JamesBCFC Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Just now, Ian M said: Could it only be Championship appearances counted? It could be, it says "league" which is why I discounted the cup. Between Joe and Bobby they have 172 Championship games. So 32 games to be found between 2 academy players (another point of contention). Presumably this means ones still at the club, so a limited few to choose from. Golbourne (out on loan) is therefore discounted despite being a "former academy player" of ours, as would be Hinds (it doesn't say how long they had to be at the academy). Is Dowling on loan? He has at least one league game, Vyner only has a handful. Has Kelly played a league match? I don't think he has. Lucic- same as Hinds for the time at the academy question. I could go on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesBCFC Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Putting queries over accuracy aside, I wonder why @Kid in the Riot didnt share this one that account posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Admin Ian M Posted November 27, 2017 Admin Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 3 minutes ago, JamesBCFC said: Putting queries over accuracy aside, I wonder why @Kid in the Riot didnt share this one that account posted. You do seem to have a bee in your bonnet about what @Kid in the Riot posts. He was very critical of LJ previously, as many of us were, but has been giving him praise for going in the right direction more recently so is there more to it or am I reading too much into this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesBCFC Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Just now, Ian M said: You do seem to have a bee in your bonnet about what @Kid in the Riot posts. He was very critical of LJ previously, as many of us were, but has been giving him praise for going in the right direction more recently so is there more to it or am I reading too much into this? I dont have a bee in my bonnet about him personally, but am calling out his double standards as I would also do to others. When people used net spend to say Johnsons spending wasnt that bad as it was pretty much nothing, he was dismissing net spend, but now we have spent a few million more than we brought in he is suddenly using net spend as a point to bring up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted November 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 7 minutes ago, Ian M said: You do seem to have a bee in your bonnet about what @Kid in the Riot posts. He was very critical of LJ previously, as many of us were, but has been giving him praise for going in the right direction more recently so is there more to it or am I reading too much into this? I never called him back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRISTOL86 Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 42 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said: I don't believe that to be the case. I think the club did have an eye on selling their most valuable asset, before the summer. Either way, the situation has happily resolved itself for the time being. Flint has demonstrated he is a model pro, is looking better than he did last season and has already matched his goal tally of last season! Although we have much improved revenue streams and continue to have the support of an extremely wealthy benefactor all the noises that have come out of the club in the last 2 years suggest when the opportunity arises we will again seek to maximise our profits on a player/players. Which I am fully on board with. I have mixed feelings about splashing the cash in January. Shouldn't we continue with our ethos of buying potential? Also, wouldn't want to upset the great team spirit that is evident now. Keep doing what we're doing and the Prem may become a reality one day, but let's do it by sticking to our principles. Do you really think we were keen to sell our most valuable player after two seasons of serious struggle? I was under the impression that there was no idea to sell him until his agent started stirring the pot. But you know what it’s like with this sort of thing...Chinese whispers and all that. I can’t see any reason why we’d have actively looked to sell him otherwise - would be quite at odds with our stated aims. Regarding January, I think SL would be the first to admit that not going for it in Jan 08 was a mistake and if he could do it again then it would be done differently. I’m not advocating putting ourselves in financial jeapordy by chasing the dream, but if we’re still serious top six, or even top two contenders come Jan 1st I would be surprised if we didn’t see a couple of additions of genuine quality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesBCFC Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 6 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said: Do you really think we were keen to sell our most valuable player after two seasons of serious struggle? I was under the impression that there was no idea to sell him until his agent started stirring the pot. But you know what it’s like with this sort of thing...Chinese whispers and all that. I can’t see any reason why we’d have actively looked to sell him otherwise - would be quite at odds with our stated aims. Regarding January, I think SL would be the first to admit that not going for it in Jan 08 was a mistake and if he could do it again then it would be done differently. I’m not advocating putting ourselves in financial jeapordy by chasing the dream, but if we’re still serious top six, or even top two contenders come Jan 1st I would be surprised if we didn’t see a couple of additions of genuine quality. I dont think SL would suddenly abandon what we have been doing, but he may sanction a bolder deal, maybe a one off marquee to push us over the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 28 minutes ago, Ian M said: You do seem to have a bee in your bonnet about what @Kid in the Riot posts. He was very critical of LJ previously, as many of us were, but has been giving him praise for going in the right direction more recently so is there more to it or am I reading too much into this? it's nothing to do with bee in the bonnet it's about context, This season is the first time we've had everying in place from the off stands boxes etc, so this is the first year we have greater spending power, We've also got some valuable assets which means if needed we can recoup monies, What will be important is not who we sell as we will always sell players, its whats the maximum we can get and who we can replace them with, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid in the Riot Posted November 27, 2017 Author Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 10 minutes ago, BRISTOL86 said: Do you really think we were keen to sell our most valuable player after two seasons of serious struggle? I was under the impression that there was no idea to sell him until his agent started stirring the pot. But you know what it’s like with this sort of thing...Chinese whispers and all that. I can’t see any reason why we’d have actively looked to sell him otherwise - would be quite at odds with our stated aims. 1) statistically Flint did not perform well last season 2) passing ability not good enough for an LJ team that wants to try and pass the ball out from the back. Those are two reasons very much in accordance with our stated aims. 4 minutes ago, Monkeh said: it's nothing to do with bee in the bonnet it's about context, This season is the first time we've had everying in place from the off stands boxes etc, so this is the first year we have greater spending power, I must've imagined last season! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheCulturalBomb Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Keep up the place where we are to establish we are one of the best sides and clubs to be at in the Championship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRISTOL86 Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 11 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said: 1) statistically Flint did not perform well last season 2) passing ability not good enough for an LJ team that wants to try and pass the ball out from the back. Those are two reasons very much in accordance with our stated aims. I didn’t mean from a tactical standpoint. More that selling your most valuable player doesn’t reconcile with pushing for promotion. But interesting points raised re style of play. Would certainly be a bold move to choose to sell Flint based on his passing ability given what he brings to the team. Especially when he’s pretty much played every minute of every game under LJ prior to transfer-gate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamesBCFC Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 24 minutes ago, Monkeh said: it's nothing to do with bee in the bonnet it's about context, This season is the first time we've had everying in place from the off stands boxes etc, so this is the first year we have greater spending power, We've also got some valuable assets which means if needed we can recoup monies, What will be important is not who we sell as we will always sell players, its whats the maximum we can get and who we can replace them with, 17 minutes ago, Kid in the Riot said: I must've imagined last season! We didn't have the full ground open from the off last season- the first few games all were capped, so what Monkeh says there is actually correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xiled Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Although we're doing much better off the pitch compared to two and more seasons ago, we still don't have income streams that can support big player spending. Mark Kelly's extended interview on 'Sound of the City' a few weeks ago was extremely enlightening. Since his appointment and the completion of the stadium our off-pitch turnover has gone from a few hundred thousand pounds to over £3M per year. A considerable rise in a short time (and still rising). I would imagine our costs have also increased considerably so how much profit we are making will probably not even pay for half a Tomlin. But it's good news especially the amount of use that the stadium now gets on non-football/rugby days. We are definitely going in the right direction and a quick read of Hull forums at the weekend shows how unbearable it must be to have a stadium owned by the council but with overseas owners who don't want to support the club. We are infinitely better placed than these formerly successful clubs. If we want the real money it's about being part of that BT Sport/Sky Premier League cash machine. Promotion is the single most likely thing to bring the club new, significant revenue. So, do we gamble in January? Personally, I would rather we bought or loaned just two good (proven) players. A striker and a midfielder. I do not want to see the team spirit damaged by someone like Tomlin - although I freely admit I thought he was a good signing after his loan. We have a mostly young and hungry team but they are playing for each other and that makes a lot of difference. I'm not sure I would actually enjoy us playing in the Prem but maybe that's because I'm cautious by nature. Fortunately or unfortunately that's where the real money is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
City Ben Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 I don't know how the OP can draw conclusions about our financial position and ability to spend or requirement to sell from one set of annual net spend figures (which may or may not be accurate). I would imagine that we take a more rounded approach to considering our financials. Not least that we have a significantly greater "asset base" - i.e. the spend we've made has been on assets which are going to/ already have increased in value. Maybe I'm being naive but I just trust that there is a plan and that we'll spend appropriate amounts. I've certainly not always had that trust! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
havanatopia Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 8 hours ago, Kid in the Riot said: An interesting table assuming it's fairly accurate. Goes to show why (IMO) the club were looking to offload Flint in the summer for circa £5m in order to help balance the books. Also, suggests we will still be looking to 'cash in' on one of our most valuable assets either in January or probably more likely the summer? And I would suggest also indicates that we won't be spunking a load of cash in January (barring someone going out the door for good money) as we cannot afford to. Thoughts? https://twitter.com/Champ_Statto/status/934741359931650053 Load of old cobblers those numbers; Ruben Neves, alone, cost Wolves £15 million and they had way in excess of 17 million quid net spend. So i would take the rest with a bit of a pinch of salt as a result.... Source... Transfermarkt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Popodopolous Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 FFP is over 3 years. So long as we are in the allowable loss limit- and I definitely think we are- it'll be all fine. As I think it will be. Lansdown is incredibly rich but that's something of a red herring with FFP isn't it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monkeh Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 6 hours ago, JamesBCFC said: We didn't have the full ground open from the off last season- the first few games all were capped, so what Monkeh says there is actually correct. The boxes also weren't ready from the off losing more income but it doesn't fit the slagging off so gets ignored infact wasn't around xmas or January when they were all finally completed and decorated Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lrrr Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 Also the fact of a year of income 'in the bank' helps a lot more than potentially spending as soon as you start generating more income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Donkeeebles Posted November 27, 2017 Report Share Posted November 27, 2017 1 hour ago, Monkeh said: The boxes also weren't ready from the off losing more income but it doesn't fit the slagging off so gets ignored infact wasn't around xmas or January when they were all finally completed and decorated I'm not sure that's correct. My mate has a box and he was in it for the Wigan game which was our first home match Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.