Or because shouting for a 5 year contract would be silly after a successful 3 months?
Talk of the budget didn't come up until posters started taking a snapshot of part of the season rather than a season as a whole and start calling for the managers head. Funny that the same posters weren't calling for him to be given a five year contract during a more favourable snapshot of the season. It was almost like they were waiting for him to fall on his sword so they could enjoy calling for him to go. Which is of course all too easy and ignoring the bigger picture. Budgets then came up as part of this bigger picture.
One small point. I've not personally put a position on where I believe we fall in the budget table. All I've said is why take SW at gospel given the history of smoke and mirrors from the top. Announcement in 2 weeks, new year. We're talking to multiple local authorities, the environment agency etc. and doing impact studies, TF estimates on crowds at Sixfields, required average gate for this season. I really could go on and on at what has turned out to be pure inaccuracy to bullshit to completely fudging figures and getting estimates wrong on an alarming scales. That seems to have been enough to upset Grendull and send him on the warpath putting words into my mouth, asking leading questions instead of just making the point etc.
SW said we have a playing wage budget of £2m, yes I would expect that to be correct. He then went on to say that we BELIEVE that puts us in the top quartile using the FL redacted report. It's the latter I'm saying is ambiguous and open to interpretation. To start of the top quartile is not the same as saying the top quarter (someone gave an explanation of that earlier) if it's top quarter i.e. sixth or above why not just say top quarter not quartile? Also the report is redacted so with the best will in the world the placing of us exactly in that table is going to require some estimating, I've already pointed out the history of estimating. Also the figures as far as anyone can tell is based on the SCMP calculation and there are ways and means of getting around that. Or are we to believe that Bury can afford the wages of the likes of Clarke based on the SCMP calculation?
I'm taking the suggestion that we have a top six budget with a cynical pinch of salt, that's all. And given the history of those at the top of our club who could blame me? I don't know where we actually fall in that table and neither does any of those taking sixth place as gospel because SW said so.
Or because shouting for a 5 year contract would be silly after a successful 3 months?
Ive never called for the managers head, nor until today discussed the budget, it just hasnt been relevant.
In my opinion, Mowbray seems to have had a fairly decent budget. I think he could have done better, but am not sure whether that was play offs or not.
I dont agree with chopping and changing managers every year, as it just causes internal chaos, has no stability and costs the club money which could be spent on players. I hope he can achieve more next year, and think if he doesnt he will go by choice or by the clubs decision. I would like to think he will succeed, but he cant make the same mistakes again.
Correct. As is calling for his head on a snapshot of a season.
Yeah would agree this, TM did worry me a bit with his tinkering, but I'm sure he will beThere is a difference between calling for his head and pointing things out.
The same happened with Thorn and Pressley, to start off they could do no wrong, hands tied etc. Blame budgets etc.
I don't see the logic in changing him come October or December so a new manager has to work with Mowbray signings. He has 1 year left, may as well give him that (unless we are looking at relegation)
If only we knew what Waggot said
What point are people actually trying to prove now?
What point are people actually trying to prove now?
I am not too sure, it starts as reasoning for the drop in form. If we lose a game it is down to budget and investment.
For me it's one of the key things to judge a manager by.
Once he has had a couple of transfer Windiws to assemble his own squad. If he isn't finishing where the budget should have you finish he is under performing.
If he is finishing above that position he is over achieving.
If our player budget is the as Waggot said, for me next year if TM doesn't get 8th-6th questions will need to be asked.
For me it's one of the key things to judge a manager by.
Once he has had a couple of transfer Windiws to assemble his own squad. If he isn't finishing where the budget should have you finish he is under performing.
If he is finishing above that position he is over achieving.
If our player budget is the as Waggot said, for me next year if TM doesn't get 8th-6th questions will need to be asked.
He has had 2 windows.
You would think the best managers would be the ones who can manager their budgets best and get the best out of what they have.
The bad ones would just moan they haven't got unlimited money when they lose to teams who have much lower budgets.
The trolling continues it's great - keep going.
I was just impressed we got 15 pages out of something no one knows the exact truth about. Still we can argue well over supposition
Can some who goes to the SCG ask the question please?
We know the answer to that. Wasps stopped doing it, Bovril isn't part of rugby tradition....Is the question why is there no Bovril anymore?
We know the answer to that. Wasps stopped doing it, Bovril isn't part of rugby tradition....
But I'm all seriousness, the SCG is tomorrow, when better to ask the question about how competitive our wage bill was/is this year.
Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk
Will it be reduced as a result of the miscalculation over the 11k and 14k ?
For a hedge fund/large companies this is basic stuff,does anyone really believe they mis-calculatedI'd be interested to know what caused such a large miscalculation.
For a hedge fund/large companies this is basic stuff,does anyone really believe they mis-calculated
I'd be interested to know what caused such a large miscalculation.
I know it seems a bit crazy to be nearly 30 % out.
It's nothing to do with a hedge fund but the person doing a calculation.
The probability is we over spent and actually went over budget and had to sell to avoid an embargo which is funny as 8th to 6th probably ended up 5th to 3rd
And we will finish 12th to 11th
I think we went over budget as well. (Obviously just a guess) leading to the Maddison sale.
I just hope his sale leads to a top 4 player budget this season.
For a hedge fund/large companies this is basic stuff,does anyone really believe they mis-calculated
I'd be interested to know what caused such a large miscalculation.
Given that around the same time this came to light Waggott and Brookfield both got the push it seems plausible but I'd like to hear what they say.
Why? We had it by default this season and still achieved nothing.
It has been said on here we got 1mil up front in the Madders deal, so surely another 1 to 2 mil is payable when he goes to Norwich in the summer, also the compo we are due for Sambo going from all of which 60% should go to playing budget, add that to projected ST sales and match day ticket sales I would be very surprised if we DIDNT have a higher playing budget next season IMO.Why? We had it by default this season and still achieved nothing.
It has been said on here we got 1mil up front in the Madders deal, so surely another 1 to 2 mil is payable when he goes to Norwich in the summer, also the compo we are due for Sambo going from all of which 60% should go to playing budget, add that to projected ST sales and match day ticket sales I would be very surprised if we DIDNT have a higher playing budget next season IMO.
Sent from my Versus TouchPad 9 using Tapatalk
So the person who only deals in facts, is in fact happy to deal in guesswork and suppositionWhy? We had it by default this season and still achieved nothing.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?