our windfall our windfall waaaah. No just remarking on Koeman's observations. Its obviously relevant to him. Still peddling the sunderland and newcastle examples which were differentiated in the simplest of terms (and ultimately irrelevant) - to which you never responded and still refuse to respond. Until you do, the jury's out whether you're a complete dipstick or completely disingenuous. I'm hedging my bets. waaa waaa waah or whatever your current cri de guerre is Edited 3 January, 2016 by shurlock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lallana's Left Peg Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Realistically, what £25m player could we have replaced Morgan with that would've wanted to come here? Sadly we're not in a position where we can buy that level of player, they simply don't want to come here. I wish it wasn't the case but it is! I don't want the club to sign a £25m player as it isn't realistic. But a £12m player in the centre of the park - it's vital. Lets not forget when we already had Morgan we added Wanyama. Now we've lost Morgan and we replaced him with Clasie or Romeu and neither are anywhere near as effective for us and we're suffering all over the pitch because of it. We only "stopped doing it this summer" for the right back position, when we should have signed somebody of Bertrand class at a Betrand sized fee. Other than that we haven't stopped doing it, have we? I think we also stopped doing it in the centre of the park. Morgan went for £25m and his replacements are £8m and £5m respectively. And it shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 I think we also stopped doing it in the centre of the park. Morgan went for £25m and his replacements are £8m and £5m respectively. And it shows. How much did Spurs pay for Alli Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lallana's Left Peg Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 How much did Spurs pay for Alli £5m. But no-one knew how good he would be. He was a prospect signing and it is paying dividends already. He also wasn't signed to immediately replace anybody or plug a hole in the team. If your argument is that you don't have to spend much to buy a good player then it only serves to highlight how poor our summer was in the transfer market where we didn't spend much on some not very good players. Generally speaking, the more you spend the better calibre of player you get. There are of course exceptions and spending lots guarantees nothing. But it usually guarantees more than spending not much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 How much did Spurs pay for Alli £5m:? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 (edited) No just remarking on Koeman's observations. Its obviously relevant to him. Still peddling the sunderland and newcastle examples which were differentiated in the simplest of terms (and ultimately irrelevant) - to which you never responded and still refuse to respond. Until you do, the jury's out whether you're a complete dipstick or completely disingenuous. I'm hedging my bets. waaa waaa waah or whatever your current cri de guerre is [emoji38] Isn't it funny how any real world comparative clubs you quickly disregard - no, so we're nothing like Leicester, or Sunderland or Newcastle or Stoke or, it seems, any other club on earth. Welcome to Sherlock's world, where Southampton Football Club are the most unique-est sporting institution there has ever been. Bizarre. Edited 3 January, 2016 by CB Fry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 I think we also stopped doing it in the centre of the park. Morgan went for £25m and his replacements are £8m and £5m respectively. And it shows. Clasie was clearly Koeman's key target this summer and we signed him. We probably need to negotiate less effectively and just sign every we want for £10m to stop people moaning on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Clasie was clearly Koeman's key target this summer and we signed him. We probably need to negotiate less effectively and just sign every we want for £10m to stop people moaning on here. or, sign better players either/or will do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lallana's Left Peg Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Clasie was clearly Koeman's key target this summer and we signed him. We probably need to negotiate less effectively and just sign every we want for £10m to stop people moaning on here. Yeah Clasie has looked great hasn't he. Can't last 90mins, bullied off the ball when we play against energetic sides and looked his best when we've played four central midfielders in a 4-4-2 just to stop us being carved open so easily. Lets not talk about the way he was done for the goal on Saturday either. Turning circle of an oil tanker. He is a million miles away from being anywhere near as effective as Morgan for us. He's an £8m player and it shows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 £5m. But no-one knew how good he would be. He was a prospect signing and it is paying dividends already. He also wasn't signed to immediately replace anybody or plug a hole in the team. If your argument is that you don't have to spend much to buy a good player then it only serves to highlight how poor our summer was in the transfer market where we didn't spend much on some not very good players. Generally speaking, the more you spend the better calibre of player you get. There are of course exceptions and spending lots guarantees nothing. But it usually guarantees more than spending not much. My point is that maybe we could identify players of potential and then Koeman could coach them , devolop them & generally make them better . I see no sign that Koeman is making any of our players better and plenty of evidence that Poch does . It's very easy to blame the board , when does the manager take his share . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Batman Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 My point is that maybe we could identify players of potential and then Koeman could coach them , devolop them & generally make them better . I see no sign that Koeman is making any of our players better and plenty of evidence that Poch does . It's very easy to blame the board , when does the manager take his share . I think Koeman has been terrible this season He was brilliant last... but you have a few fans saying we should be oh so thankful he is our manager and we could never get anyone to do a better job and all that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ALWAYS_SFC Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 I think Koeman has been terrible this season He was brilliant last... but you have a few fans saying we should be oh so thankful he is our manager and we could never get anyone to do a better job and all that Why do you feel the need over totally state things? Rk has not been terrible at all, granted it's not been as good as last year. Your quest to undermine everything the club does is frankly ridiculous and lots of it is so far from truth..tbh you should be embarrassed by some of it What is your motivation? Perhaps it's just to annoy others, I don't know??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Duckhunter Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 (edited) I think Koeman has been terrible this season He was brilliant last... but you have a few fans saying we should be oh so thankful he is our manager and we could never get anyone to do a better job and all that " Brilliant" or lucky to have Morgan , Vic & Jose . My view is he was the perfect manager to manage the meltdown from last summer , cool headed & calm . This season I'm not convinced . Had we signed Alli instead of Spurs , would he be as good . Would he even be playing every week , he'd be in and out and people moaning about lack of ambition by only spending £5mil on an mk Dons player . Can anybody name one player that's shown major improvement under Koeman? It's not a fluke Alli is doing well , they didn't just put him in and he played well . He's been coached and managed fantastically . Edited 3 January, 2016 by Lord Duckhunter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Convict Colony Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 We should have replaced Clyne with someone like Kieran Trippier, Carl Jenkinson or Sam Byram. Supposedly we were interested in Byram but weren't willing to pay the £6M fee Leeds wanted. Jenkinson was supposed to be our first choice and rumour has it we had agreed a fee with with Arsenal for £10 million but he chose to go back to West Ham on loan instead. But more importantly we should have replaced Calum Chambers a year earlier - or refused to sell him - as when he left it was obvious Clyne was going to leave. We didn't which meant in the end we had to panic buy this summer. We sold Chambers for £17M and Clyne for £15M so we should at least have spent £15M on two replacements. Not just £5M on Cedric and Martina. We'd be laughing now if we had Jenkinson and Byram at right back. Similarly I don't understand why we let Cork leave last Jsnuary knowing Schneiderlin was going to leave in the summer. We simply shouldn't have let it get to the stage where he felt unwanted and chose to leave. It's not all about the money - but I think Les Reed and Co have convinced themselves they are clever than they are - that they can identify and sign an unknown player from abroad, improve the player, sell him on at a profit and repeat the process. Cedric was this type of signing I guess - but I am not sure he is up to it in the premier league - same with Juanmi. Both are too small for one thing. If we signed one of Trippier, Byram or Jenkinson and Cedric again I think we'd be fairly happy. Martina was just a last minute panic buy - and one I don't really understand. One of the problems I think we've got is our wage bill - if it's at 60% of our turnover isn't it maxed out? If so its means we can't afford to pay anymore thanks to FFP. So maybe it is partly about the money. This is where the lack of commercial revenue and disastrous signings like Osvaldo and Ramírez have bitten us. But we have made some bad signings since those two and I think both Les Reed and his team and the Koemsn brothers share the blame for that. Players like Pellè, Martina, Stekelenburg and Clasie were undoubtedly Koeman brothers signings. Tadic was identified by Reeds team but approved by Koeman according to Ron's comment at the time. Van Dijk was probably the same. And Alderweireld similar. Whereas Juanmi, Cedric, Mané, Gardos and Caulker look like Les Reed signings to me. And not forgetting Long - for the £12 million fee the worst of the lot. We have also lost our English core and a not of our team spirit along with it or so it seems as well. So Reed and Koeman should share the blame for player recruitment - which has taken us a step backwards. But Koeman has to take the blame for our tactics - we no longer press the ball, build from the back or look as fit. We look very one dimensional playing the long ball to Pellè most of the time. Will Koeman walk? Yes I think he will in the summer to protect his reputation - because unless something changes we are going backwards - and probably looking at a relegation battle next season if not this one. yeah pretty agree with this but I'd lump Mane in Koeman's bucket as well as he said he saw Mane tear Ajax a new ars*hole in a friendly and was keen to sign him. “I know the player because last season Ajax Amsterdam played against Red Bull Salzburg in Europe, and I saw him playing and I was impressed with his qualities and with the physicality that he showed. “He can play in different positions in the attack – he can play on the left or right side and also as a number nine. It is incredible how many goals he has scored from his position, and I hope that he will do the same for us. “With the way that we play and the fact that I know him very well, this is a good step forward for him.” http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/article/20140901-announcement-sadio-mane-joins-southampton-1892373.aspx#5EGYRRVom8fVDU9y.99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint lard Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Like Adkins? Your words not mine. Glad you agree though. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dig Dig Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Isn't it funny how any real world comparative clubs you quickly disregard - no, so we're nothing like Leicester, or Sunderland or Newcastle or Stoke or, it seems, any other club on earth. Welcome to Sherlock's world, where Southampton Football Club are the most unique-est sporting institution there has ever been. Bizarre. Anyone would be hard pushed to find a "compariable" club as our situation over the last couple of years was fairly unique. We had 4-5 England Internationals, a strong spine of players and an attractive, energetic style of play and a rep for having the balls to play academy lads. Post this, we recouped more in transfers for a club of our size than other every has or probably ever will. If you think we've done well at taking advantage of what is probably a once in a generation situation, fair enough and good for you. However, it's pretty fair and obvious for others to at least be talking about what we have done. We have a team which is probably depreciating in value overall, don't really have a recognised style of play, crashed out of Europe at the first hurdle and were completely embarrassed in the cup and now struggling in the league. Wahhh wahhh indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint77 Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Why do you feel the need over totally state things? Rk has not been terrible at all, granted it's not been as good as last year. Your quest to undermine everything the club does is frankly ridiculous and lots of it is so far from truth..tbh you should be embarrassed by some of it What is your motivation? Perhaps it's just to annoy others, I don't know??? Agree only have to see his name and it winds me up still he will be back to school tomorrow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the saint in winchester Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 He doesn't like losing. Who does? he is also probably very hacked off with Mane's behaviour and Wanyama's stupid tackles. He may be, but it's poor management to publicly berate them through the media. Keep discipline internal and hit them with a fine. Withdrawing Mane from the starting line up was hitting his other players and the fans not Mane. May as well as poked himself in the eye. Yes, agree we don't want to keep selling off players every year, but as a 'showcase' club we end up with disenchanted players if we refuse to allow them a chance to earn salaries we can't afford. If Koeman doesn't see that, then he needs to be at Man Utd or Man City. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Morgan was a one million Euro player when we signed him. Just saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnnyboy Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Sun 03 Jan 2016, 18:39 Koeman: 'Stir upset' Our Telesport Editors Ronald Koeman is all set with the lax behavior displayed by his players. The coach of Southampton, which lost last weekend from Norwich, wants to tighten things up to get his team back on the winning path. Koeman was just before the start of the race his starting line upset because Sadio Mané came too late. The Dutch coach complained about the lack of focus and discipline within his squad. "We're going to change course and to tighten discipline," Koeman announced via the official YouTube channel of Southampton. 'The Saints' lost 6 of the last 8 matches. "We are in a difficult situation. But if the focus is missing, then there is nothing for me to coach. That focus must come from the players themselves, but I can tighten things up." According Koeman lacked against Norwich on team spirit. "If it goes bad, you have to prepare as a team, but I have not seen in Norwich." On January 9 enters Southampton against Crystal Palace in the third round of the FA Cup and then follow the league games against Watford and West Bromwich Albion. All three games will be played within a week. "That's tough, but complaining does not make sense. We need points, so we can better focus on that. Winning is the best remedy to boost our self-confidence." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lazlo78 Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Fingers crossed that he will walk again - I wasn't even aware the injury was that serious! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Marco Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 I don't buy this whole we can't afford wages thing. In October it was announced clubs were to get £3bn from the sale of broadcasting rights abroad. That in itself is more then Spain, Italy, Germany and France get in broadcasting money, combined! Add on top of that the £100m a season each PL team get's from domestic tv rights. A PL team will get around £140m a season just from tv rights. That is a huge amount of money. We might not be able to compete with the wages paid by the likes of Chelsea, Man Utd, Arsenal etc but in comparison to the majority of foreign teams we should be able to beat their wages for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lallana's Left Peg Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 I don't buy this whole we can't afford wages thing. In October it was announced clubs were to get £3bn from the sale of broadcasting rights abroad. That in itself is more then Spain, Italy, Germany and France get in broadcasting money, combined! Add on top of that the £100m a season each PL team get's from domestic tv rights. A PL team will get around £140m a season just from tv rights. That is a huge amount of money. We might not be able to compete with the wages paid by the likes of Chelsea, Man Utd, Arsenal etc but in comparison to the majority of foreign teams we should be able to beat their wages for sure. FFP means that if our wage bill is over £52m a year (last summer it was) then we can only increase it by £4m that season. The only other additional way it can be increased is via commercial revenue but our club is way behind on that so basically the wage bill could only increase by say around £5m last summer. That is probably why we got rid of Osvaldo. Signing Stek and Caulker didn't help as they were loan cover for players already at the club and being paid. That's why I didn't like our 'padding out' of the squad. Juanmi contributed the square root of **** all eating up 30-40k a week probably. Caulker the same. Don't sign them and it's 80k we could have used towards wages for better players elsewhere. Mind boggling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingsland Red Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 FFP means that if our wage bill is over £52m a year (last summer it was) then we can only increase it by £4m that season. The only other additional way it can be increased is via commercial revenue but our club is way behind on that so basically the wage bill could only increase by say around £5m last summer. That is probably why we got rid of Osvaldo. Signing Stek and Caulker didn't help as they were loan cover for players already at the club and being paid. That's why I didn't like our 'padding out' of the squad. Juanmi contributed the square root of **** all eating up 30-40k a week probably. Caulker the same. Don't sign them and it's 80k we could have used towards wages for better players elsewhere. Mind boggling. I agree, one guy who can score goals is worth say 3 x squad players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Anyone would be hard pushed to find a "compariable" club as our situation over the last couple of years was fairly unique. We had 4-5 England Internationals, a strong spine of players and an attractive, energetic style of play and a rep for having the balls to play academy lads. Post this, we recouped more in transfers for a club of our size than other every has or probably ever will. If you think we've done well at taking advantage of what is probably a once in a generation situation, fair enough and good for you. However, it's pretty fair and obvious for others to at least be talking about what we have done. We have a team which is probably depreciating in value overall, don't really have a recognised style of play, crashed out of Europe at the first hurdle and were completely embarrassed in the cup and now struggling in the league. Wahhh wahhh indeed. Strange how selling all our best players has suddenly morphed from being a terribly bad thing to a "once in a generation" situation we are supposed to have taken advantage of. Bizarre. I'd say Newcastle finishing fifth under Pardew with an exceptional crop of well scouted players and a positive expansive style is pretty comparable, or Boro under McClaren, or Fulham with Mo pumping in money all over the shop, or Villa under Martin O Neil finishing 6th three seasons in a row, or plenty of other clubs who have a moment in the sun. Guess what, all of them had "a platform" to build on/push on/kick on/etc etc etc and none of them did. We're really, really not unique. Not sure why you think that I think we have "done well" this season, obviously we haven't, and I haven't said that we have. Middle ranked club doesn't stay at seventh forever shock horror I can't believe it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Isn't it funny how any real world comparative clubs you quickly disregard - no, so we're nothing like Leicester, or Sunderland or Newcastle or Stoke or, it seems, any other club on earth. Welcome to Sherlock's world, where Southampton Football Club are the most unique-est sporting institution there has ever been. Bizarre. Still not answering. To repeat, limited conclusions can be drawn from one summer window – precisely what you’ve done with your dopey little Sunderland example. That’s called a small sample size. More accurately, a sample size of one. Just think if you woke up tmrw, were walking down the street and, heaven forbid, were attacked by a Christian fundamentalist. Would you be straight on here, apologising to SOG , admitting the error of your ways, acknowledging that in fact there was no difference between Islam and Christianity in their propensity to violence? Course you wouldn’t, pal. Sample size. All of which is to say that over the long-term and a larger sample size, teams that strengthen in addition to replacing players they’ve lost, will do better. Net spend is a basic, if imperfect formulation or metric of this intuition. And yet the question is also much simpler (NB you can skip the stuff on sample size if its making your head hurt): Would our team be stronger if we had not only reinvested the money from losing key players but supplemented it with an additional transfer budget? Would it? In making this specific claim, I’m not suggesting we’re unique. Quite the opposite, pal. If anything, you’re the one who inhabits a baroque alternative reality in which the normal rules don’t apply. There seems no reason why instead of making a profit, as Koeman pointed out, we couldn’t have brought our additional transfer spend in line with peers. And before you wheel out another hoary, patently dips**t Fryism that those other clubs are behaving like lottery winners on crack to justify our seeming exceptionalism, the answer, lest you’re still struggling, is yes. We would be stronger relative to where we are. That’s all that matters. Not Sunderland, Newcastle or whoever else is on your little radar. Hopefully, things will change. It might be the case that we’ve been using the past couple of seasons to build up a rainy day fund, so I reserve judgment for now (this summer will be interesting) and no I’m not going to write a letter or go on a march (nice edit x). I’ll continue to attend home and away games, supporting the team while you’re here, getting all flustered over Mark Lawrenson or something. Many thanks for asking, though. A demain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 (edited) FFP means that if our wage bill is over £52m a year (last summer it was) then we can only increase it by £4m that season. The only other additional way it can be increased is via commercial revenue but our club is way behind on that so basically the wage bill could only increase by say around £5m last summer. That is probably why we got rid of Osvaldo. Signing Stek and Caulker didn't help as they were loan cover for players already at the club and being paid. That's why I didn't like our 'padding out' of the squad. Juanmi contributed the square root of **** all eating up 30-40k a week probably. Caulker the same. Don't sign them and it's 80k we could have used towards wages for better players elsewhere. Mind boggling. Be careful not to confuse salary figures for the club employees as a whole (right down to the tea lady) "Total Group Wages" with figures for just the players. Reported figures typically include everything (though obviously player wages constitute the largest share) while FFP applies only to the latter. Our yankee chum got tripped up by this a few years ago. http://www.saintsfc.co.uk/news/article/20151009-southampton-financial-results-2014-15-2735534.aspx Edited 3 January, 2016 by shurlock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 (edited) Still not answering. To repeat, limited conclusions can be drawn from one summer window – precisely what you’ve done with your dopey little Sunderland example. That’s called a small sample size. More accurately, a sample size of one. Just think if you woke up tmrw, were walking down the street and, heaven forbid, were attacked by a Christian fundamentalist. Would you be straight on here, apologising to SOG , admitting the error of your ways, acknowledging that in fact there was no difference between Islam and Christianity in their propensity to violence? Course you wouldn’t, pal. Sample size. All of which is to say that over the long-term and a larger sample size, teams that strengthen in addition to replacing players they’ve lost, will do better. Net spend is a basic, if imperfect formulation or metric of this intuition. And yet the question is also much simpler (NB you can skip the stuff on sample size if its making your head hurt): Would our team be stronger if we had not only reinvested the money from losing key players but supplemented it with an additional transfer budget? Would it? In making this specific claim, I’m not suggesting we’re unique. Quite the opposite, pal. If anything, you’re the one who inhabits a baroque alternative reality in which the normal rules don’t apply. There seems no reason why instead of making a profit, as Koeman pointed out, we couldn’t have brought our additional transfer spend in line with peers. And before you wheel out another hoary, patently dips**t Fryism that those other clubs are behaving like lottery winners on crack to justify our seeming exceptionalism, the answer, lest you’re still struggling, is yes. We would be stronger relative to where we are. That’s all that matters. Not Sunderland, Newcastle or whoever else is on your little radar. Hopefully, things will change. It might be the case that we’ve been using the past couple of seasons to build up a rainy day fund, so I reserve judgment for now (this summer will be interesting) and no I’m not going to write a letter or go on a march (nice edit x). I’ll continue to attend home and away games, supporting the team while you’re here, getting all flustered over Mark Lawrenson or something. Many thanks for asking, though. A demain. Sunderland and Newcastle have a huge positive net spend over the last five seasons. Five seasons. Count them. Edited 3 January, 2016 by CB Fry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shurlock Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Sunderland and Newcastle have a huge positive net spend over the last five seasons. Five seasons. Count them. And so have many of the big guns. "Would our team be stronger if we had not only reinvested the money from losing key players but supplemented it with an additional transfer budget?" As I say, that is ultimately what matters... Still not answering. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 And so have many of the big guns. "Would our team be stronger if we had not only reinvested the money from losing key players but supplemented it with an additional transfer budget?" As I say, that is ultimately what matters... Still not answering. Why are you asking that question like it is some killer question I'm avoiding? Who knows? Leicester are second with a team containing a grand total of zero players costing ten million. Koeman has a squad chock full of ten million quid players which Stoke don't have, or Leicester, or Watford, even our old chums Everton don't have many, stonking fee for Lukaku notwithstanding. He's had the tools to get us into the Europa proper and a respectable mid table finish. If we'd have signed two more £10m players this summer the only guarantee is that the same dins on this forum would be demanding we spend even more this window to "push on". Have a biscuit for your question though. I'm on the rack and no mistake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Marco Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Can't really blame Koeman for the transfer figures. Surely he identifies the players and the board negotiates the fees? We obviously over paid on a few players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 And so have many of the big guns. "Would our team be stronger if we had not only reinvested the money from losing key players but supplemented it with an additional transfer budget?" As I say, that is ultimately what matters... Still not answering. Our team would in all likelihood be stronger. But how much money has been used to pay for training ground costs, previous transfer deals and historic costs? Unless we know what has happened to any 'spare' money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lallana's Left Peg Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Why are you asking that question like it is some killer question I'm avoiding? Who knows? Leicester are second with a team containing a grand total of zero players costing ten million. Koeman has a squad chock full of ten million quid players which Stoke don't have, or Leicester, or Watford, even our old chums Everton don't have many, stonking fee for Lukaku notwithstanding. He's had the tools to get us into the Europa proper and a respectable mid table finish. If we'd have signed two more £10m players this summer the only guarantee is that the same dins on this forum would be demanding we spend even more this window to "push on". Have a biscuit for your question though. I'm on the rack and no mistake. The challenge is that every single team other team in the league spent money in the summer in order to try and make their first team better. Some get it right, some don't. Some spend a lot doing it, some don't. But unless you try then it won't happen. We spent this summer trying to fill three holes and ending up not getting anywhere near as good in any of them (though I do like the VvD signing), and then on top of that signing squad players who are third / fourth / fifth choice. The approach doesn't make sense and it questions how we spent our money. It's also then even harder if you are content to just spend money you receive on transfer fees on new players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint IQ Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Of course he isn't gonna walk FFS! Re the investment argument above. I think the main thing we are missing and have been for years is an advanced central midfielder that can shoot. Payet at West Ham comes to mind. If we had another option to Davis/Ward-Prowse (both awful at shooting and finishing) we would of finished higher than 7th last year and we'd of been easily in the top 10 this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ART Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 No, he isn't going to walk anymore than LVG was prepared to at Man U. We need to get rid of him, his brother, and the Unfitness Manager and bring in Garry Monk to work together with Sammy Lee. Monk and Lee would get things back on track and soon sort out the stragglers and bring in really class players. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guan 2.0 Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 More likely to be escorted out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 More likely to be escorted out. Eh? Players not happy? I'm more inclined to blame then than koeman tbf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guan 2.0 Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Eh? Players not happy? I'm more inclined to blame then than koeman tbf Lack of clarity over his own future from Koeman himself - the club cannot be expected to delay that when the results are so bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Katalinic's 'tache Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 More likely to be escorted out. Really? Has it all gone boobies up behind the scenes or are you hinting he'll never walk and will need to be fired before he leaves? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivan Katalinic's 'tache Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Lack of clarity over his own future from Koeman himself - the club cannot be expected to delay that when the results are so bad. Oh, I see. Will this impact any potential signings? I mean, if Koeman could be removed I guess we won't let him spend heavily on players a new coach won't want despite the obvious need for a forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suhari Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 More likely to be escorted out. **** me. That is one hellof a statement from a genuine ITK, whose views are hugely resected by the old(er) school posters on here. Care to elaborate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DuncanRG Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Lack of clarity over his own future from Koeman himself - the club cannot be expected to delay that when the results are so bad. I'm not sure I follow. Delay what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 Lack of clarity over his own future from Koeman himself - the club cannot be expected to delay that when the results are so bad. It's pretty clear he's off after his contract expires and I'm sure he's frustrated by our summer dealings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suhari Posted 3 January, 2016 Share Posted 3 January, 2016 I'm not sure I follow. Delay what? Delay decision on his own future I imagine? 18 months left, no commitment to extended, and **** results. The board should be asking themselves how to move forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now