Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS
SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

Hoochie Bloochie Mama

Members
  • Posts

    5795
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    70

Posts posted by Hoochie Bloochie Mama

  1. Just now, LeftWinger said:

    O'Connell is a regular in statistically the 4th best defence in the Premier League this season. 

    Lenihan a regular in the 13th best defence in the Championship.

    Appreciate there are other members of these defences - but not a chance they'd offer 10m plus O'Connell.

    I didn't say they'd offer 10m + O'Connell - just that Lenihan is worth £10m. Wilder would improve him no end, just like he has with Egan, Basham and O'Connell - all lower league defenders a few years ago.

  2. 4 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

    Pretty sure it's more because you're now adding O'Connell into the mix, a Premiership defender who is probably better than Lenihan....plus the ten million.

    Anyway, never heard of them bidding 10 mill for him, let alone two seasons running. We know they bid a lowball when we got relegated, heard nothing about bids since. Where are you getting this?

    An obvious point perhaps, but O'Connell is only a Prem defender because he plays there! He was in our reserves a few years ago and in League 1 with Sheff Utd 3 years ago. Put Lenihan in the Prem for a season and he'd be worth a lot more than £10m I reckon. 

    • Like 1
  3. Just now, dingles staying down 4ever said:

    Its the clubs, like Rovers in the past, with a wage bill of over 95% income where gate receipts will bite. Other clubs, like Rovers now, depend on Advanced Season Ticket sales to spend in the summer.

    Burney were rumoured in the press earlier this year were to be close to administration so it will be hurting the smaller premiership clubs 

    Burnley have reported a profit for the last 3 seasons. That's why I'd imagine Dyche has been moaning about lack of transfer funds. Have you got a link to the admin? I don't remember Burnley being anywhere near administration.  

  4. Just now, dingles staying down 4ever said:

    I agree with you about Prem teams if they have been run well but for a club the size of Burnley, even though they are run well, then player's wages will be eating up potentially there income and any down turn in  gates receipts and sponsorship will hit hard

    I think it's £150m in TV money from Sky and a wage bill of £90m-£100m. I'd imagine Dyche will be demanding some decent funds from the Chairman. Let's hope he's refused and he leaves!

  5. 1 minute ago, JacknOry said:

    I dont think they all would in the current climate, arguably in the previous climate either. Dack pre-injury certainly but even shelling out 10 million on him now comes with a huge risk. Lenihan is certainly not worth 10 million and I think Travis needs another good season like this one to get close to that value. Can only be AA in my opinion.

    It depends who is in for them. If it's all Prem clubs then they would be all worth £10m IMO. The cutbacks won't affect Prem teams as much as other divisions and £10m is still chicken feed to them.

  6. 34 minutes ago, arbitro said:

    I believe the budget thing is a red herring as I think if there is a budget it will be small. Transfer funds will come from outgoing players. I was told that there is a £10m his on the table now for one of our players which I think will be used to fund new signings.

    Dack, Lenihan, AA & Travis must be the only 4 capable of fetching that type of fee.

    I think Dack will be sold before the window closes in October. 

  7. Just now, Gav said:

    You're quite right its the clubs job and they seem to think we're better of with Mowbray, I happen to agree with them simply because I can't find anyone who could replace him and get us promoted, in fact I can see one of two that would probably send us the other way!

    Just because you can't see them doesn't mean they are not out there. But it's good you're agreeing with Venky's, and that they're making the right decisions and not just going for a cheap unemployed manager every time ?

    • Like 1
  8. Just now, Gav said:

    The original point was around sacking Mowbray for someone better, You’re looking for someone who can do more with less, I agree with you, that’s what we need.

    Can you name me someone who can bring that illusive quality to Ewood? Because if you want Mowbray out, you need a replacement. 

    That's the club's job. In the last few years Huddersfield found one. Burnley found one. Sheff Utd found one. Brentford found one.  Norwich found one. etc etc 

    Every manager is a gamble. Rovers need to widen their search away from the mediocrity of Lambert, Bowyer, Appleton, Mowbray etc. 

    • Like 1
  9. Just now, Gav said:

    Here is a link to spending:

    https://www.transfermarkt.co.uk/fc-brentford/transfers/verein/1148

    How many 'better managers' have done more with less in recent times? Once you've answered that and probably given me Warnock and Wilder more recently, I'll give you 10 that haven't.

    The pool of managers around at the moment is probably the worst I can ever remember, either that or money is a much bigger factor than it once was, I think its a bit of both. 

     

    It's not about numbers, it's about finding a manager who can do more with less. You said it wasn't possible. You're now admitting it is. 

    We were on about wages, not transfer spends. And if you dig a bit deeper you'll see they sold players for £36m, so they effectively spent minus £5m.

    • Like 1
  10. Just now, Gav said:

    Brentford have spent £30m this season I read somewhere, they brought a few quid in also, but thats massive by championship standards, Leeds have done the same.

    I bet Mowbray wished he could sell the current squad for 30m and then spend it again!

    You'll always find exceptions to the rule, cherry pick certain clubs, but for every 1 club you provide I'll give you 10 that don't fit the narrative and we are one of them with or without Mowbray.

     

    You seem to be throwing figures out without reference to links. I've backed up my arguments. A better manager does more with less. That narrative is well-established in football and has been for decades. 

    • Like 3
  11. 4 minutes ago, Gav said:

    Disagree. Brentford's wage bill for the same period was £19m, they were a Raya fumble away from the Prem. Ours wage bill was £23m. Of course finance can be a key factor but it isn't everything. When Burnley first got promoted under Dyche they had one of the lowest wage bills in the Championship. 

    https://financialfootballnews.com/brentford-fcs-2019-finances-scouting-profits/

    To be fair I don't think Mowbray has done a bad job. The squad is worth a lot more than when he started and two mid-table Championship finishes are pretty reasonable considering we have a mid-table wage bill.

    My argument is that we need someone in charge who can do more with the available resources. That means getting a better manager. It's up to the club to find one, because IMO Mowbray will never punch above his weight on the resources available to him and get us in the Top 6, let alone promoted.

    • Like 5
  12. 13 minutes ago, Gav said:

    I saw an interview with Dyche yesterday who claimed that Leeds current wage bill with bonuses is double that of burnleys - £60m+, you can guarantee West Brom is massive also.

    Money doesn't automatically buy success as we know, but it helps, especially in todays market. 

    Gives you some idea what Tony and the club are up against.

     

    If Dyche did say that he might want to have a word with his Chairman. 

    Leeds last published wage bill was £46.2m.

    https://www.leeds-live.co.uk/sport/leeds-united/leeds-united-accounts-wage-bill-18066284

    Burnley's last published wage bill was £87m.

    https://www.lancs.live/sport/football/football-news/premier-league-wages-burnley-garlick-18063290

    • Like 4
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.