Is The Club Ambitious

[Red Robin]

What makes me think this

well the departure of quality players over the past few months.

To be honest with the four players signed, all good signings as well it makes you wonder if we want to remove ourselves from this hellhole.

To me it was a very capable bunch of players to win this division outright.

All of a sudden we seem to be a team on the down and not the up.

Tell me how the hell clubs either keep the quality players or renew there contracts.

NOT AT BCFC it seems when a player does okay the slighest sniff of money and we are a selling club.

how the hell can POOL KEEP NELSON AND BOYD.

how the hell do LUTON KEEP HOWARD.

how the hell DID SWINDON KEEP PARKIN FOR SO LONG.

just a few names that come to mind,pretty scarey really, it really does make one wonder just how small this club is as OPPOSED TO THE POTENTIAL FOR THE EXPANSION OF THIS FINE CLUB.

[Guest roejowland]

poole also lost players and boyd could be coming to us.

[Guest Tactical Genius]

[Guest taipan]

Of course the club is ambitious.

There's a difference between not wanting to be promoted, and having a secure finance. All of those players on the top scorer list left for economic reasons. The money City got for Murray, 650k or so for a 28 year old is a good deal at this level, regardless of how many he scored. Peacock was on Championship wages which the club couldn't afford to keep paying in this league.

The ambition of this club is in its youth, though one does have to question how long those players will be here. Anyone can see that Anyinsah and Lita were stalling over new contracts, just the same as Matt Hill did, who also demanded a low, low release-clause in his contract. He wanted out. They all did. No club can keep a player whom they either can't afford or who doesn't want to stay.

End transmission.