Jump to content

Jack Butland

Saint Matty 76

By Saint Matty 76,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

CWD

CWD

Posted
Posted
Get your facts right. I never once said a deal for Rodriguez was a long way off, especially not on the day. Feel free to check my timeline.

 

I pride myself in getting things right and would never post anything I did not believe to be correct.

 

Maybe I'm rembering wrongly but I swear you posted something along the lines of "I am lead to believe saints are a lot further away from signing Rodriguez than has been reported". I also remember something similar happening with regards to Billy Sharp I think. I am not for one minute suggesting that you didn't believe this to be correct, or that you were somehow trying to mislead anyone.

 

If my memory has failed me then I will of course owe you an apology.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
saint-crinny

saint-crinny

Posted
Posted
what does that say about butland...not good enough to be number 3 at brum last season...?

 

Or does it mean that they have really high hopes for, preferred for him to be sent out on loan to get some game time rather than sitting on the bench?

 

As it goes, he then did well enough to be considered and picked for the England squad (regardless of whether you think he is third best keeper in the country, which clearly, he isnt).

 

If we signed him, you would hope that it would prove to be an excellent addition, possibly in the short term, but certainly looking further ahead

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted
And our lot want all of this, but moan about ticket prices....

 

http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/showthread.php?38658-memorial-cup

 

All in my opinion of course.

 

I don't know why you don't understand that ticket prices are basically irrelevant at this point.

 

The left column here is revenue in our last Prem season :

 

14%2BSouthampton%2BRevenue%2BGrowth.jpg

 

In addition, West Ham received £40 million for finishing bottom of the Premier League in 2010 compared to Southampton’s £19 million in 2005. Similarly, while Southampton’s relegation was cushioned by £13 million of parachute payments, West Ham will receive £48 million (£16 million in each of the first two years, and £8 million in each of years three and four).

 

This shows the revenues of Wolves, Birmingham and Burnley in the Prem (£60m, £56m and £45m)

26%2BSouthampton%2BPromotion%2BImpact.jpg

 

So even when we were in the Prem last time our income from tv deals was more than it was from Match Day revenue, and since then the tv money has basically doubled, and is now 2/3s of all income, which is overall at a much higher level. Ticket prices in relation to that (as they only a part of the Match Day revenue) are a drop in the ocean.

 

http://swissramble.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/southampton-saints-alive.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted
That swissramble blog is always well rersearched and a good read. Wouldnt't be surprised if the writer ansd Cortese have moved in similar circles in the past.

 

I'm always interested in actual stats about this kind of stuff, amazing how much debate goes on without any actual evidence. (eg £6m for Butland ;) )

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The9

The9

Posted
Posted (edited)

This one for instance is also pretty useful in the "how much money the tv deals are worth" discussion I've grafted onto this thread :

 

17+Reading+PL+Distribution.jpg

 

TV revenue in 2011/12 will be around the same level, but will shoot up next season, as each club in the Premier League receives around £40 million. The distribution methodology is fairly equitable with the top club (Manchester City) receiving around £61 million, while the bottom club (Wolves) gets £39 million. The lion’s share of the money is allocated equally to each club, which means 50% of the domestic rights (£13.8 million in 2011/12) and 100% of the overseas rights (£18.8 million). However, merit payments (25% of domestic rights) are worth £757,000 per place in the league table and facility fees (25% of domestic rights) depend on how many times each club is broadcast live.
Edited by The9
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Kraken

The Kraken

Posted
Posted
i see the echo have "revealed" Nigel Adkins transfer policy in a big article today. Apparantly it's young, british and hungry. I'm glad they are around to tell reveal this sort of information.

 

Ha ha.

 

Though I do sometimes feel a bit sorry for the Echo and the stick they get. They have a substantial readership who don't visit the OS, don't come on message boards, and yet still want to read daily Saints-related news. The football club refuse to deal with the Echo, they don't get any access to interviews, soundbites or leaked news reports, and I think they are still not allowed press access to the ground on a matchday. So they have to fill the back pages every day with information they can glean from the OS, news and gossip gleaned from other club sites and message boards, and opinion pieces from "fans representatives" like SISA and the Saints Trust (where they let themselves down IMO).

 

With that in mind it's kind of natural that they'll too often have to get by with non-stories and space filler, as (for their readership) that is much better than no reporting at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dig Dig

Dig Dig

Posted
Posted
Ha ha.

 

Though I do sometimes feel a bit sorry for the Echo and the stick they get. They have a substantial readership who don't visit the OS, don't come on message boards, and yet still want to read daily Saints-related news. The football club refuse to deal with the Echo, they don't get any access to interviews, soundbites or leaked news reports, and I think they are still not allowed press access to the ground on a matchday. So they have to fill the back pages every day with information they can glean from the OS, news and gossip gleaned from other club sites and message boards, and opinion pieces from "fans representatives" like SISA and the Saints Trust (where they let themselves down IMO).

 

With that in mind it's kind of natural that they'll too often have to get by with non-stories and space filler, as (for their readership) that is much better than no reporting at all.

 

Why can't a substantial proportion of the Echo readership get access to saints news elsewhere?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Kraken

The Kraken

Posted
Posted
Why can't a substantial proportion of the Echo readership get access to saints news elsewhere?

 

Who said they can't? They just don't.

 

The Echo's readership is not the same as SFC's target audience. And there are plenty of Saints fans or supporters who don't read the OS or internet boards every day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Dig Dig

Dig Dig

Posted
Posted
Who said they can't? They just don't.

 

The Echo's readership is not the same as SFC's target audience. And there are plenty of Saints fans or supporters who don't read the OS or internet boards every day.

 

To be fair, on the odd occasion when I see the Echo when visiting the parents, the saints coverage doesn't really look any different to how it used to before the club froze them out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Kraken

The Kraken

Posted
Posted
To be fair, on the odd occasion when I see the Echo when visiting the parents, the saints coverage doesn't really look any different to how it used to before the club froze them out.

I think overall they do a good job considering the restrictions they're under.

 

They have an average daily sales figure of 31,000, with an estimated 80,000 people reading the paper every day. Compared to www.saintsfc.co.uk's unique daily visitor figures of 8,000. So there is a relatively huge market of either Saints fans or general supporters with a passing interest who won't have visited the OS and yet who quite probably want to read about Saints (my mum and dad get the Echo every day, neither actively support Saints yet they'll always have a read through the sports section).

 

While I do find some of their reporting a bit poor I think the overall content is pretty decent; especially for the traget audience. And often find the constant Echo bashing on here a bit embarrassing and needless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
david in sweden

david in sweden

Posted
Posted (edited)

anyway this thread is about Butland - isn't it ?

Every site is copying every other one and reporting our (supposed) £6 million bid.....and that Brum have rejected that offer.

 

However, at this time, BFC have not stated so. Manager Clark has said that only a huge bid of, "silly money" would buy him but neither confirms or denies the (supposed)bid - and of course Saints will not comment on this either (as they certainly want him and have already (supposedly) made a lower bid.

 

This smells of agents PR to me...if there had been a bid of that size, Brum surely hope such a story might drive up the price to other interested clubs (whoever?)

and therefore won't confirm the bid either way, but if no other club else is willing to top the offer they are stuck with whatever "lower bid(s) they have already had...like Saints previously (supposed) £3 million from two weeks ago.

 

I guess we'll have to wait until after the Olympics. If Butland is the star in the GB team and we do well / win the title, he'll command a very high fee...if we find out he's lousy at saving penalties, Brum might have a problem getting the type of (supposed) fee everyone is quoting.

 

With nothing confimed or denied we can rightfully ask .." when is somebody gonna' go on the record with this story ?** "

 

** from Jason Robards' portrayal of newspaper editor Ben Bradlee in " All the Presidents Men" - Oscar winning film from 1976).

Edited by david in sweden
Link to comment
Share on other sites
PhilippineSaint

PhilippineSaint

Posted
Posted
anyway this thread is about Butland - isn't it ?

Every site is copying every other one and reporting our (supposed) £6 million bid.....and that Brum have rejected that offer.

 

However, at this time, BFC have not stated so. Manager Clark has said that only a huge bid of, "silly money" would buy him but neither confirms or denies the (supposed)bid - and of course Saints will not comment on this either (as they certainly want him and have already (supposedly) made a lower bid.

 

This smells of agents PR to me...if there had been a bid of that size, Brum surely hope such a story might drive up the price to other interested clubs (whoever?)

and therefore won't confirm the bid either way, but if no other club else is willing to top the offer they are stuck with whatever "lower bid(s) they have already had...like Saints previously (supposed) £3 million from two weeks ago.

 

I guess we'll have to wait until after the Olympics. If Butland is the star in the GB team and we do well / win the title, he'll command a very high fee...if we find out he's lousy at saving penalties, Brum might have a problem getting the type of (supposed) fee everyone is quoting.

 

With nothing confimed or denied we can rightfully ask .." when is somebody gonna' go on the record with this story ?** "

 

** from Jason Robards' portrayal of newspapaer editor Ben Bradlee in " All the Presidents Men" - Oscar winning film from 1976).

 

He will not be going to the Olympics. Anybody that went to the Euro's regardless of whether they played will not be considered as part of the Olympic team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thedelldays

Thedelldays

Posted
Posted

God, I really hope all this was rubbish.

 

£6m for him who has played 1 game for brum and part of the problem in this country

 

Completely over pricing English players

And what makes it worse, saints fans defending it

 

No wonder we have so many foreigners playing in england. The best left back in the world cost £2m more in regards to a transfer fee

 

Madness, no matter how you slice the figure

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hopkins

Hopkins

Posted
Posted

There is no such thing as value in football. You pay what you can afford and what the selling club can command. It's all subjective.

 

Out of interest who are you considering the best left back in the world?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thedelldays

Thedelldays

Posted
Posted
There is no such thing as value in football. You pay what you can afford and what the selling club can command. It's all subjective.

 

Out of interest who are you considering the best left back in the world?

 

Maybe the best left back in the world is OTT. All just words tht we easily throw around

 

But thy fella alba cost that didn't he?

(not sure actually)

 

Actually. Maybe it was £14m euros

Link to comment
Share on other sites
jasoneuelllfanclub

jasoneuelllfanclub

Posted
Posted

I am thinking if the butland deal is going to happen it will be this week before he joins up with olympic squad on saturday. otherwise he may not be potentially be available for talks until tournament is over for england which could be well into august. Can't see nige waiting that long without having keeper onboard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pilchards

Pilchards

Posted
Posted
It will only take one bad game in the Olympics to destroy Birminghams valuation of the young lad.

So, it's now or never.

We have other options, Birmingham hasn't!!

 

If Brum have a transfer embargo then how do they get a replacement GK in as they sold Foster 2 days ago?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...