saintjay77

'every week Rupert Lowe insisted he included more youngsters' not 'every week Rupert Lowe insisted he played all youngsters' Difference between then and now is then we were in a position to bring the youth into the team at our discretion. Something that back then we as fans were also asking to be done. Now we are doing it at the banks discretion and its not looking pretty as we dont have the right experience throughout the team to cope with it.

It was almost excellent, there were a few spelling mistakes

I did respond to this post originally i think or maybe in-directly but I did try to give some idea on the way i interperated it. Monday morning meeting could well have been about the team that harry had selected at the weekend and lowe could well have asked harry to bring through some of the youth. If lowe had speant 10 mill on a striker then im pretty sure he would be putting pressure on what ever manager to get him on the pitch. with 10 mil speant on the acadamy its no surprise that the chairman wants to see the fruits of that spend being brought into the 1st team otherwise these youngens are going to seek to further there carreers elsewhere. IMO its no different at any club but because we are talking about kids with possible potential and not house hold names with a big price tag it is deemed that Lowe is doing something out of the ordenary. I still havent gone through the posts to find who was stating a load of balls and i wasnt trying to accuse you. TBF its not really important. what i think many fans need to get over is there hate for the man at the top as they can sometimes look pretty silly when raging about stuff he has done when it is no different than what any other chairman would also do. There are plenty of things to get arsed off with lowe for that is just and deserved and reading your posts you are one of the few that understand this. sooner we see light at the end of the tunnel the better for all of us me thinks.

tell you what this place is a much better place to come and talk saints when the debate is more reasonable. we can all have a laugh at the extreme every now and then but we are all saints fans and supporting saints is what comes first to all of us. will probably desend into the asylm again tomorrow so for now its been a pleasure.

im fairly sure that on the other thread there were plenty suggesting that lowe was/is picking the team and also i believe people wer going on about how the echo now know about it and cant wait for the story. as it turns out the report that everyone is going nuts about has nothing of the "quotes" that yourself and others say were said. The more people go on about the non quotes like they are facts the more it all looks abit silly IMO. I agree that the chairman should keep to his side of the business as if he wanted to manage then he may as well save some cash and get rid of the manager. but giving guidlines to the manager that the team needs to be based around the youth we have comeing through as opposed to the highearners we cant afford is not really picking the team is it? if we speant 30 to 40 million on a player would the manager be under any pressure to make sure he was played? or would the chairman sit back and watch his new investment collect his wages without getting on the pitch because the manager wants to play a different system?

well he bought himself out of his last contract and I think the cost has been said before although i cant remember how much it was. Considering the jump up from the division he was in to the CCC I would guess he is on more now? unless its similar but performance related bonuses based on where we finish?

maybe the roling contract would have worked out to be £160,000 and the full contract he wanted was £360,000? no idea so just guessing but we all know how each camp choose what facts and figures to spout off to suit there own needs so maybe both camps are correct in there own way.

LOL i have just been reading the comments on that page and its quite comical. They started off having a tiz waz about lowe picking the team, then backtracked on how it was just interference, then blamed the echo for editing the transcript and being in bed with lowe then someone even suggested the mp3 had been edited to suit too. Im sorry but if they are prepared to go on record to say it was the full interview then i cant help but believe them. it does go on to make a few people look silly though and maybe why this thread and the other one have gone a bit quite.

I can see both sides which is why i mentioned the crystal ball before. had we known that the extra spend would get us no-where other than right on the door step of administration then we would have been allot more stringent with the money and been in a better position to keep the best of the experience mixed with the best of the youth now. Might be nearer play off spots by doing so. but had we not spent when we had the chance to do so the fans would have been just as unhappy.

I think Up and away was talking about blending the youth into a team that still had plenty of experience a few years back when bagpuss and basset were laughing at how the kids were not good enough. change in chairmen and so on since has watched us do not allot with the youth untill we are where we are today not being able to afford that prescious experience. so which bubble are you in now?

it is never known if a decision is too late until it really is too late. we are sticking the youth in now and too many of them but that seems to be more down to the bank that choice. crystal ball or tardis and im sure the youth would have been forced into the squad back then by who ever was in charge. its just easy now to blame lowe for all that is wrong with the club cause they guy is who is is.

this of course is very possible but its also just as possible for him to walk away now and watch us go into admin and end up in teh very same place and no better off in the same amount of time. I am still in the camp of wanting to see us try and get out of it no matter who is in charge.

I didnt know that but it woudnt surprise me and if JP and Wotte cost as much as pearson surly thats 2 for the price of 1 so cost has at least got something to do with it?

this has been a problem for years but allot of it comes down to the ammount of managers we went through. they all brought people in but not many shiped players out and we ended up with an over inflated squad. most of that is down to Lowe going through managers so much but it didnt change all that much when the others stepped in for there small stints at the top. its impossible for us to work out the maths but if we cant afford to keep the likes of john and rasiak yet we bring in all those loanee's and kids then the wages or bonus must be massivly different. it doesnt exactly add up to me but i cant see any other way round it.

Sorry bud I stand corrected. I was basing my assumptions on seeing him while he was with us. Admitedly he was the one who gave lallana a chance so maybe my view on him is unjust. He does seem to be more of an old fasioned manager and he got better performances out of our players in a few games than they did in a whole season so yet again I say I would have liked to have seen him get the chance. I suppose i am playing devils advocate and trying to provide possible reasons as to why he is not with us. If your were a chairman/boss of a footy club and knew the banks were going to twist your arm into reducing costs all over the place do you go against them and go for the more expensive all round option or replace with cheap alternatives and hope the kids are good enough to keep you up?

problem with that is Oakley is probably on more of a wedge than we would pay likwise howard. that blend of experience would be there with pearson in charge IF he was alloud to get the players he wanted in. My argument is based on the players he would want would cost more than we are willing or able to pay. How much would Pearson be on compared to JP? How much would Pearson want to spend compared to JP? We could argue that the money pearson would want is justified as we sit hovering above the relegation spots but financial restrictions seem to be there more on the banks choice than ours. OK Lowe wants the youth to be used but even he must see that total youth does not win games which IMO is why we have seen Skacel return but otherwise the cheap option is always used above the perfered. If the finacial side wasnt a problem then we could all come up with dream situations going from the possible to the fantasy but all else is guess work and opinions.

I was assuming based on my opinion. I think with a pre season and being able to bring in the players he wanted then he would do very well for us. I would have been happy for him to be given a chance at least. but its obvious that some players have been shown the door due to finances as no manager in there right mind would let some of the best CCC strikers go if they had the option to keep them. Even when Stern was still here he was hardly getting a game and was forced out by a kid that has proved nothing. So I very much doubt Pearson would have been allowed to bring in anyone of note and it would all been with kids who are cheaper. some of the players we have brought in have done pretty well and others we havent seen yet. full back positions is a big mistake and i dont understand the thinking behind settling with what we have. No recognised Right back and freezing out skacel cost us in points and confidence and should have been addressed by now. Saying that it wasnt addressed when Burly was here either so I am not having a dig at anyone in particular.

Do we look even remotly like Chelsea or Arsenal?? lol

Pah!!! but we know nothing

I think we were playing passing football and wooton was playing hoofball. all change when he went off and we played much better. i dont mind him being in the squad to help guide the kids but passing responcibilitys should have been passed to Surman right from the start.

you were saying? lol

Sorry mate im not trying to accuse you of anything. Just trying to point out some peoples view points change the facts so much to suit there own ideas its quite funny. I dont take too much notice of what i read in the press and some of that is as fabricated as things are in here. But bassets comments were fom his own mouth and on a live radio station. Somehow they got turned into what is written on the other thread which turns out to be a load of balls that made everyone jump up and down for 24 hours. The transcript has been printed and although we shouldnt read much of what is in the press I tend to believe the transcript is what was actually said and none of it supports what is believed to have been said.

Think that happens on both side of the Lowe fanatics

Think your right on the luck of who we have played. The only addition to that I think is the games we have played we have put out a different team. Certain players in certain positions make this system to be not bad and proves we can get results or decent performances from it. But when key players are injured jan hasnt chosen the right replacements and we look complete arse. Bristol was a prime example as Wooton was given the role Morgan plays so well and he hoofed it all over the place which lost us the fast passing rythem we are trying to create. Wooton goes off and Surman takes that role and all of a sudden we can pressure there defence. As with many previous years it is not our 1st choice squad that are letting us down, its the long list of injurys we seem to suffer and not good enough replacements to cover. IMO it is purly luck that we have had a stronger team more often on our travels than when at home.

I have no idea what the actual reasons for it were but the financial reasons were probably the ones used to make it look like it wasnt lowe throwing his toys out of the pram. But if Lowe (and the bank) want the club to go down the route of using the kids as opposed to expensive experienced players then Lowe needs a manager that is prepared to follow this system. the chance was there to blood more of them a few years ago when we had much better experience to help them along and it was mnot taken fully due to the manager at the time not believing in it. Pearson IMO is the type of manager that believes in older work horse type players rather than nifty skillful kids so there looks to be a clash of interests before anyone gets going. It took pearson a while to get a couple of wins, how well do you think he would do with the current crop of players?