Jump to content

Describe this window in just 5 words

Fitzhugh Fella

By Fitzhugh Fella,
in The Saints

 Share

Recommended Posts

Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
A lot of people seem to be using the phrase 'push on' on here. I'm not sure what you all mean by it, 6th and in Europe is pretty much as good as it'll get for us.

 

then why do the players, staff and manager (although, not this one yet) go on about going for the champions league?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bartosz Bialkowski

Bartosz Bialkowski

Posted
Posted
A lot of people seem to be using the phrase 'push on' on here. I'm not sure what you all mean by it, 6th and in Europe is pretty much as good as it'll get for us.

 

I think we were a couple of shrewd signings away from being genuine top 4 contenders.

 

I don't think it would have been unreasonable with our Europa League obligations to add two new quality faces, fulfill the managers ambitions and actually put some weight behind the long standing CL aspirations.

 

If then you fall short and finish 6th, so what? You're suddenly an established force.

 

We've settled for being a mid table club at best, when we genuinely could have been more.

 

Its a shame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nta786

nta786

Posted
Posted (edited)
then why do the players, staff and manager (although, not this one yet) go on about going for the champions league?

 

Actually have a look at Puels first interview. I'm certain he mentioned it is Saints aspiration to make the Champions League.

 

http://mobile.saintsfc.co.uk/news/article/2016-17/20160630-claude-puel-new-southampton-manager-interview-3162313.aspx

Edited by nta786
Found a link.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Saint IQ

Saint IQ

Posted
Posted
Spent wisely, not like some.

 

This is correct

 

Probably the worst window to get heavily involved in, (so many players going for way way over their actual value) maybe January will be more of a gold mine (probably not) and hopefully, due to no manager upheaval we can get more business done and wrapped up early next summer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Badger

Badger

Posted
Posted
Gone backwards; missed opportunity again

 

Again? When was the other time?

 

I have absolutely no problem with this window. The only thing that might need to change is the formation, to get the best out of our players

 

2003 springs to mind.

 

2003 which caused strachan to leave huge missed chance to push on after the FA Cup final in Cardiff

 

2003 in 5 words:

 

Sold Bridgey, downward spiral began

 

Now that was a meltdown.

 

Glad to see others concur

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Greenridge

Greenridge

Posted
Posted
Strachan had just received his payoff from Coventry which enabled him to take the time off to have the hip operation that he needed. Or so I read somewhere.

 

He needed that payout to afford time off?! :lol:

 

Strangely though he didn't have the operation to several months later I seem to recall.

 

Maybe you're getting confused with ol' 'Arry and his excuse for leaving Rangers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Whitey Grandad

Whitey Grandad

Posted
Posted
He needed that payout to afford time off?! :lol:

 

Strangely though he didn't have the operation to several months later I seem to recall.

 

Maybe you're getting confused with ol' 'Arry and his excuse for leaving Rangers.

 

I am only repeating something that I read in the press at the time. After resigning from us he had a 16 month break so that would fit in with your recollections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bit of a plonker

Bit of a plonker

Posted
Posted

Another long time lurker, first time poster.

 

The thing with these net spend charts, could mean a couple of things. Either we have the least ambition, which I do not believe, or we get top prices when we sell our players, closer to reality, although I would have thought we could have got more seeing the price for some other transfers (Joe Allen for instance, young midfielder entering final year of contract, sound familiar). Also, where would you like to be in there? Everyone is way behind the top 4, Tottenham leapt up there by paying a ridiculous sum for a player who was crap in the league but had a couple of good games in the Euro's, and West Ham did their usual spend on anything with a pulse appproach (£20m for Andre Ayew?). Sunderland have a net spend of £20m nearly and they have had a really poor window with now 1 fit striker for 3 months, which was still nearly enough to beat us, but lets not go there!

 

I am disappointed overall, think we did miss a chance to consolidate as far as possible on a 6 - 8 place finish, given rigours of Europa league, but these tables do not tell anything of any real note.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted (edited)
So what...

 

Its clearly total coincidence that the regular CL / top six teams - Man City, Man U, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs all spent massively.

 

I dont mind us spending within our means and being mostly mid table. What irritates me is the kind of deception by the club who regularly trot out the CL ambitions guff whilst spending the lowest of all 20 teams for two years running. Whats worse though is the arrogance and delusion of the fans who lap it up - attacking anybody who points out the Emperor has no clothes. News Flash! Saints havent discovered a new way to run a football club and dont have a monopoly on good scouts / good academy. You cant buck the trend year on year.

Edited by buctootim
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted
Its clearly total coincidence that the regular CL / top six teams - Man City, Man U, Chelsea, Arsenal and Spurs all spent massively.

 

I dont mind us spending within our means and being mostly mid table. What irritates me is the kind of deception by the club who regularly trot out the CL ambitions guff whilst spending the lowest of all 20 teams for two years running. Whats worse though is the arrogance and delusion of the fans who lap it up - attacking anybody who points out the Emperor has no clothes. News Flash! Saints havent discovered a new way to run a football club and dont have a monopoly on good scouts / good academy. You cant buck the trend year on year.

 

but but but we gave out new contracts and broke our transfer record

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Millbrook Saint

Millbrook Saint

Posted
Posted

The thing is part of running a football club is to excite fans, it's all well and good being clever by only replacing what we lose, but surely the club need to do something to excite fans, there's only so much fans will take of seeing players leave and replaced by potential. What if the potential doesn't work out? Personally I'm excited by our recruitment but feel we should have added a striker and defender, imagine the excitement around the club if we'd signed a proven striker, remember the buzz Osvaldo brought, ok it didn't work out, but I couldn't wait to see him play. This is the excitement the club need to generate for the fans, I feel the club are so set in their way of 'breeding success' that they forget that part of their job is to excite their customer base.

 

Record season tickets this season, will it be the same next year with fans knowing what will most likely happen.... can't see it myself, it's all well and good saying who needs these 'plastics', 'bed wetters' etc but these fans are the ones we need to entice back each season if we're ever going to become a bigger club. Most Saints fans are reasonable enough to know that players come and go, we're happy to spend within our means, we know we can't compete with the top teams but for ****s sake they need to give us something to get excited about.

 

The lowest net spend in the league is frankly embarrassing, can't see there being much of a buzz around the ground with people excited that our net spend was less than everyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted

having a siginificant minus net spend for the last 2-3 summers is not done by accident.

it has to be a set out policy.

 

if that is to pay for a new stand on the ground, so be it.

but the club have openly said that new stands are out of the question.

 

why is it? Anyone ITK want to add anything? Guan and Kbilly have fell off a cliff here

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sour Mash

Sour Mash

Posted
Posted
So you have to spend more than others to compete...ok...

 

Transfer budgets are irrelevant surely, its who you buy that counts not how much you spend..

 

So perhaps we should over pay for who we buy and sell cheaper than we do just so we can have a positive spend...... right

The more you spend, the probability is, you'll get better and/or more players; would you agree with that principle?

 

Do you think our transfer incomings (both quality and quantity) are as good as they could possibly be?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sour Mash

Sour Mash

Posted
Posted
having a siginificant minus net spend for the last 2-3 summers is not done by accident.

it has to be a set out policy.

 

if that is to pay for a new stand on the ground, so be it.

but the club have openly said that new stands are out of the question.

 

why is it? Anyone ITK want to add anything? Guan and Kbilly have fell off a cliff here

I've asked the question previously and think it must be covering something, definitely part of a strategy/plan. Be that paying back debt/equity, a larger infrastructure project, or a future FFP work around?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted
So you have to spend more than others to compete...ok...

 

Transfer budgets are irrelevant surely, its who you buy that counts not how much you spend..

 

So perhaps we should over pay for who we buy and sell cheaper than we do just so we can have a positive spend...... right

 

Oddly enough other clubs also have scouts who identify good young players and CEOs who drive hard bargains. Like it or not there is a relationship between what you spend and the quality of what you get. Thats why the top spenders are also consistently the top clubs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted
having a siginificant minus net spend for the last 2-3 summers is not done by accident.

it has to be a set out policy.

 

if that is to pay for a new stand on the ground, so be it.

but the club have openly said that new stands are out of the question.

 

why is it? Anyone ITK want to add anything? Guan and Kbilly have fell off a cliff here

 

I've asked the question previously and think it must be covering something, definitely part of a strategy/plan. Be that paying back debt/equity, a larger infrastructure project, or a future FFP work around?

 

Agree with this. Why not just be open and say "we're paying down debt / planning for a new ground / paying off contracts etc but we will be nett spenders again next year" (or whenever). Most fans appreciate the truth and are alienated by CL crap that is totally detached from reality and the club's actions.

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...