Davefevs Posted October 22, 2021 Report Share Posted October 22, 2021 Just now, Silvio Dante said: Dave - I genuinely can’t remember a conversation like that last night. Can you point me to it??? Ah nuts… @ray savinonot you, same difference, sounds similar! Basically be a bit frugal to control when you sell, not have to sell. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Waconda Posted October 22, 2021 Report Share Posted October 22, 2021 3 minutes ago, Davefevs said: Because I took one season. Why? It was The season we received the most transfer income (not net per se). It was This season that included sales of players he signed. It was the season that as a worst case shows scattergun recruitment, clubs in the bag approach of quantity over quality. Oh I see, not a full account of players sales and signings of the LJ era - makes sense. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Red Posted October 22, 2021 Report Share Posted October 22, 2021 FFS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davefevs Posted October 22, 2021 Report Share Posted October 22, 2021 Just now, VT05763 said: Oh I see, not a full account of players sales and signings of the LJ era - makes sense. Thanks Nope, I’ve done that to death Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodsyred Posted October 22, 2021 Report Share Posted October 22, 2021 If we can score 5 tomorrow we may just win the game fingers crossed Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mozo Posted October 22, 2021 Report Share Posted October 22, 2021 2 hours ago, Davefevs said: Comments above. Good post though. Secondary question - why did he have to sell his best players? One part of the answer is because “he” (the collective involved in recruitment, not just LJ) wasted a shedload on fees and wages, etc on players. You can bring in circa £22m net in 19/20 selling Webster, Pack and Brownhill (best players) but he still spent circa £25 (inferior players) replacing them: I don’t buy the LJ sob story. Sell 3 or 4 players, buy / loan 17 players….fees alone were greater than he netted, plus 17 players wages are astronomically greater than the outgoing players. Im sure you’ve seen the various accounts posts / excel pics I’ve put up. If he sold Webster, Pack and Brownhill and just replaced 1 for 1 with say Kalas, Massengo and Nagy, I’d say he deserved time to transition those two midfielders in (Kalas already acclimatised via loan). One of my mates, formerly ITK, and LJ’s most ardent fans (and Ashton hater) surprised me when he eluded to which players he thought we LJ signings and which ones weren’t. I was surprised. Palmer was an LJ signing according to him. My usual caveat is; recruitment was a collective. I hold fault in the collective. That does not mean Ashton is the devil incarnate, but it doesn’t absolve LJ either. It pisses me off when I see “LJ had to sell his best players”. Karl Robinson at MKD used to moan at Cotts for having an expensive squad. However Cotts kept costs down (to an extent, we were still one of the bigger spenders I’m not denying that) by having a small squad. Robinson ran with a squad of 30+ players. He wasted funds that way. Agree. See above. As per a post to @Silvio Dante In that respect would I mind? Bentley Tanner | Kalas | Atkinson | Baker Massengo | Vyner | James | Pring Scott (Weimann) | Wells Nope, but I doubt very much that will be the team. Sorry who's this "Vyner" guy you've included in that line up...? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.