|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 29, 2023 9:53:27 GMT
A thread regarding new ownership…..all I see is historical blaming and deterring away from the real problem here. Reams you have said money is there to spend and players will be coming in, let’s give these guys till Friday and strategise moving forward come Saturday. Am I happy? No, do I trust the new group? No, should they be given E chance to get the right players in? Yes. So I think they will come? No. I think many of us do not want this to fail but it’s difficult to ask for peoples patience after x amount of months of due diligence and then expecting everyone to be told what cake to eat and when. Quite frankly it’s embarrassing on their behalf. As I say a big week coming up and let’s just be more strategic in how we voice these concerns, I do not want this to blow up but have every belief it will. When and if that does happen I have some cobwebs laying underneath the coffin in regards to out new investors and all will be revealed Saturday at the minimum. I agree. The burden has been placed far too much on the young players. If we are not in a better place come Saturday then they have left themselves wide open to criticism but let's cross that bridge when we come to it. The abuse I have had for trusting them has been pretty disgusting to be honest but like I said I take people on face value. If they mess it up then fair enough. I will revaluate if and when that time comes. |
|
|
|
Post by weststandfruitloop on Aug 29, 2023 10:03:34 GMT
What Andy Scott is not is a coach. He doesn't take the players onto the training field or pick the formation or the team that goes out to a match. That was Dean Holden's job. Scott is a far more experienced manager/coach than Holden (more than four times as many games, promotion with Brentford, BBC London manager of the year, etc) and he will be doing that job here officially before long imho. |
|
|
|
Post by se7sm on Aug 29, 2023 10:10:14 GMT
no pressure then Andy only got a find 3 to 4 players and a manager in a week or the lynch mobs out |
|
|
|
Post by squareball on Aug 29, 2023 10:15:54 GMT
A thread regarding new ownership…..all I see is historical blaming and deterring away from the real problem here. Reams you have said money is there to spend and players will be coming in, let’s give these guys till Friday and strategise moving forward come Saturday. Am I happy? No, do I trust the new group? No, should they be given E chance to get the right players in? Yes. So I think they will come? No. I think many of us do not want this to fail but it’s difficult to ask for peoples patience after x amount of months of due diligence and then expecting everyone to be told what cake to eat and when. Quite frankly it’s embarrassing on their behalf. As I say a big week coming up and let’s just be more strategic in how we voice these concerns, I do not want this to blow up but have every belief it will. When and if that does happen I have some cobwebs laying underneath the coffin in regards to out new investors and all will be revealed Saturday at the minimum. I agree. The burden has been placed far too much on the young players. If we are not in a better place come Saturday then they have left themselves wide open to criticism but let's cross that bridge when we come to it. The abuse I have had for trusting them has been pretty disgusting to be honest but like I said I take people on face value. If they mess it up then fair enough. I will revaluate if and when that time comes. Maybe you aren’t asking the right questions. The 3 window requirement to turn us into Ipswich is nonsense. The first window brought utter dross and the second window is closing soon which has brought us a crock on loan (Camara) a kid on loan (Campbell) Edun and Jones who have been dreadful at the back and Taylor who isn’t an upgrade on what left. We aren’t better off clearly. Maybe ask your mate what the strategy is for reducing the losses down to 1/2 million a season? That’s an impossible target without a major plan in place. It’s a fact that it’s been said so as fans we really need to know how cost cutting fits with squad improvements over 3 windows bringing in better players who will command higher salaries. We know patience is required but an answer to that simple question would be appreciated so we can all understand how better players on bigger salaries can ultimately lead to trimming 4/6 million a season off the budget. |
|
|
|
Post by Mundell on Aug 29, 2023 10:29:00 GMT
I agree. The burden has been placed far too much on the young players. If we are not in a better place come Saturday then they have left themselves wide open to criticism but let's cross that bridge when we come to it. The abuse I have had for trusting them has been pretty disgusting to be honest but like I said I take people on face value. If they mess it up then fair enough. I will revaluate if and when that time comes. Maybe you aren’t asking the right questions. The 3 window requirement to turn us into Ipswich is nonsense. The first window brought utter dross and the second window is closing soon which has brought us a crock on loan (Camara) a kid on loan (Campbell) Edun and Jones who have been dreadful at the back and Taylor who isn’t an upgrade on what left. We aren’t better off clearly. Maybe ask your mate what the strategy is for reducing the losses down to 1/2 million a season? That’s an impossible target without a major plan in place. It’s a fact that it’s been said so as fans we really need to know how cost cutting fits with squad improvements over 3 windows bringing in better players who will command higher salaries. We know patience is required but an answer to that simple question would be appreciated so we can all understand how better players on bigger salaries can ultimately lead to trimming 4/6 million a season off the budget. That is the key question squareball I completely agree. Either Methven’s comment around annual losses of £1-2m p.a. was taken out of context or is misleading in some way, or we’re going nowhere fast. We’d need a huge amount of luck, of one kind or another, to win promotion with a significantly lower wage bill than we’ve had in recent seasons, but that’s what Methven is potentially implying. |
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 29, 2023 11:54:14 GMT
I agree. The burden has been placed far too much on the young players. If we are not in a better place come Saturday then they have left themselves wide open to criticism but let's cross that bridge when we come to it. The abuse I have had for trusting them has been pretty disgusting to be honest but like I said I take people on face value. If they mess it up then fair enough. I will revaluate if and when that time comes. Maybe you aren’t asking the right questions. The 3 window requirement to turn us into Ipswich is nonsense. The first window brought utter dross and the second window is closing soon which has brought us a crock on loan (Camara) a kid on loan (Campbell) Edun and Jones who have been dreadful at the back and Taylor who isn’t an upgrade on what left. We aren’t better off clearly. Maybe ask your mate what the strategy is for reducing the losses down to 1/2 million a season? That’s an impossible target without a major plan in place. It’s a fact that it’s been said so as fans we really need to know how cost cutting fits with squad improvements over 3 windows bringing in better players who will command higher salaries. We know patience is required but an answer to that simple question would be appreciated so we can all understand how better players on bigger salaries can ultimately lead to trimming 4/6 million a season off the budget. The first window is now, not last January when they couldn't buy players as they were not the owners just like they couldn't in this one because the EFL din't allow it. I do wish you would count to 10 sometimes before posting. I would answer the rest of your post but don't want to confuse you any more than what you are. Your thinking leaves alot to be desired squareball. |
|
|
|
Post by squareball on Aug 29, 2023 12:22:53 GMT
Maybe you aren’t asking the right questions. The 3 window requirement to turn us into Ipswich is nonsense. The first window brought utter dross and the second window is closing soon which has brought us a crock on loan (Camara) a kid on loan (Campbell) Edun and Jones who have been dreadful at the back and Taylor who isn’t an upgrade on what left. We aren’t better off clearly. Maybe ask your mate what the strategy is for reducing the losses down to 1/2 million a season? That’s an impossible target without a major plan in place. It’s a fact that it’s been said so as fans we really need to know how cost cutting fits with squad improvements over 3 windows bringing in better players who will command higher salaries. We know patience is required but an answer to that simple question would be appreciated so we can all understand how better players on bigger salaries can ultimately lead to trimming 4/6 million a season off the budget. The first window is now, not last January when they couldn't buy players as they were not the owners just like they couldn't in this one because the EFL din't allow it. I do wish you would count to 10 sometimes before posting. I would answer the rest of your post but don't want to confuse you any more than what you are. Your thinking leaves alot to be desired squareball. That’s convenient to ignore January. They brought in the players whether they paid or not. It’s an insight to the players that they are targeting. We’ve seen more so far in this window. I’m not ignoring any window because they tell us the calibre of player they’re looking at. Freebies and loans. Answer the other question I’m sure that there’s plenty waiting to hear how Charlie plans on getting the losses down while strengthening the team. Can they get it down by a whopping 66% while maintaining ambition to get promotion? Sounds more like a league 2 budget to me. |
|
|
|
Post by seriouslyred on Aug 29, 2023 12:53:24 GMT
The first window is now, not last January when they couldn't buy players as they were not the owners just like they couldn't in this one because the EFL din't allow it. I do wish you would count to 10 sometimes before posting. I would answer the rest of your post but don't want to confuse you any more than what you are. Your thinking leaves alot to be desired squareball. That’s convenient to ignore January. They brought in the players whether they paid or not. It’s an insight to the players that they are targeting. We’ve seen more so far in this window. I’m not ignoring any window because they tell us the calibre of player they’re looking at. Freebies and loans. Answer the other question I’m sure that there’s plenty waiting to hear how Charlie plans on getting the losses down while strengthening the team. Can they get it down by a whopping 66% while maintaining ambition to get promotion? Sounds more like a league 2 budget to me. We saw what happened in January: - Stockley, O'Connell sold plus several loaned out - Maynard-Brewer and Ness promoted to first team - Hector introduced and since renewed - three or four came and went with no impact And we climbed the table to safety. As a result of that, and the takeover back on we all expected more spend in August. As for Methven comments on reducing operating losses to £2M he's going to need to clarify when and how. For now let's be patient and await final signings, Leaburn, Camara and Fraser back plusca new manager appointed. Let's see where we are end September 😌 |
|
|
|
Post by aaronaldo on Aug 29, 2023 13:02:44 GMT
The first window is now, not last January when they couldn't buy players as they were not the owners just like they couldn't in this one because the EFL din't allow it. I do wish you would count to 10 sometimes before posting. I would answer the rest of your post but don't want to confuse you any more than what you are. Your thinking leaves alot to be desired squareball. That’s convenient to ignore January. They brought in the players whether they paid or not. It’s an insight to the players that they are targeting. We’ve seen more so far in this window. I’m not ignoring any window because they tell us the calibre of player they’re looking at. Freebies and loans. Answer the other question I’m sure that there’s plenty waiting to hear how Charlie plans on getting the losses down while strengthening the team. Can they get it down by a whopping 66% while maintaining ambition to get promotion? Sounds more like a league 2 budget to me. Convenient? Lol. They weren’t in charge and you know it. You’re such a WUM. |
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 29, 2023 13:06:56 GMT
The first window is now, not last January when they couldn't buy players as they were not the owners just like they couldn't in this one because the EFL din't allow it. I do wish you would count to 10 sometimes before posting. I would answer the rest of your post but don't want to confuse you any more than what you are. Your thinking leaves alot to be desired squareball. That’s convenient to ignore January. They brought in the players whether they paid or not. It’s an insight to the players that they are targeting. We’ve seen more so far in this window. I’m not ignoring any window because they tell us the calibre of player they’re looking at. Freebies and loans. Answer the other question I’m sure that there’s plenty waiting to hear how Charlie plans on getting the losses down while strengthening the team. Can they get it down by a whopping 66% while maintaining ambition to get promotion? Sounds more like a league 2 budget to me. If you want questions answered direct them to the people or person that can. That's not me so I prefer it if you wouldn't assume it was just to suit your rhetoric. As for January you are talking bollocks even by your standards. |
|
|
|
Post by earlpurple on Aug 29, 2023 13:16:48 GMT
The owners were not in place in January, the senior management team were. Thomas Sandgaard was still the owner so it was done under his budget.
The result was mediocre, but mediocrity was all it needed to get us safely to 10th place.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mundell on Aug 29, 2023 13:43:18 GMT
That’s convenient to ignore January. They brought in the players whether they paid or not. It’s an insight to the players that they are targeting. We’ve seen more so far in this window. I’m not ignoring any window because they tell us the calibre of player they’re looking at. Freebies and loans. Answer the other question I’m sure that there’s plenty waiting to hear how Charlie plans on getting the losses down while strengthening the team. Can they get it down by a whopping 66% while maintaining ambition to get promotion? Sounds more like a league 2 budget to me. We saw what happened in January: - Stockley, O'Connell sold plus several loaned out - Maynard-Brewer and Ness promoted to first team - Hector introduced and since renewed - three or four came and went with no impact And we climbed the table to safety. As a result of that, and the takeover back on we all expected more spend in August. As for Methven comments on reducing operating losses to £2M he's going to need to clarify when and how. For now let's be patient and await final signings, Leaburn, Camara and Fraser back plusca new manager appointed. Let's see where we are end September 😌 To be fair to squareball he’s made a reasonable observation and it would just be easier to accept that. At this point we’re dealing with considerable uncertainty and none of us knows, for sure, how that uncertainty will be resolved. What kind of wage budget is SE7 going to operate with and how will it be spent? We simply don’t know. Moreover, we know less than I thought we would do by this point. Although SE7 did not own the club back in January, it was clear that Andy Scott was responsible for managing the window, subject to Sandgaard’s sign off no doubt, and also that SE7 expected at that point to secure ownership imminently. How Scott managed the window is therefore relevant and, in truth, it is possible to interpret the decisions made in one of two ways. First, that the decks were being cleared in readiness for a major summer rebuild. Or second, that it was a cost reduction exercise, perhaps best illustrated by the sale of Eoghan O’Connell and his replacement by the unproven Lucas Ness. I’m sure you’ll agree that most of the incoming players were underwhelming. The two that remain, Hector and Thomas, have hardly been unqualified successes. Unfortunately, we haven’t seen a major summer rebuild. Instead, what we’ve witnessed is what might be a continuation of a relatively low cost strategy with several ‘low cost’ youngsters being given lots of game time. You’re right to say that we should wait and see. The window obviously isn’t closed yet and it’s possible that the club has correctly identified that a significantly above average number of academy graduates are already capable of regular first tram football. That would obviously be a big positive. Nevertheless, I hope we can recognise that there are two legitimate perspectives here and that, as new information becomes available, that we can discuss what’s happening accordingly. |
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 29, 2023 13:53:48 GMT
We saw what happened in January: - Stockley, O'Connell sold plus several loaned out - Maynard-Brewer and Ness promoted to first team - Hector introduced and since renewed - three or four came and went with no impact And we climbed the table to safety. As a result of that, and the takeover back on we all expected more spend in August. As for Methven comments on reducing operating losses to £2M he's going to need to clarify when and how. For now let's be patient and await final signings, Leaburn, Camara and Fraser back plusca new manager appointed. Let's see where we are end September 😌 To be fair to squareball he’s made a reasonable observation and it would just be easier to accept that. At this point we’re dealing with considerable uncertainty and none of us knows, for sure, how that uncertainty will be resolved. What kind of wage budget is SE7 going to operate with and how will it be spent? We simply don’t know. Moreover, we know less than I thought we would do by this point. Although SE7 did not own the club back in January, it was clear that Andy Scott was responsible for managing the window, subject to Sandgaard’s sign off no doubt, and also that SE7 expected at that point to secure ownership imminently. How Scott managed the window is therefore relevant and, in truth, it is possible to interpret the decisions made in one of two ways. First, that the decks were being cleared in readiness for a major summer rebuild. Or second, that it was a cost reduction exercise, perhaps best illustrated by the sale of Eoghan O’Connell and his replacement by the unproven Lucas Ness. I’m sure you’ll agree that most of the incoming players were underwhelming. The two that remain, Hector and Thomas, have hardly been unqualified successes. Unfortunately, we haven’t seen a major summer rebuild. Instead, what we’ve witnessed is what might be a continuation of a relatively low cost strategy with several ‘low cost’ youngsters being given lots of game time. You’re right to say that we should wait and see. The window obviously isn’t closed yet and it’s possible that the club has correctly identified that a significantly above average number of academy graduates are already capable of regular first tram football. That would obviously be a big positive. Nevertheless, I hope we can recognise that there are two legitimate perspectives here and that, as new information becomes available, that we can discuss what’s happening accordingly. Looks to me that the reason the youngsters are being given game time is to put them in the shop window. Sell one or two and bingo CM achieves his goal Problem is it's flawed because some, if not all, are not ready and they are already looking tired. Flog them week in week out and their value will take a tumble. It can only be the reason more senior players are not coming in. CM telling me over the summer that we wouldn't sign players to block our youngsters progress didnt make sense to me at the time and it makes even less sense now. |
|
|
|
Post by Mundell on Aug 29, 2023 14:08:44 GMT
To be fair to squareball he’s made a reasonable observation and it would just be easier to accept that. At this point we’re dealing with considerable uncertainty and none of us knows, for sure, how that uncertainty will be resolved. What kind of wage budget is SE7 going to operate with and how will it be spent? We simply don’t know. Moreover, we know less than I thought we would do by this point. Although SE7 did not own the club back in January, it was clear that Andy Scott was responsible for managing the window, subject to Sandgaard’s sign off no doubt, and also that SE7 expected at that point to secure ownership imminently. How Scott managed the window is therefore relevant and, in truth, it is possible to interpret the decisions made in one of two ways. First, that the decks were being cleared in readiness for a major summer rebuild. Or second, that it was a cost reduction exercise, perhaps best illustrated by the sale of Eoghan O’Connell and his replacement by the unproven Lucas Ness. I’m sure you’ll agree that most of the incoming players were underwhelming. The two that remain, Hector and Thomas, have hardly been unqualified successes. Unfortunately, we haven’t seen a major summer rebuild. Instead, what we’ve witnessed is what might be a continuation of a relatively low cost strategy with several ‘low cost’ youngsters being given lots of game time. You’re right to say that we should wait and see. The window obviously isn’t closed yet and it’s possible that the club has correctly identified that a significantly above average number of academy graduates are already capable of regular first tram football. That would obviously be a big positive. Nevertheless, I hope we can recognise that there are two legitimate perspectives here and that, as new information becomes available, that we can discuss what’s happening accordingly. Looks to me that the reason the youngsters are being given game time is to put them in the shop window. Sell one or two and bingo CM achieves his goal Problem is it's flawed because some, if not all, are not ready and they are already looking tired. Flog them week in week out and their value will take a tumble. It can only be the reason more senior players are not coming in. CM telling me over the summer that we wouldn't sign players to block our youngsters progress didnt make sense to me at the time and it makes even less sense now. I agree. The other thing about a strategy of selling academy players to reduce operating losses is that it’s very hit and miss. The club’s academy has been extraordinarily successful in producing players for League football, but for every Joe Gomez or Ezri Konsa, there are many more Albie Morgan’s, George Lapslie’s, Brandon Hanlon’s, Reeco Hackett-Fairchild’s and James Vennings etc, all of whom are good enough to make a career in the game, but none of whom were able to help us to win promotion or command a healthy transfer fee. Its possible that there’s some wishful thinking at play. |
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 29, 2023 14:15:53 GMT
Looks to me that the reason the youngsters are being given game time is to put them in the shop window. Sell one or two and bingo CM achieves his goal Problem is it's flawed because some, if not all, are not ready and they are already looking tired. Flog them week in week out and their value will take a tumble. It can only be the reason more senior players are not coming in. CM telling me over the summer that we wouldn't sign players to block our youngsters progress didnt make sense to me at the time and it makes even less sense now. I agree. The other thing about a strategy of selling academy players to reduce operating losses is that it’s very hit and miss. The club’s academy has been extraordinarily successful in producing players for League football, but for every Joe Gomez or Ezri Konsa, there are many more Albie Morgan’s, George Lapslie’s, Brandon Hanlon’s, Reeco Hackett-Fairchild’s and James Vennings etc, all of whom are good enough to make a career in the game, but none of whom were able to help us to win promotion or command a healthy transfer fee. Its possible that there’s some wishful thinking at play. Well I was told last week that we have turned down 4m for some of our academy graduates. Whether that is one, two or three im not sure. |
|
|
|
Post by kings hill addick on Aug 29, 2023 16:28:26 GMT
I agree. The other thing about a strategy of selling academy players to reduce operating losses is that it’s very hit and miss. The club’s academy has been extraordinarily successful in producing players for League football, but for every Joe Gomez or Ezri Konsa, there are many more Albie Morgan’s, George Lapslie’s, Brandon Hanlon’s, Reeco Hackett-Fairchild’s and James Vennings etc, all of whom are good enough to make a career in the game, but none of whom were able to help us to win promotion or command a healthy transfer fee. Its possible that there’s some wishful thinking at play. Well I was told last week that we have turned down 4m for some of our academy graduates. Whether that is one, two or three im not sure. Leaburn? |
|
|
|
Post by franksav63 on Aug 29, 2023 16:37:58 GMT
Well I was told last week that we have turned down 4m for some of our academy graduates. Whether that is one, two or three im not sure. Leaburn? Would anyone bid for Leaburn at the moment due to his injury? He’s been out for nearly 2 months. |
|
|
|
Post by seriouslyred on Aug 29, 2023 17:04:30 GMT
To be fair to squareball he’s made a reasonable observation and it would just be easier to accept that. At this point we’re dealing with considerable uncertainty and none of us knows, for sure, how that uncertainty will be resolved. What kind of wage budget is SE7 going to operate with and how will it be spent? We simply don’t know. Moreover, we know less than I thought we would do by this point. Although SE7 did not own the club back in January, it was clear that Andy Scott was responsible for managing the window, subject to Sandgaard’s sign off no doubt, and also that SE7 expected at that point to secure ownership imminently. How Scott managed the window is therefore relevant and, in truth, it is possible to interpret the decisions made in one of two ways. First, that the decks were being cleared in readiness for a major summer rebuild. Or second, that it was a cost reduction exercise, perhaps best illustrated by the sale of Eoghan O’Connell and his replacement by the unproven Lucas Ness. I’m sure you’ll agree that most of the incoming players were underwhelming. The two that remain, Hector and Thomas, have hardly been unqualified successes. Unfortunately, we haven’t seen a major summer rebuild. Instead, what we’ve witnessed is what might be a continuation of a relatively low cost strategy with several ‘low cost’ youngsters being given lots of game time. You’re right to say that we should wait and see. The window obviously isn’t closed yet and it’s possible that the club has correctly identified that a significantly above average number of academy graduates are already capable of regular first tram football. That would obviously be a big positive. Nevertheless, I hope we can recognise that there are two legitimate perspectives here and that, as new information becomes available, that we can discuss what’s happening accordingly. Looks to me that the reason the youngsters are being given game time is to put them in the shop window. Sell one or two and bingo CM achieves his goal Problem is it's flawed because some, if not all, are not ready and they are already looking tired. Flog them week in week out and their value will take a tumble. It can only be the reason more senior players are not coming in. CM telling me over the summer that we wouldn't sign players to block our youngsters progress didnt make sense to me at the time and it makes even less sense now. There is certainly uncertainty and there are also actors who wish to conflate five consecutive losses with far more than the failure of the first team manager to utilise the squad effectively! Perhaps if we visit the various challenges and opportunities at our club seperately whilst identifying the executive responsible this might assist in staying ahead of this rapidly evolving scenario? But let's not forget that SE7 Partners and their SMT have been in charge for just five weeks! Methven highligted a long term objective to reduce operating losses to £2M but didn't articulate the detail. That this should meet with the condemnation of the CL glitterati and CASTrust is somewhat predictable. We all want promotion but who wants to discuss sustainability? Who wants to look at losses forecast for 2025/26, player sales and who is going to fund the gap. Let us be clear that GFP are on the hook for the next two seasons. So here's an attempt to disaggregate the main challenges: Squad evolution and player development Scott + new manager + Performance Director - We know that the playing budget is in the top six for League One and nowhere has it been stated that this reduceing. Rather the inferred strategy from nearly two windows complete is to promote youth, not recruit older League One journeymen. There will be perhaps two or three more additions according to the grapevine and then some further ins and outs January 2024. Some Academy players will take straight to the first team whereas others will need to go out on loan. Fact is that Leaburn and Campbell have 30 games behind them and next March we can add a few others to that. Yes, they will attract bids but they many will be part of the 2024/25 squad. - The formations and selections employed throughout September will reveal the thinking. The football aim has been stated as top six. Yes we've had an horrendous start and yet only one loan arrived with two key players injured. We're a month behind the curve but many agree that it's too early to tell the true calibre of the current squad. September under new management will double games played and shape how we feel plus the stats - We've seen two windows and an indication of players recruited plus those promoted from the Academy straight into the first team. Performance and Sports Science- We've also seen low levels of fitness in August which can only be a legacy of the Sandgaard era. But we haven't seen enough games, key players are injured and our ex manager was determined to play three at the back with no wing-backs in the squad. It's going to take time to improve the surroundings and culture at Sparrows Lane after a decade of either no SMT or an SMT without the technical experience to deliver improvements Player sales-The objective for the last decade has been to offset large operating losses with player sales. CAFC (BVI) made £1.5M pa whereas in Duchatelet's time a significant increase saw £25M+ over six years. Plus some considerable add ons left in the bank for later. on the other hand ESI and Sandgaard's time hasn't delivered significant value due to the side slumping to mid-table and perhaps other factors. In short Duchatelet placed an emphasis on playing youth and that has returned Commercial revenue- Methven & Sutherland (Interim Commercial Director): at £2M is around 40% of our main competitors at the top of League One and in the Championship. And many orf those clubs are in the poorer regions as opposed to 25 minutes from Docklands and The City. Up to them to deliver over time and run a narrative on the wins as and when they occur. Operating Costs- Rodwell + SMT: Aside from playing budgets we have some of the highest operating costs in the division. One would expect savings to be made after a decade without a CEO but this is probably not a concern to fans. Plus savings can easily be presented as counter to the desire of improving performance and support of the first team at Sparrows Lane. Methven or Rodwell could make a statement about direction and likely benefits at the appropriate time. Ordinarily a Supporters Trust would hold a dialogue butthat's not part of our reality |
|
|
|
Post by Mundell on Aug 29, 2023 17:36:30 GMT
Very good post seriouslyred The final sentence is very true and a great shame. CAST’s response to Dean Holden’s sacking is a classic example of behaviour that creates opposition to the club making constructive dialogue even more difficult. |
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 29, 2023 17:37:42 GMT
Would anyone bid for Leaburn at the moment due to his injury? He’s been out for nearly 2 months. They have. |
|
|
|
Post by vistavalle on Aug 29, 2023 17:38:11 GMT
We saw what happened in January: - Stockley, O'Connell sold plus several loaned out - Maynard-Brewer and Ness promoted to first team - Hector introduced and since renewed - three or four came and went with no impact And we climbed the table to safety. As a result of that, and the takeover back on we all expected more spend in August. As for Methven comments on reducing operating losses to £2M he's going to need to clarify when and how. For now let's be patient and await final signings, Leaburn, Camara and Fraser back plusca new manager appointed. Let's see where we are end September 😌 To be fair to squareball he’s made a reasonable observation and it would just be easier to accept that. At this point we’re dealing with considerable uncertainty and none of us knows, for sure, how that uncertainty will be resolved. What kind of wage budget is SE7 going to operate with and how will it be spent? We simply don’t know. Moreover, we know less than I thought we would do by this point. Although SE7 did not own the club back in January, it was clear that Andy Scott was responsible for managing the window, subject to Sandgaard’s sign off no doubt, and also that SE7 expected at that point to secure ownership imminently. How Scott managed the window is therefore relevant and, in truth, it is possible to interpret the decisions made in one of two ways. First, that the decks were being cleared in readiness for a major summer rebuild. Or second, that it was a cost reduction exercise, perhaps best illustrated by the sale of Eoghan O’Connell and his replacement by the unproven Lucas Ness. I’m sure you’ll agree that most of the incoming players were underwhelming. The two that remain, Hector and Thomas, have hardly been unqualified successes. Unfortunately, we haven’t seen a major summer rebuild. Instead, what we’ve witnessed is what might be a continuation of a relatively low cost strategy with several ‘low cost’ youngsters being given lots of game time. You’re right to say that we should wait and see. The window obviously isn’t closed yet and it’s possible that the club has correctly identified that a significantly above average number of academy graduates are already capable of regular first tram football. That would obviously be a big positive. Nevertheless, I hope we can recognise that there are two legitimate perspectives here and that, as new information becomes available, that we can discuss what’s happening accordingly. |
|
cafcph
Season Ticket Holder
Posts: 120
|
Post by cafcph on Aug 29, 2023 17:55:18 GMT
Would anyone bid for Leaburn at the moment due to his injury? He’s been out for nearly 2 months. Stoke bought Alfie Doughty while he still had a significant injury. Much worse than Leaburns. |
|
|
|
Post by franksav63 on Aug 29, 2023 18:13:29 GMT
Would anyone bid for Leaburn at the moment due to his injury? He’s been out for nearly 2 months. Stoke bought Alfie Doughty while he still had a significant injury. Much worse than Leaburns. That is indeed true |
|
|
|
Post by reamsofverse on Aug 29, 2023 18:27:23 GMT
Would anyone bid for Leaburn at the moment due to his injury? He’s been out for nearly 2 months. Stoke bought Alfie Doughty while he still had a significant injury. Much worse than Leaburns. Very well said. |
|
|
|
Post by roburwash on Aug 29, 2023 18:38:07 GMT
Selling Leaburn would certainly put the cat among the pigeons.
|
|
|
|
Post by observer on Aug 30, 2023 0:05:03 GMT
Looks to me that the reason the youngsters are being given game time is to put them in the shop window. Sell one or two and bingo CM achieves his goal Problem is it's flawed because some, if not all, are not ready and they are already looking tired. Flog them week in week out and their value will take a tumble. It can only be the reason more senior players are not coming in. CM telling me over the summer that we wouldn't sign players to block our youngsters progress didnt make sense to me at the time and it makes even less sense now. There is certainly uncertainty and there are also actors who wish to conflate five consecutive losses with far more than the failure of the first team manager to utilise the squad effectively! Perhaps if we visit the various challenges and opportunities at our club seperately whilst identifying the executive responsible this might assist in staying ahead of this rapidly evolving scenario? But let's not forget that SE7 Partners and their SMT have been in charge for just five weeks! Methven highligted a long term objective to reduce operating losses to £2M but didn't articulate the detail. That this should meet with the condemnation of the CL glitterati and CASTrust is somewhat predictable. We all want promotion but who wants to discuss sustainability? Who wants to look at losses forecast for 2025/26, player sales and who is going to fund the gap. Let us be clear that GFP are on the hook for the next two seasons. So here's an attempt to disaggregate the main challenges: Squad evolution and player development Scott + new manager + Performance Director - We know that the playing budget is in the top six for League One and nowhere has it been stated that this reduceing. Rather the inferred strategy from nearly two windows complete is to promote youth, not recruit older League One journeymen. There will be perhaps two or three more additions according to the grapevine and then some further ins and outs January 2024. Some Academy players will take straight to the first team whereas others will need to go out on loan. Fact is that Leaburn and Campbell have 30 games behind them and next March we can add a few others to that. Yes, they will attract bids but they many will be part of the 2024/25 squad. - The formations and selections employed throughout September will reveal the thinking. The football aim has been stated as top six. Yes we've had an horrendous start and yet only one loan arrived with two key players injured. We're a month behind the curve but many agree that it's too early to tell the true calibre of the current squad. September under new management will double games played and shape how we feel plus the stats - We've seen two windows and an indication of players recruited plus those promoted from the Academy straight into the first team. Performance and Sports Science- We've also seen low levels of fitness in August which can only be a legacy of the Sandgaard era. But we haven't seen enough games, key players are injured and our ex manager was determined to play three at the back with no wing-backs in the squad. It's going to take time to improve the surroundings and culture at Sparrows Lane after a decade of either no SMT or an SMT without the technical experience to deliver improvements Player sales-The objective for the last decade has been to offset large operating losses with player sales. CAFC (BVI) made £1.5M pa whereas in Duchatelet's time a significant increase saw £25M+ over six years. Plus some considerable add ons left in the bank for later. on the other hand ESI and Sandgaard's time hasn't delivered significant value due to the side slumping to mid-table and perhaps other factors. In short Duchatelet placed an emphasis on playing youth and that has returned Commercial revenue- Methven & Sutherland (Interim Commercial Director): at £2M is around 40% of our main competitors at the top of League One and in the Championship. And many orf those clubs are in the poorer regions as opposed to 25 minutes from Docklands and The City. Up to them to deliver over time and run a narrative on the wins as and when they occur. Operating Costs- Rodwell + SMT: Aside from playing budgets we have some of the highest operating costs in the division. One would expect savings to be made after a decade without a CEO but this is probably not a concern to fans. Plus savings can easily be presented as counter to the desire of improving performance and support of the first team at Sparrows Lane. Methven or Rodwell could make a statement about direction and likely benefits at the appropriate time. Ordinarily a Supporters Trust would hold a dialogue butthat's not part of our reality Excellently argued |
|
|
|
Post by kings hill addick on Aug 30, 2023 13:39:44 GMT
Selling Leaburn would certainly put the cat among the pigeons. Yeah. Selling Leaburn and pocketing the money and then bringing in a loan player for a season is very short sighted. It is, quintessentially, selling off the family silver. Leaburn will sell injured because it's not a career threatening injury and the club buying him is interested in the potential that will be realised in two to four years. They have no intention of playing him anytime soon yet if they wait for him to complete another season the price could double. |
|
