Jump to content

In the Net

Members
  • Posts

    1749
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Posts posted by In the Net

  1. 1 hour ago, lenred said:

    Plenty of talent in the South West you could be developing but any youth player who’s anywhere near half decent wouldn’t come near your shithole of a club.   Given your manager is prone to stubbing out cigars in youth players eyes,  it’s probably just as well. 

    Rather strange then that Newcastle, Liverpool, Everton, Stoke, and Cardiff have been happy to entrust some of their talented young players to be developed under JB. ?

  2. 3 minutes ago, TheReds said:

    One thing I have never understood with these types of comments is they never mention any assets or infrastructure?

    How much has Lansdown put in?

    How much is everything worth as it stands - including training facilities, academy, players, the planning granted for the future, how much once all of that is finished? 

     

    Now how much has Wael put in so far?

    How much are all of your assets worth? 

    We were discussing the merits and  financial practicalities of developing your own players. Wael never stated that he was a billionaire, I think the EP ran a typically inaccurate article about him being the 5th wealthiest owner, or something ridiculous, and our more naive fans lapped it up.  Similarly it was the EP who managed to write a whole article about the watch Wael wears.  This says more about the local rag that it does our owner.

    On the stadium front, of course Lansdown has turned AG into a very good venue - I've seen it for myself when attending a concert.  At the moment Wael has delivered a training ground, whereas we have previously rented.  I wonder how many of those who criticise it have been shown around the facilities there?  There is further work planned, hence you can find photographs which show the unfinished bits, and try and portray it as an accurate portrayal of what is there, if that makes you feel superior. 

    Comparing Lansdown and Wael is like comparing apples and pears, with regards to their personal wealth.  Fair play that Lansdown has backed the club for so many years, shame that his enthusiasm doesn't seem to have filtered down the gene pool.  It's a big ask for him to find an investor who will be as committed as he is. 

    • Like 2
  3. 34 minutes ago, bcfc01 said:

    Those days haven't gone.

    Clubs that had the foresight to invest in FA academies produce their own players on a regular basis, there is one just south of the river in this city.

    Of course, those clubs with FA academies need to employ managers who can see the worth and are interested in developing young players for the first team.  

    Money would be better spent on this, rather than being dependent upon and paying for loanees who become surplus to requirements, or who return to their own clubs thankful that another club has improved them free of charge or attracting a payment in some cases.

    I can see the point of one or two loanees, but half a team is excessive and counter productive in the medium to long term.

    Agreed, if they aren't serious about investing in them or if they have managers/board who ignore them, they become a bit pointless.

    Cotterill didn't appear to have time for the academy, but did really well managing his own way for a short time. I'm pretty sure that played a part in his departure in the end, the club wanted to see a return from the academy and we can see that now happening with knobs on - 6 academy or ex-academy players on the pitch against WBA (not for the first time either). And some ex-academy players bringing in millions for the club.

    A Cat3 academy costs around 1m per year to run which may be beyond some clubs, but it shouldn't be beyond most L1 clubs.

    Loanees usually have a large chunk of their wages paid for by the parent club.  As I said, I would prefer developing youth players, however, the majority of League One and Two clubs do rely on having half a dozen players from the loan market - that's the way the finances are managed these days.

    Gold star for the club South of the river, who's enormous losses are bankrolled by their billionaire owner - you are not comparing like for like.

    • Haha 1
  4. 34 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

    The alternative is to build a side predominantly of your own players supplemented by the odd loanee that steamrollers the division and also wins the Michael Mouse Cup for good measure.......I'm sure somebody did that about ten or so years ago..........managed by a "Dinosaur" (that's how some Scouse Manager yet to achieve anything approaching that described him a few weeks back).

    Ten years is a long time in football, things have changed on the financial front.  You won't find many League One and Two clubs who don't have several loanees on the matchday teamsheet.  Sad, as I much preferred the days of more local players in teams.

  5. 12 minutes ago, Numero Uno said:

    I can understand having six on loan when you are allowed five in, if that's the way your club have decided to go, but after that you are just pissing money up against the wall and literally stockpiling the training ground with other teams players (not to mention numerous Coaches and other backroom staff with a scouse accent). When you ask the average Fewer to explain how stacking your squad with other teams players is "building something special" and an example of the "special club Ethos that everyone associated with the club buys into" you just get a load of incomprehensible drivel literally spat (don't forget to duck) in your direction and a bottle of moonshine lobbed at you.

    Plymouth have been playing 5 players loaned from higher league clubs this season, a lot of clubs in League One and Two have a similar number of loanees, apart from Ipswich.

    This quote from the Plymouth manager explains very clearly why clubs do it:- Schumacher said: "I think it's important we do try and use the loan market. Sometimes it's not possible to bring in the players you want to bring in permanently because we haven't got the spending power the same as the other teams in this division.

    • Like 1
    • Flames 1
  6. 5 hours ago, BigTone said:

    Just had a visit from our commune Mayor who has said if Ann has any problems with the house while I'm away then just call and they will send someone to help. Frankly I'm chocked. How nice is that.

    Glad to hear that you have offers of help for Ann while you are away - it is amazing how people rally round when needed.  I think that Dollymarie's suggestion of a shorter time away from home is the one which I would go with.

    • Like 1
  7. 3 hours ago, BCFC11 said:

    Think you’ll find your shitty little tinpot club haven’t mentioned no such thing as a drainage problem. 

    A bit strange for you to assume that you know everything about what's happening at Rovers.?  Barton mentioned it in an after match interview a few weeks ago, as he was not happy with the pitch.  It doesn't take a genius to see that something's wrong, as the condition is nowhere near as good we've had for the past few seasons. 

  8. 56 minutes ago, BCFC11 said:

    We’ve managed a rugby game and a football game within the space of 24hrs at AG and a parks pitch barely 2 miles away from ‘Membley’ has managed to get their game on but R*vers can’t. ?

    Well done - have a gold star.

    The answer to your question is that there is a problem with the drainage under the pitch, which has affected the surface recently..

    • Haha 3
  9. 4 hours ago, Open End Numb Legs said:

    As if having the games at Forest Green, Cardiff and Newport also being still on wasn't a clue, the rare event of City and Rovers playing at home on the same day makes it worse as they can't say 'City would have postponed too if they were home'.

    The forecast is for 5 degC by 2pm. Let's assume they don't have under pitch heating. Why are the non league games able to be played?

    Newport game is off, I presume Cardiff have under pitch heating as they are an ex-Premiership club. As for FGR - there's always plenty of hot air up there! 

    • Hmmm 1
  10. 1 hour ago, RedLionLad said:

    Ignorance is no defence. You guys thrive on 1982 everyday of your existence 

    That has no relevance to your original post.  Rather ironic that you're the one who brought 1982 into the conversation - why on earth would that have an impact on everyday of my existence. ?

  11. 1 hour ago, GreedyHarry said:

    I guess it’s a bit like trying to take the moral high ground using something that happened 40 years ago. Maybe??

    Not really.  What happened 40 years ago isn't being compared to anything - no idea why you decided to bring it up.

×
×
  • Create New...