Jump to content
IGNORED

Elliott Bennett (MERGED)


True red

Recommended Posts

Just now, robin4ever said:

How many times has it got to be said ... A 9 million bid and a league one wage !!!!!! Publicity stunt

How many times has it got to be said ... Our owner said last week that wages wasn't the issue !!!!!! Publicity stunt this isn't.  Can I ask what publicity you think we'd get through losing out on a player? What benefit do we get by showing other clubs how much money we've got, which in turn drives up prices as clubs know how much money we've got to spend.

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on that, for sure.... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not too bothered with this. Bennett was distinctly average for us. I'd rather Little play the wing back role than a lightweight winger. 

Can anyone give me 3 contributions that Bennett gave this team in his 16 or so appearances. 

One half decent game v Forest in which Freeman & Wilbs also looked like worldbeaters. One decent cross v Reading. That's about it isn't it? 

Glad he's gone elsewhere. Would've been a very average signing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, CotswoldRed said:

We're bigger than lots of clubs who have a full squad. 

Full squad? It took us years to sort out our massive squad.  I'd rather us have a small squad and buy right than buy for the sake of buying and lose millions yet again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, cottsciderarmy said:

Can SL please just get rid of Cotts now, we won't sign anyone with that muppet in charge.

1 minute ago, Jesus said:

How many times has it got to be said ... Our owner said last week that wages wasn't the issue !!!!!! Publicity stunt this isn't.  Can I ask what publicity you think we'd get through losing out on a player? What benefit do we get by showing other clubs how much money we've got, which in turn drives up prices as clubs know how much money we've got to spend.

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on that, for sure.... 

We won't break our pay structure ... No one over 10 k a week .... Can you get 9 million pound players to sign for 10 k ?????? Waste of time bidding... Publicity stunt . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Harry said:

Not too bothered with this. Bennett was distinctly average for us. I'd rather Little play the wing back role than a lightweight winger. 

Can anyone give me 3 contributions that Bennett gave this team in his 16 or so appearances. 

One half decent game v Forest in which Freeman & Wilbs also looked like worldbeaters. One decent cross v Reading. That's about it isn't it? 

Glad he's gone elsewhere. Would've been a very average signing. 

I agree, Harry. The issue is that it gives people another chance to knock whoever they need to knock without looking at the bigger picture. The Cotterill outers, will obviously blame Cotts and the Landsdown haters will be blaming him.  

Its a bit of an inconvenience, but Bennett is hardly irreplaceable .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can't blame him. It is evident off the field that we are not the best managed club to incentivize players and pay the odds. Coming off a loan spell he has seen the warts in the club and sees the club lacks ambition by the owners of putting a challenging team on the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Jesus said:

You've not really answered the question. How is it a publicity stunt? Also, how do you know that we don't pay over 10k a week? Is that a guess, or do you actually know that as a fact? 

By the chairman bidding 9 million he is making out that he is backing the manager and conning us fans into believing that he is throwing money about... But our wage structure won't allow us to sign multi million pound players .... Was it only two weeks ago that SL said we need to be looking for league one players under 24 .... Which when you translate it means young unproven players who cost less than a million and earn under 4 k a week ... IMO

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, robin4ever said:

By the chairman bidding 9 million he is making out that he is backing the manager and conning us fans into believing that he is throwing money about... But our wage structure won't allow us to sign multi million pound players .... Was it only two weeks ago that SL said we need to be looking for league one players under 24 .... Which when you translate it means young unproven players who cost less than a million and earn under 4 k a week ... IMO

Seeing your keen on quoting SL, you neglected to also mention that he said Gayles wages were not a problem and they new what he was on at Palace.............oh........that  does not fit your agenda does it

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, robin4ever said:

By the chairman bidding 9 million he is making out that he is backing the manager and conning us fans into believing that he is throwing money about... But our wage structure won't allow us to sign multi million pound players .... Was it only two weeks ago that SL said we need to be looking for league one players under 24 .... Which when you translate it means young unproven players who cost less than a million and earn under 4 k a week ... IMO

Ok, I think I understand what you're getting at. I'm afraid that we will have to agree to disagree on this.  I fully believe that SL would have paid the money for Gayle and Gray. I think everyone is looking far too much into things and trying to see something that isn't there to help fit a specific agenda. The facts are SL would have paid the money but one player wanted to fight for his Premier League place (which he has done) and the other has left to join a team that is looking likely to rejoin Englands top division.  To me, its pretty simple and it looks as though they have both made the right choice. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, sh1t_ref_again said:

Seeing your keen on quoting SL, you neglected to also mention that he said Gayles wages were not a problem and they new what he was on at Palace.............oh........that  does not fit your agenda does it

You obviously only read quotes that you want to believe. He said his wages were not a problem ... He did not say we would be prepared to PAY that wage. Also the removal of the bolasssie sell on made that bid a lot more attractive for SL.. I have no agenda , but I don't like getting conned and can't see us paying the going rate for multi million pound championship players ... Would love to be proved wrong though !!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, robin4ever said:

By the chairman bidding 9 million he is making out that he is backing the manager and conning us fans into believing that he is throwing money about... But our wage structure won't allow us to sign multi million pound players .... Was it only two weeks ago that SL said we need to be looking for league one players under 24 .... Which when you translate it means young unproven players who cost less than a million and earn under 4 k a week ... IMO

What IS our wage structure?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Jesus said:

Ok, I think I understand what you're getting at. I'm afraid that we will have to agree to disagree on this.  I fully believe that SL would have paid the money for Gayle and Gray. I think everyone is looking far too much into things and trying to see something that isn't there to help fit a specific agenda. The facts are SL would have paid the money but one player wanted to fight for his Premier League place (which he has done) and the other has left to join a team that is looking likely to rejoin Englands top division.  To me, its pretty simple and it looks as thought they have both made the right choice. 

One of us is nearer the truth than the other ... And we will def agree to disagree ... Nite nite

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, robin4ever said:

You obviously only read quotes that you want to believe. He said his wages were not a problem ... He did not say we would be prepared to PAY that wage. Also the removal of the bolasssie sell on made that bid a lot more attractive for SL.. I have no agenda , but I don't like getting conned and can't see us paying the going rate for multi million pound championship players ... Would love to be proved wrong though !!!

So have we sold (to Palace) our Bolassie sell on clause?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well a think you are just playing semantics over what was meant, I don't think SL for one minute would waste his time making bids for players with no intention of paying them a wage level either comparable to what they are earning or competitive for the division. We obviously have a pay structure and FFP to consider, but does not mean it could not have been managed within

Perhaps we could be accused of being over ambitious, but if we had signed leauge 1 players and been in the same position then everyone on hear would have shouted lack of ambition.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the Gray and Gayle matter - it was plainly a publicity stunt.... forget the wages the players were never coming to BCFC. Gayle never went near the club and Gray was always off to Burnley.  The point is how many clubs have bids accepted for players and then get turned down in this way.... They don't. You do your work with the agents first, make the approach with the club and bingo, in comes the player.  There is no evidence that either player seriously entertained us. It was a stunt to try and show we have mussel. Quite why they did it I don't know, because it does then weaken your hand with other clubs when you are trying to negotiate prices for players. Point is - might that explain why we did not sign anyone.... clubs put up their prices. Also, watch interviews with SC. He never wanted either player and was about as enthusiastic as the chap on the bridge of the titanic who was asked to look out for icebergs. Looked what happened to him.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, MarkRed! said:

On the Gray and Gayle matter - it was plainly a publicity stunt.... forget the wages the players were never coming to BCFC. Gayle never went near the club and Gray was always off to Burnley.  The point is how many clubs have bids accepted for players and then get turned down in this way.... They don't. You do your work with the agents first, make the approach with the club and bingo, in comes the player.  There is no evidence that either player seriously entertained us. It was a stunt to try and show we have mussel. Quite why they did it I don't know, because it does then weaken your hand with other clubs when you are trying to negotiate prices for players. Point is - might that explain why we did not sign anyone.... clubs put up their prices. Also, watch interviews with SC. He never wanted either player and was about as enthusiastic as the chap on the bridge of the titanic who was asked to look out for icebergs. Looked what happened to him.....

They did their work with the agents without saying a thing. It was the agents who blabbed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, CotswoldRed said:

They did their work with the agents without saying a thing. It was the agents who blabbed. 

TBH, who knows what to believe, I personally thought it was a side show to sell tickets and raise the profile of the club. It backfired as we looked stupid when the players said no to the move. My point, was whether BCFC were ever given the nod by the agents that the players were prepared to say yes..... Gayle did not come for talks. Gray did, but you can't tell me, Burnley pays more than us if SL is to be believed..... It was a sideshow. In the end, the whole transfer policy and approach needs to be reviewed. This shire can not be allowed to happen again....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, MarkRed! said:

On the Gray and Gayle matter - it was plainly a publicity stunt.... forget the wages the players were never coming to BCFC. Gayle never went near the club and Gray was always off to Burnley.  The point is how many clubs have bids accepted for players and then get turned down in this way.... They don't. You do your work with the agents first, make the approach with the club and bingo, in comes the player.  There is no evidence that either player seriously entertained us. It was a stunt to try and show we have mussel. Quite why they did it I don't know, because it does then weaken your hand with other clubs when you are trying to negotiate prices for players. Point is - might that explain why we did not sign anyone.... clubs put up their prices. Also, watch interviews with SC. He never wanted either player and was about as enthusiastic as the chap on the bridge of the titanic who was asked to look out for icebergs. Looked what happened to him.....

Are you saying SC didn't want Gayle or Gray? He would be mad and incompetent if so, where is your evidence when suggesting this?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, robin4ever said:

That hits the nail on the head... Wages could be matched , but we decided not too !!!

I don't think we never decided not to match the wages, it had been widely reported we offered Gray more than he was offered at Burnley, but he chose Burnley due to them have a better chance at reaching the Premiership!

Likewise with Gayle, he opted to take his chances with staying with a Premier League Club, which at the time he started to get game time!

I think we aimed for players who were totally out of reach for a team who just returned to the Championship!

Jesus wasn't Gray one of the top scorers in the league last year?

SL has said the funds are there, but as of the QPR game he said he has not received a list of targets! He can't do anything about that, that is down to two people, one who seems untouchable by some on this forum, and the other hasn't been heard since pre-season last year!!

I refer to a post in another thread, my worry is that we do not have many contacts that we canuse! As mentioned many times it is well known our manager does not have many friends in the game, maybe he is not able to call in as many favours as others!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, harrys said:

Are you saying SC didn't want Gayle or Gray? He would be mad and incompetent if so, where is your evidence when suggesting this?

TBH mate, no hard evidence.  Just piecing together the press comments he gave at the time and his apparent apathy to the signings. I am not sure they would have fitted into the group, in terms of salary  and they would have been the highest paid by some margin.... SC is big on the togetherness of the squad and I think he would have been concerned about this.  Problem is we don't really know so we are all speculating. This is what happens when the club gives mixed messages and is not clear on who is actually making the transfer decisions. The point maybe is that if the groundwork was done, they would have signed.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what a ******* shambles this season is.

if we had left a 10 year old in charge  of everything I rekon he would have done a better job.

its shocking, I never voted on the "who's to blame thread" because there all culpable.

back down again, just hope were back in 2 seasons and not 9.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was thinking that we must not be a very attractive option for players to come to at the moment. Now I have started thinking that there are hundreds of players in the game. Lots who don't get game time. Lots at lesser clubs.

We WILL be an attractive club to some. Hopefully we find a few who are up for the challenge.

we just need to string a few results together.

stay positive buddy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...