Jump to content
Note to existing users - password reset is required Read more... ×

Badger

Members
  • Content Count

    3,570
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Badger last won the day on April 3

Badger had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

194 Excellent

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. It is not "fickle" to change your mind based on evidence. It is the frequency and speed of change which is the determinant. One is fickle if one changes one's mind frequently and with haste. This, of course, begs the question of what is a "reasonable time" to give a manager.
  2. I'm not sure that there were many who thought Neil should stay by the end - including the owners! It doesn't mean that we were wrong to back him when the first signs of trouble started - just as we were right to back Farke, when he had his difficulties and under-achieved in the first year.
  3. See what I mean - gardens have a user's manual! Just like tech!
  4. Gardening always seems pretty complicated to me (I don't do it if possible) - I always get things wrong. How do you tell where to prune something or when is the right time to plant something (I know not midwinter). What plant goes in what soil - what soil I have for goodness sake? Which plants need plenty of water and which must be watered sparingly; which need sun or shade. Is this tree normal or sick - there are a million questions that I don't know the answer to - it all seems very technical to me. And that's before I even start to get to grips with the equipment that I have seen people use...
  5. Landscape gardening is pretty "teccy" to me!
  6. Just as a matter of interest, approximately how much would it cost?
  7.  Badger

    More concessions required

    Why is it interference - if we don't want to accept their terms, we don't have to take them? Plus, why do you think that 17.4 million voters of a country that wants to leave the EU should try to dictate changes to the rules of one or more countries that remain? (i.e. "We're leaving and because we want to do so in a way that is consistent with our international commitments, we want you to change your rules re borders and introduce something that exists nowhere else.") I think we are the bully boys!
  8.  Badger

    Ownership questions

    Taking on debt, which is essentially what you are suggesting, can work in the short term (but is not guaranteed), but tends to be unsuccessful in the long term and often leads to teams spending prolonged periods in the wilderness.
  9.  Badger

    Ownership questions

    The "big" clubs are generally held by investors seeking to make a profit (e.g. Man Utd; Newcastle) or as a "plaything" by those for whom money is no object (e.g. Man City; Chelsea). Investors are seeking to take money out of the club in the form of profit or selling the club for a higher price. The money no object multi-billionaire "plaything model" is possibly more attractive (although I fear it could be highly volatile) but not that easy to find.
  10.  Badger

    Must go

    You don't seem aware of the way you contradict yourself. On the one hand you say that you don't want to spend beyond our means then in the following sentence say that you would like a richer owner/ investors, implying that we should be spending more than we obtain from normal sources. Investor put money into businesses in the hope of taking out more than they have put in. It is what investment is. What you are hoping to find is someone who is willing to just give us tens of millions. Good luck with the search.
  11.  Badger

    Must go

    I doubt that we would have got any of our loanees for £5 to 8 million. I know that this doesn't apply to you but if the OP believes that money spent equates to player value, it is reasonable to assume that our £5 to 8 million purchases wouldn't be as good as our loanees, which makes their purchase even more pointless.
  12.  Badger

    Must go

    1. No, but you don't just buy "decent 5-8 million" players just because you've got the money. 2. Frugality was not the reason - we thought we had enough because we didn't anticipate the spate of injuries that we had. We have 3 specialist central defensive midfield players - how many do you want in a 25 man squad?
  13.  Badger

    Must go

    But would it have made us any better...? ... and how do you know in advance that they won't be "a Naismith?" FWIW, I suspect that we do have the money to spend 10 to 15 million if the right player becomes available - just buying bodies for the sake of it is pointless.
  14.  Badger

    Must go

    You are only allowed to have a squad of 25 players. You expect injuries but don't know where they will come. We have 3 central defenders with medium to long term injuries - are you suggesting that we should have gone into the season with six? We spent heavily on a reserve keeper are you suggesting that we should also have spent big on a 3rd choice keeper as well? It is not just that we have injuries, but the concentration of where we have them. If instead of 3 centre backs, we had 3 strikers injured would you have argued that we should have started the season with 4 or 5 strikers? Apart from the waste of money, packing a squad full of players that you do not expect to play damages the morale and dynamic of the squad. e.g. Having 5 premiership quality centre backs means that in normal circumstances, three are not getting a game and can become frustrated. It also means that you have less choice in other places as well.
×