Communication between JP and RL

[John B]

Again, you MISS the point.

 

EVERY PLAYER is for sale.

 

We have NO CHOICE.

 

If we cannot sell the players we want to, we sell the players we HAVE to.

 

I don't like it. You don't like. But it's a commercial reality. Look at Ford. Do you think they wanted to sell Jaguar/Land Rover and Aston?? No. Why did they sell them. To stay afloat!!!

 

This is not a football discussion, this is basic economics.

 

Our only hope is that the management team (including Lowe) can find cheaper players who are as good, if not better than those we are having to sell. It's a fecking tough ask but not impossible.

 

I HATE it. Ask CB Fry, I would blow my last dollar on good players.

 

But there is aboslutely no guarantee that the players we are now being forced to sell would necessarily ensure our Championship status. For a start, all the players we have thus far sold were only good enough to avoid relegation by the inability of Coventry and Leicester to score...

 

There is no problem selling a player if there is a replacement available.

 

We sold Wayne Bridge and Got Graham Le Saux we sold Dean Richards and got Michael Svennson years ago we sold Martin Chivers who was replaced by Micky Channon

 

I think if we sold Andrew Surman next year Joseph Mills would be a good replacement

 

So there is no real problem selling players

[aintforever]

Again, you MISS the point.

 

EVERY PLAYER is for sale.

 

We have NO CHOICE.

 

If we cannot sell the players we want to, we sell the players we HAVE to.

 

I don't like it. You don't like. But it's a commercial reality. Look at Ford. Do you think they wanted to sell Jaguar/Land Rover and Aston?? No. Why did they sell them. To stay afloat!!!

 

This is not a football discussion, this is basic economics.

 

Our only hope is that the management team (including Lowe) can find cheaper players who are as good, if not better than those we are having to sell. It's a fecking tough ask but not impossible.

 

I HATE it. Ask CB Fry, I would blow my last dollar on good players.

 

But there is aboslutely no guarantee that the players we are now being forced to sell would necessarily ensure our Championship status. For a start, all the players we have thus far sold were only good enough to avoid relegation by the inability of Coventry and Leicester to score...

 

We do have a choice, we spunked 1.5mill euros on an untried French kid during the summer without making any major sales. Now if it is the bank manager making descisions on playing staff then we have the first bank manager in history to tell a club on the verge of admin to gamble a ton of cash on a player.

 

Lowe would like us to think he has no choice - it's easier for him that way. The fact is the bank even backed Crouch and his "who cares if we lose money" policy, I'm pretty ****ing sure that he will understand that if we reduce the quality of the team too much we will go down and into admin and he will see even less of his money.

[Legod Second Coming]

There is no problem selling a player if there is a replacement available.

 

We sold Wayne Bridge and Got Graham Le Saux we sold Dean Richards and got Michael Svennson years ago we sold Martin Chivers who was replaced by Micky Channon

 

I think if we sold Andrew Surman next year Joseph Mills would be a good replacement

 

So there is no real problem selling players

 

Alright, so not every deal works out...

[John B]

We do have a choice, we spunked 1.5mill euros on an untried French kid during the summer without making any major sales. Now if it is the bank manager making descisions on playing staff then we have the first bank manager in history to tell a club on the verge of admin to gamble a ton of cash on a player.

 

Lowe would like us to think he has no choice - it's easier for him that way. The fact is the bank even backed Crouch and his "who cares if we lose money" policy, I'm pretty ****ing sure that he will understand that if we reduce the quality of the team too much we will go down and into admin and he will see even less of his money.

 

Are you certain about your facts or are you making assumptions.

 

1 The untried French kid did not cost 1.5m Euros as payments are staged.

 

2 The board and football staff are not stupid Wilde and Lowe are highly intelligent and successful

 

I dont think Lowe is looking for easy options he has told us the facts and is trying to get the club stable whingeing will not change the course of what is happening at St Mary's

[Bon Call Night]

Is there a problem ?

 

We had Saturday's comments about Davies and Sunday's hasty "clarification"

 

Now there seems to be confusion about Surman's wanted-or-not status.

 

Has JP got the full picture, or is situation very fluid and he is not being kept in the loop as well as he should be ?

 

Knowing our chairman as we do, I am somewhat surprised JPs comments to the press are not going over his desk first.

 

Are you a professional sh1t stirrer?

 

I wouldn't be surprised if JP had been concentrating on those selected, the team tactics and the game itself to be concerned with an uncompleted deal.

 

We need to balance the books ASAP once we have done that we can then consider our position and begin rebuilding. Scneiderlin has been the best signing for some years IMO and other than Wotton most of the summer additions have been good.

 

If all you want to do is bait the pro-Lowe's and gee up the anti-Lowe's then I suggest you get to the games and sample some of the football.

 

You never have anything constructive to say - why do you support Saints, you sound as though you need constant success, well you ain't goin to get it with Southampton I suggest you try Chelsea or Man Utd!!

[Redondo Saint]

Obviously that was the plan. Stated by all involved, and understood by anyone with half a brain.

 

However, no-one wants Skacel because he is on far too much of a cushy number here so his current contract is pricing himself out of a move. We. can't. seem. to. shift. him.

 

If someone comes in with £3m for Surman then he'll go. It doesn't mean "selling Surman was in the plan all along and evil evil Rupert didn't tell us" it just means we can't afford to turn down £3m for a player.

 

It's exactly the same as when Leeds said they needed to sell players, and Leeds fans happily predicted that Michael Duberry and Seth Johnson would be flogged off to balance the books. Happy days.

 

But no-one wanted Duberry and Seth Johnson. They wanted Rio Ferdinand and Woodgate and that's who got sold. It's the same priciple here.

 

The fact we want rid doesn't mean other clubs are obliged to pick up our overpaid wasters. (The same overpaid wasters you were slating day in day out last season, only to become your all time favourite ever players once it looks Lowe was going to sell them)

 

 

Once again, this is primary school football business basics that you misunderstand for (no great) effect Alpine.

 

Just more of your usual garbage.

 

 

Well stated.

 

Another non thread that needs to be knocked back.

[Bon Call Night]

We do have a choice, we spunked 1.5mill euros on an untried French kid during the summer without making any major sales. Now if it is the bank manager making descisions on playing staff then we have the first bank manager in history to tell a club on the verge of admin to gamble a ton of cash on a player.

 

Lowe would like us to think he has no choice - it's easier for him that way. The fact is the bank even backed Crouch and his "who cares if we lose money" policy, I'm pretty ****ing sure that he will understand that if we reduce the quality of the team too much we will go down and into admin and he will see even less of his money.

 

And I am pretty sure that had Crouch been in charge players would still have been sold as we would need to be seen to achieving targets agreed with the bank or else they would have shut us down credit wise.

 

But as this fits you argument carry on!!

 

Do the math.... £19m costs - £14m turnover (inc player trading) we have to find £10m from somewhere £5m to replace that loss and £5m to supplement turnover/reduce costs this year. We have trimmed the squad and now need to put some cash in the bank.

 

Once we have balanced the books then we can look to rebuild until them we have to take money where we can and other teams are not going to want our worst players for millions!!!!

[Legod Second Coming]

We do have a choice, we spunked 1.5mill euros on an untried French kid during the summer without making any major sales. Now if it is the bank manager making descisions on playing staff then we have the first bank manager in history to tell a club on the verge of admin to gamble a ton of cash on a player.

 

Lowe would like us to think he has no choice - it's easier for him that way. The fact is the bank even backed Crouch and his "who cares if we lose money" policy, I'm pretty ****ing sure that he will understand that if we reduce the quality of the team too much we will go down and into admin and he will see even less of his money.

 

 

This is cobblers.

 

There is a business plan and the plan will state that we must raise X amount (mainly from players sales).

 

Lowe clearly wants that X million to be raised from sales of Euell, Skacel, etc.

 

However, if no-one wants to buy them, then what??

 

Then the money has to come from someone else being sold. No??

 

All the bank do is review the plan and agree it or not. There probably aren't even names of players in the plan (although there might be). What there will be is:

 

Income

 

Expenditure

 

And it's a case of making both match.

 

Pretty fecking simple I would have thought??

 

So if we need to raise £6m, we need to raise it. Wherever it comes from. And that doesn't stop us buying players under the expenditure column. It just means selling some that we might have preferred to keep.

[aintforever]

And I am pretty sure that had Crouch been in charge players would still have been sold as we would need to be seen to achieving targets agreed with the bank or else they would have shut us down credit wise.

 

But as this fits you argument carry on!!

 

Do the math.... £19m costs - £14m turnover (inc player trading) we have to find £10m from somewhere £5m to replace that loss and £5m to supplement turnover/reduce costs this year. We have trimmed the squad and now need to put some cash in the bank.

 

Once we have balanced the books then we can look to rebuild until them we have to take money where we can and other teams are not going to want our worst players for millions!!!!

 

I never said we didn't have to sell players, we obviously do. But there comes a point where getting rid of too many will be a false economy because relegation will lose us a fortune.

 

There's no point you or I doing our basic maths because neither of us know exactly what the bank's policy is, or what our current costs are. But the fact that the bank let us gamble 1.5mill euros a couple of months ago means that it is not as simple as the bank manager telling us what to do - we obviously have options.

[Verbal Kint]

This is cobblers.

 

There is a business plan and the plan will state that we must raise X amount (mainly from players sales).

 

Lowe clearly wants that X million to be raised from sales of Euell, Skacel, etc.

 

However, if no-one wants to buy them, then what??

 

Then you go to the bank and you negotiate. Something Salz and Crouch were doing at the end of last season.

 

The bank says we have to raise 4 million. You explain to them you have reduced the wage bill significantly (Ostlund, Idiakez, Safri, Wright, Rasiak etc) and that the only current way of raising the money would be to sell the best players and that is not in the long term interests of the bank. Meanwhile we do everything to sell off the dead wood.

 

Salz was able to do it so why can't Lowe?

[Verbal Kint]

I never said we didn't have to sell players, we obviously do. But there comes a point where getting rid of too many will be a false economy because relegation will lose us a fortune.

 

Exactly. And not only because of relegation. People will stop coming to see us play if we sell our best players. In fact, although it is early on and there may have been excuses, the attendance for Brum suggests that a lot of fans have made their mind up.

[John B]

Then you go to the bank and you negotiate. Something Salz and Crouch were doing at the end of last season.

 

The bank says we have to raise 4 million. You explain to them you have reduced the wage bill significantly (Ostlund, Idiakez, Safri, Wright, Rasiak etc) and that the only current way of raising the money would be to sell the best players and that is not in the long term interests of the bank. Meanwhile we do everything to sell off the dead wood.

 

Salz was able to do it so why can't Lowe?

 

This is again conjecture is it not we do not know what is happening at the bank I dont expect Barclays are ringing up everyday

 

We are not selling off our players Davies wanted to go as far as I understand

[aintforever]

This is cobblers.

 

There is a business plan and the plan will state that we must raise X amount (mainly from players sales).

 

Lowe clearly wants that X million to be raised from sales of Euell, Skacel, etc.

 

However, if no-one wants to buy them, then what??

 

Then the money has to come from someone else being sold. No??

 

All the bank do is review the plan and agree it or not. There probably aren't even names of players in the plan (although there might be). What there will be is:

 

Income

 

Expenditure

 

And it's a case of making both match.

 

Pretty fecking simple I would have thought??

 

So if we need to raise £6m, we need to raise it. Wherever it comes from. And that doesn't stop us buying players under the expenditure column. It just means selling some that we might have preferred to keep.

 

So in your simplistic world if we need to raise £6mill the bank will make us do it no matter what, even if that means selling every single player and the SFC backroom staff have to take to the field for the season? rubbish

 

The whole future of the club relys upon the quality of the first team, if we get relegated we will go into admin and the bank will lose more money, even Barclays will understand that.

[Gis]

He's the anti-Burley, if you will.

 

Thanks Adriansfc.

 

I know that I will always have trouble remembering how to pronounce, let alone spell "Jan Poortvliet" - the anti-Burley sums him up so well.

[OldNick]

indeed...no matter what alpine puts...valid point or not, he will get stick...and for what? being right about burley before most woke up to his ineptness???

How can use an opinion as fact? It is a case that you both believe that GB was no good , but it is not the fact and if you stood back and saw it from a neutrals point you would perhaps think that the manager went from CCC to International management and so was a success.

So do not make such sweeping statements as fact, as that is what upsets people.

[Thedelldays]

How can use an opinion as fact? It is a case that you both believe that GB was no good , but it is not the fact and if you stood back and saw it from a neutrals point you would perhaps think that the manager went from CCC to International management and so was a success.

So do not make such sweeping statements as fact, as that is what upsets people.

do you see GB as a success at saints..?

 

 

yes or no answer will do

[Verbal Kint]

This is again conjecture is it not we do not know what is happening at the bank I dont expect Barclays are ringing up everyday

 

We are not selling off our players Davies wanted to go as far as I understand

 

I think it's really naive to think there was no way we could have persuaded him to stay here rather than leave for stoke bloody city.

[Verbal Kint]

So in your simplistic world if we need to raise £6mill the bank will make us do it no matter what, even if that means selling every single player and the SFC backroom staff have to take to the field for the season? rubbish

 

The whole future of the club relys upon the quality of the first team, if we get relegated we will go into admin and the bank will lose more money, even Barclays will understand that.

 

You are getting the point across much better than me i think aintforever!! I couldn't agree more.

[Legod Second Coming]

Then you go to the bank and you negotiate. Something Salz and Crouch were doing at the end of last season.

 

The bank says we have to raise 4 million. You explain to them you have reduced the wage bill significantly (Ostlund, Idiakez, Safri, Wright, Rasiak etc) and that the only current way of raising the money would be to sell the best players and that is not in the long term interests of the bank. Meanwhile we do everything to sell off the dead wood.

 

Salz was able to do it so why can't Lowe?

 

 

Lowe did go to the bank and they agreed to extend our borrowing.

 

Which will have been on the agreement that we make every conceivable effort to balance the books.

 

But the pure economics will dictate that you have to raise the money from somewhere.

 

You talk as though we can sell dead-wood for mahogany money??

 

When Lowe returned he said we would have to make some tough decisions to stem the flow of losses. Now they're being made.

 

The bank are supportive but not to the extent that they will want to see losses increase - and that's exactly what happens if you cannot trim the wage bill.

 

People say "how can you bring in Schneiderlin who cost £1m?". How? Becauase his cost to the club is probably considerably less than Andrew Davies, for example. Players fees are only a fraction of what they cost us. The bigger cost is their wages!!! And no doubt Morgan is on much, much less than players we have sold.

 

Lowe is simply acting as any Chairman would. Deliver the best possible team for the minimum cost. In our case, that means selling the high-wage earners, the most valuable assets and replacing them with players who it is believed can do an equal job for less cost.

 

Where in this is the logic missing for people??

 

And why are they so keen to, say, hang onto Surman when he delivered a relegation battle? Or Skacel? Or Rasiak??

 

I personally rate Surman highly but the man at Barclays (if he even cares) has precious little evidence to guide him that we have a team of winners who should be spared at all costs does he??????

[OldNick]

do you see GB as a success at saints..?

 

 

yes or no answer will do

Its impossible to rationally give an answer to that in one word. Yes would be my answer in the main as my answer would not be no as I tske into account circumstances. NP would be the same in my book while

 

G&g would be a definate No, of course some fans didnt wish to listen when they were told it would be them if GB was sent packing. 'Anyone but Burley' FFS

[Legod Second Coming]

So in your simplistic world if we need to raise £6mill the bank will make us do it no matter what, even if that means selling every single player and the SFC backroom staff have to take to the field for the season? rubbish

 

The whole future of the club relys upon the quality of the first team, if we get relegated we will go into admin and the bank will lose more money, even Barclays will understand that.

 

Err, yes. If we need to repay £6m and can't then we have to renegotatiate with them or go into administration. Pretty simple equation.

 

But why do you bang on that we're losing our best players and that the decisions taken thus far have somehow deprived us of a Championship winning side??

 

Barclays clearly understand how our business operates and will want to give us every opportunity to operate as effectively as possible. That doesn't extend to them wanting or needing to care about the quality of the first team IF the business is telling them that it can operate effectively and meet its repayment terms, and that the quality of the first team will be sufficient to achieve this.

[Verbal Kint]

Lowe did go to the bank and they agreed to extend our borrowing.

 

Which will have been on the agreement that we make every conceivable effort to balance the books.

 

But the pure economics will dictate that you have to raise the money from somewhere.

 

You talk as though we can sell dead-wood for mahogany money??

 

When Lowe returned he said we would have to make some tough decisions to stem the flow of losses. Now they're being made.

 

The bank are supportive but not to the extent that they will want to see losses increase - and that's exactly what happens if you cannot trim the wage bill.

 

People say "how can you bring in Schneiderlin who cost £1m?". How? Becauase his cost to the club is probably considerably less than Andrew Davies, for example. Players fees are only a fraction of what they cost us. The bigger cost is their wages!!! And no doubt Morgan is on much, much less than players we have sold.

 

We have lost Wright, Licka, Ostlund, Idiakez, Rasiak, Powell, Claus, Makin, Saganowski, Safri and Viafara from the wage bill. We got a fee for Safri as well. I know we won't get a lot of money for the likes of Skacel and Euell but we should have been able to get a decent fee for Rasiak who to outsiders is a consistent scorer in this division.

 

How many more players do we have to lose from the wage bill? We got rid of 11 the higher earners!!!

 

I'm sorry, but having got rid of that many i refuse to believe we weren't in a position to negotiate with the bank. Especially as any replacements we brought in will be on much much less money.

[Thedelldays]

Its impossible to rationally give an answer to that in one word. Yes would be my answer in the main as my answer would not be no as I tske into account circumstances. NP would be the same in my book while

 

G&g would be a definate No, of course some fans didnt wish to listen when they were told it would be them if GB was sent packing. 'Anyone but Burley' FFS

 

 

burley a success...in what part..lol

[Legod Second Coming]

We have lost Wright, Licka, Ostlund, Idiakez, Rasiak, Powell, Claus, Makin, Saganowski, Safri and Viafara from the wage bill. We got a fee for Safri as well. I know we won't get a lot of money for the likes of Skacel and Euell but we should have been able to get a decent fee for Rasiak who to outsiders is a consistent scorer in this division.

 

How many more players do we have to lose from the wage bill? We got rid of 11 the higher earners!!!

 

I'm sorry, but having got rid of that many i refuse to believe we weren't in a position to negotiate with the bank. Especially as any replacements we brought in will be on much much less money.

 

 

Do you have any concept how much we were losing????

You've named those who contributed to probably half the overspend.

Now what??

[aintforever]

Err, yes. If we need to repay £6m and can't then we have to renegotatiate with them or go into administration. Pretty simple equation.

 

But why do you bang on that we're losing our best players and that the decisions taken thus far have somehow deprived us of a Championship winning side??

 

Barclays clearly understand how our business operates and will want to give us every opportunity to operate as effectively as possible. That doesn't extend to them wanting or needing to care about the quality of the first team IF the business is telling them that it can operate effectively and meet its repayment terms, and that the quality of the first team will be sufficient to achieve this.

 

I think the crux of the issue is what the standard of team is that Lowe believes we need to be able to operate effectively. Lowe may be good with numbers but when it comes to judging how well equiped we are to compete in the Championship we might as well have Father Christmas in charge.

[Thedelldays]

I think the crux of the issue is what the standard of team is that Lowe believes we need to be able to operate effectively. Lowe may be good with numbers but when it comes to judging how well equiped we are to compete in the Championship we might as well have Father Christmas in charge.

well, lowe was not in charge in the last two years which has contributed heavily to where we are.....and guess what..they did not stop the rot

[alpine_saint]

Its impossible to rationally give an answer to that in one word. Yes would be my answer in the main as my answer would not be no as I tske into account circumstances. NP would be the same in my book while

 

G&g would be a definate No, of course some fans didnt wish to listen when they were told it would be them if GB was sent packing. 'Anyone but Burley' FFS

 

Wow, I'm gobsmacked. What circumstances was that, then ? Wilde gave him too much money to spend ?

[Stalypig]

How many players are fielded at a time? 11 on the pitch. 5 on the bench. It is a team game!

 

How will selling 1 player result in inevitable relegation? Any player could get injured, lose form or end up in the dock at any time. It is not adequately replacing players that is the problem.

 

We still have 27 players listed as first teamers on the OS. Jan wants 24 maximum to ensure healthy competition and suitable depth. That means some players will need to go in order to get the squad balance right whilst others will need to be sold in order to bring in funds. Such is life.

 

If Davis, Thomas, Skacel, Euell, Wright-Phillips, John or Surman go then so be it. The wage bill will be dramatically reduced as a result, the books balanced and a little money for transfers brought in. As long as we are able to bring in players with the hunger, desire and potential to fill the gap then we'll be alright.

 

It is a delicate balancing act and unfortunately the club is not entirely in control of its own destiny but is reliant on others, be it the bank or other teams buying or selling players. It's not great but what viable alternative is there? The best must be made of a bad situation.

 

Grin and bear it.

[Legod Second Coming]

I think the crux of the issue is what the standard of team is that Lowe believes we need to be able to operate effectively. Lowe may be good with numbers but when it comes to judging how well equiped we are to compete in the Championship we might as well have Father Christmas in charge.

 

I agree he has a plan to use more youth and puts no stock in simple high-wage earners as the basis for success.

 

But can you blame him??

 

What part of last season convinced you we had a decent squad??

 

So far in two games I have seen more consistent and better football than we played all last year!!

[Legod Second Coming]

How many players are fielded at a time? 11 on the pitch. 5 on the bench. It is a team game!

 

How will selling 1 player result in inevitable relegation? Any player could get injured, lose form or end up in the dock at any time. It is not adequately replacing players that is the problem.

 

We still have 27 players listed as first teamers on the OS. Jan wants 24 maximum to ensure healthy competition and suitable depth. That means some players will need to go in order to get the squad balance right whilst others will need to be sold in order to bring in funds. Such is life.

 

If Davis, Thomas, Skacel, Euell, Wright-Phillips, John or Surman go then so be it. The wage bill will be dramatically reduced as a result, the books balanced and a little money for transfers brought in. As long as we are able to bring in players with the hunger, desire and potential to fill the gap then we'll be alright.

 

It is a delicate balancing act and unfortunately the club is not entirely in control of its own destiny but is reliant on others, be it the bank or other teams buying or selling players. It's not great but what viable alternative is there? The best must be made of a bad situation.

 

Grin and bear it.

 

Hallelujah!

[Verbal Kint]

Do you have any concept how much we were losing????

You've named those who contributed to probably half the overspend.

Now what??

 

I'm fully aware of how much we were losing. And i also know it's not a problem that can be solved simply by selling off every player we get an offer for

[Thedelldays]

I'm fully aware of how much we were losing. And i also know it's not a problem that can be solved simply by selling off every player we get an offer for

are you?

 

are you a director at SFC or something as you clearly seem to be an expert!!

[Stalypig]

Let's cunningly sell Jackson's Farm, Staplewood and St. Mary's off for far less than they are worth. We can then rent the stadium back at an exhorbitant rate safe in the knowldege that at least the first team will be alright and our financial wellbeing secured for the next few years. Bargain.

[OldNick]

burley a success...in what part..lol

Well you may think he was poor but people away from our club, people who looked in from outside of the panic and hysteria assessed that he did in fact do an ok job and so offer him an International post.That is a fact (International post)

They saw what was going on and that everytime it looked as though we had a team the players were sold. This is always morale sapping and even WGS had enough of it when he was here.

You may have your opinion but it is not fact.

ps I think we have done GB to death so how about just accepting we both have differing views and leave it there, the same as GB has.

[alpine_saint]

Well you may think he was poor but people away from our club, people who looked in from outside of the panic and hysteria assessed that he did in fact do an ok job and so offer him an International post.That is a fact (International post)

 

I beg to differ.

 

He got the job because he was the only non-controversial Sweatie in football management with any experience that hadnt already done it.

 

I'll say one thing for the Scots - at least they have a correct sense of national pride and insist on having a fellow Scot running their team, unlike a country not a million miles from here............

[Redondo Saint]

I think it's really naive to think there was no way we could have persuaded him to stay here rather than leave for stoke bloody city.

 

You are the naive one!

 

Stoke 'bloody' City are in the Premiership.

They will probably be 1 of 6 clubs in the running to be relegated at the end of the season.

If they get relegated they will be 1 of 3 clubs favourites to be promoted.

If they get relegated they will have 3 yrs of parachute payments.

Meanwhile, he will earn more money and play Manchester United, Arsenal and Liverpool.

 

Or/

 

SFC are in the CCC

Mid table would be a success this season

Still a chance of administration

If we get relegated we are flucked.

Meanwhile he will earn less money (and few win bonuses) and play Doncaster Rovers, Barnsley and Blackpool.

 

 

 

Let's take a vote shall we!!!

[benjii]

Well you may think he was poor but people away from our club, people who looked in from outside of the panic and hysteria assessed that he did in fact do an ok job and so offer him an International post.That is a fact (International post)

They saw what was going on and that everytime it looked as though we had a team the players were sold. This is always morale sapping and even WGS had enough of it when he was here.

You may have your opinion but it is not fact.

ps I think we have done GB to death so how about just accepting we both have differing views and leave it there, the same as GB has.

 

To be fair Steve McLaren got offered an International post (International post) and is clearly an inept behemoth of a **** (****).

[alpine_saint]

to be fair steve mclaren got offered an international post (international post) and is clearly an inept behemoth of a **** (****).

 

lol !

[Redondo Saint]

I beg to differ.

 

He got the job because he was the only non-controversial Sweatie in football management with any experience that hadnt already done it.

 

I'll say one thing for the Scots - at least they have a correct sense of national pride and insist on having a fellow Scot running their team, unlike a country not a million miles from here............

 

 

What, Germany, Czech Rep, Italy, Slovenia, Slovakia and Hungary?

[OldNick]

Wow, I'm gobsmacked. What circumstances was that, then ? Wilde gave him too much money to spend ?

Unfortunately you do not at times have the mental capacity to see. Go to the squad list to when he arrived and then strip it of over 20 players who wrre failing or on high wages and so had to be got rid of.This was part of GB's remit when RL employed him. Lowe could see we needed to trim the costs but of course you went on a long campaign of getting rid of the financial sense and went big time for the obvious nonsense of the Wilde bunch.

Now after you strip a squad of 20 + players, that leaves holes and so GB had to replace some positions.Now some of those purchases were of players who you whine about not playing now, ironic eh.

Add to his success under those transistional teams of getting us to the playoffs and turning players forgotten in the reserves or said to be no good into multi million pound sales.

I didnt panic when the team had been dismotivated by losing 3 of the star players and was heading for mid table. Only when G&D were appointed as you were warned did we plummet.

So overall he was a success, you may also add the fact in the last week you have been proclaiming how sad it is selling players 1 was bought by GB the other brought into the team by him.

[OldNick]

To be fair Steve McLaren got offered an International post (International post) and is clearly an inept behemoth of a **** (****).

That is fair comment.

[OldNick]

I beg to differ.

 

He got the job because he was the only non-controversial Sweatie in football management with any experience that hadnt already done it.

 

I'll say one thing for the Scots - at least they have a correct sense of national pride and insist on having a fellow Scot running their team, unlike a country not a million miles from here............

but how can he be uncontroversial as you keep telling us he was a drunk. What about McLeish, Irvine, Davis, and there are others

[benjii]

That is fair comment.

 

lol - thanks.

[alpine_saint]

but how can he be uncontroversial as you keep telling us he was a drunk. What about McLeish, Irvine, Davis, and there are others

 

Maybe drunkeness amongst people north of the border is uncontroversial

[OldNick]

Maybe drunkeness amongst people north of the border is uncontroversial

ahhhh I see

[Verbal Kint]

You are the naive one!

 

Stoke 'bloody' City are in the Premiership.

They will probably be 1 of 6 clubs in the running to be relegated at the end of the season.

If they get relegated they will be 1 of 3 clubs favourites to be promoted.

If they get relegated they will have 3 yrs of parachute payments.

Meanwhile, he will earn more money and play Manchester United, Arsenal and Liverpool.

 

Or/

 

SFC are in the CCC

Mid table would be a success this season

Still a chance of administration

If we get relegated we are flucked.

Meanwhile he will earn less money (and few win bonuses) and play Doncaster Rovers, Barnsley and Blackpool.

 

 

 

Let's take a vote shall we!!!

 

Or maybe you tell him he is earning good money as it is, he has the chance to join a side who are going to, in all likelihood, be relegated this year and that considering he only joined the club 8 months ago would he not be able to stay at least until next summer and evaluate his position then, when after a season of excellent form much better teams than stoke city will have him on their wish lists?

 

Put it this way. I would have made every effort to kepp Andrew Davies at this football club. I firmly believe Rupert Lowe did not feel the same way. That is what is wrong. Selling one of our best players without appearing to make any effort to keep him has and will **** fans off. If fans see a team whose best players are being sold off one by one they WILL vote with their feet.

[John B]

I think it's really naive to think there was no way we could have persuaded him to stay here rather than leave for stoke bloody city.

 

I think it's really naive to think there was a way we could have persuaded him to stay here rather than leave for stoke city who are in the Premiership and would be able to pay more,

 

I dont think his agent would be telling him to stay

Edited 22 August, 2008 by John B

[Stalypig]

Or maybe you tell him he is earning good money as it is, he has the chance to join a side who are going to, in all likelihood, be relegated this year and that considering he only joined the club 8 months ago would he not be able to stay at least until next summer and evaluate his position then, when after a season of excellent form much better teams than stoke city will have him on their wish lists?

 

Put it this way. I would have made every effort to kepp Andrew Davies at this football club. I firmly believe Rupert Lowe did not feel the same way. That is what is wrong. Selling one of our best players without appearing to make any effort to keep him has and will **** fans off. If fans see a team whose best players are being sold off one by one they WILL vote with their feet.

 

Right. And yet you know that this did/didn't happen?

 

I'm going to be really mature and waste my last post of the day with the immortal word...

 

BORING!

[Verbal Kint]

Let's put it another way. What sort of message does it send to these youngsters breaking through when they see a player who captained the team last year and was voted player of the season. A laughable offer comes in for him. Not only is the offer accepted, but the senior management then explain to him that his wages are too high so it is in everybody's best interests he leave?

[John B]

Let's put it another way. What sort of message does it send to these youngsters breaking through when they see a player who captained the team last year and was voted player of the season. A laughable offer comes in for him. Not only is the offer accepted, but the senior management then explain to him that his wages are too high so it is in everybody's best interests he leave?

 

 

I think they would be pleased .

 

 

It was not a laughable offer we paid £1m for him and he played 12 games

 

 

Jack Cork may be better