Interesting Comments By DF

[nutty nigel 7,513]

I think if it was left in the context it was said would be a better idea.

[Hillhead 114]

Those Hoover comments are rather novel but I like them. 

Reminds me of Leicester in the 14/15 season where after 29 games they had picked up 19 points and were 7 points adrift of 17th after their 4-3 loss to spurs. 

whilst what happened over the next 14 months or so was one of the craziest things ever to happen in football it should at least give some hope to those out there who have already written off our season. A couple of wins and it will all look so different.

[JF 694]

3 hours ago, Midlands Yellow said:

We haven’t got any money to spend on new players . Forget the 100 M from Sky because it’s staggered payments . 

As are transfer fees and wages. 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

2 hours ago, king canary said:

The model is fine but any model still needs money to make it turn. We're really not that different to how Southampton used to operate- buy low, sell high and sprinkle in some products from the youth team. Yet they realised you can't buy quite as low as we have tried. Some shrewd signings in the £10-15m area can turn into £40-50m when sold on. You're highly unlikely to turn a £1m player into a £20-25m at this level though.

Exactly king canary and I used the example of Celtic who signed Van Djik and Wanyama before selling them on to Southampton. Who then sold them on to the big boys. 

Even if we can't spend £12m(ish) on a Celtic player like Southampton in that period, you'd hope that we could spend £3m/£4m on a player we could later sell to a Leicester or Everton. 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

54 minutes ago, Indy said:

So in fairness to Farke and the fans this type of admission from Farke needs to be put to bed as it just riles the fans, looks like Farke having a slight dig at his limitations imposed on him.

It starts to stink a little just as we are coming up to the next transfer window is Farke protecting himself from the poor form by blaming the limited tools supplied by the club or is he trying to apply pressure by saying this knowing the fans will react to the limited spending?

Option 3, he's evoking a fan reaction to try and get Webber to open the purse strings because he's fed up. 

[canarydan23 4,060]

15 minutes ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

Exactly king canary and I used the example of Celtic who signed Van Djik and Wanyama before selling them on to Southampton. Who then sold them on to the big boys. 

Even if we can't spend £12m(ish) on a Celtic player like Southampton in that period, you'd hope that we could spend £3m/£4m on a player we could later sell to a Leicester or Everton. 

Oliver Ntcham would be worth a punt. 

[Thirsty Lizard 3,155]

2 hours ago, Kenny Foggo said:

It is definitely the model they as owners want and as long as a large majority of our fans are happy with this then there will be no pressure to relinquish control. It will be interesting if people are so accepting when Tom Smith takes control and whether he has different ideas. 

Must say it's really depressing when we listen to our manager stating that we can not spend £10 /£15m given the guaranteed money from being in the top flight and how he finds that a real burden to achievinf safety in this league. The likes of Burnely / Bournemouth seem to find a way without jeopardising the future of the club. 

But this was probably to be expected given previous experiences

You do you know that Bournemouth have got a massively wealthy Russian sugar daddy and that they had to pay a £7.6 million fine for breaching financial fair play rules? 

 

[Making Plans 936]

51 minutes ago, Hillhead said:

Those Hoover comments are rather novel but I like them. 

 

 

If we had Dyson's instead of Hoovers we wouldn't need to knock on as many doors

 

[hogesar 9,618]

2 hours ago, Duncan Edwards said:

We’re hilarious really. When we’re winning there’s an apparent togetherness, unity and pride that we did it against the odds; didn’t go down the tried and tested “bullocks to FFP, let’s spend it anyway and if we get promoted it doesn’t matter”. Yet for all the joy and happiness at winning the title, for some it was through gritted teeth. On the one hand their team had won the league, on the other it AGAIN demonstrated some sort of justification for Smith and her cost-neutral approach. How many more times can she possibly get lucky?

 

Here we are, looking decidedly ropey having again chosen to live within our means and the clenched teeth are now gnashing again. No ambition, no plan B, no money, where’s it all gone? 
 

Becchio Syndrome is also back in full flight with anyone not playing an obvious and immediate upgrade on somebody that is; what does Patrick Roberts have to do to get a game instead of that moany little git Buendia? 
 

Can’t be long until the Times article is dragged up and the “clubs not for sale” brigade reunite for a comeback tour. Perhaps they could support Westlife? 
 

They’ve got plenty of money. 

POTD

[Mello Yello 2,281]

Hope we beat Watford.....Gnash Gnash Gnash......

[keelansgrandad 6,679]

If we had Dyson's instead of Hoovers we wouldn't need to knock on as many doors

I've got a Shark🦈

[Jobsworth Canary 168]

Farke has done a good job of turning average championship players into very good championship players

the issue is ownership not coaching, I feel sorry for him, only when the ownership issue is addressed will we succeed in the championship 

I just hope Farke doesn’t get disillusioned by the lack of ambition 

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

DF knew what he was taking on,  he's just reminding  everyone where we are at, that's all. It's  all been explained  ad nauseam by SW over  the last couple of years.  An old footh friend from Norfolk  said to me when we won the championship last season...." cant we keep the money and stay where  we are, the Clubs stabilised and we need to build a bit before we take on the moneybags in the premier  league.  "   we can't  unfortunately.  So we must go through this season , possibly  a year or two before we were prepared for it

[Mason 47 1,373]

I think the club are fire fighting and trying to remind everyone exactly where we are; no matter how calm and collected we could be as a fanbase, nobody likes losing every week.

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

36 minutes ago, Mason 47 said:

I think the club are fire fighting and trying to remind everyone exactly where we are; no matter how calm and collected we could be as a fanbase, nobody likes losing every week.

Agree 100% . Losing  is shoite.  I believe that  the plan is to consolidate from our precarious position  a few years  back  and build from there. Hence my comment  about it all ( promotion) coming a bit soon, despite the fun we all had last season. 

[Indy 3,286]

1 minute ago, wcorkcanary said:

Agree 100% . Losing  is shoite.  I believe that  the plan is to consolidate from our precarious position  a few years  back  and build from there. Hence my comment  about it all ( promotion) coming a bit soon, despite the fun we all had last season. 

This will only work if we go down and keep Aarons, Lewis, Cantwell, Buendía and Godfrey, if they depart for a few million we then go back to square one!

The whole point of a sustainable club is to build on young players and gems like Pukki, lose these after gaining 150 million in our first season back down and we could find ourselves there for another three years or more.

[nutty nigel 7,513]

It's not long ago, probably 18 months, we were being told after we sold Lewis there'd be no one of any value left...

[Indy 3,286]

8 minutes ago, nutty nigel said:

It's not long ago, probably 18 months, we were being told after we sold Lewis there'd be no one of any value left...

We’ve got a few more coming through for next season too Nutty, looking very promising.

If we did go down, I’d be happier losing a few of the Germans who haven’t really stepped up so far and build on the youngsters who will no doubt gain loads or experience and be better for it.

Futures bright if we can convince them to stay long term and not jump ship, never works for a lot of our ex youngsters to jump clubs.

Edited November 4, 2019 by Indy

[Fuzzar 1,702]

Unfortunately, the ones we want to keep will be the ones others want to buy. 

[Indy 3,286]

7 minutes ago, Fuzzar said:

Unfortunately, the ones we want to keep will be the ones others want to buy. 

But we don’t have sell! So it’ll be interesting to see just how the club projects the following season to sell it to any payers being courted by other clubs.

If they sell out then as I’ve said it could be a long road back again.

[king canary 7,580]

Just now, Indy said:

But we don’t have sell! So it’ll be interesting to see just how the club projects the following season to sell it to any payers being courted by other clubs.

If they sell out then as I’ve said it could be a long road back again.

'We don't have to sell' is very dependent on what is in those players contracts. I'd imagine a few of the new contracts players signed will contain release clauses if we get relegated.

[Samwam27 519]

Its interesting we're debt free, we don't have to sell, and we're in the promised land.

And yet our top purchase was £750k! Who says we have to pay £10-15m, when Webber's task is to find those gems we can polish.

He's found a few duffs, but on the whole he's found good quality. But surely we can afford a few players at £3-5m that are improvements on what we've got?

If not surely our scouting system is failing. And where is all the money going if we're debt free  

[Duncan Edwards 2,223]

2 minutes ago, Samwam27 said:

Its interesting we're debt free, we don't have to sell, and we're in the promised land.

And yet our top purchase was £750k! Who says we have to pay £10-15m, when Webber's task is to find those gems we can polish.

He's found a few duffs, but on the whole he's found good quality. But surely we can afford a few players at £3-5m that are improvements on what we've got?

If not surely our scouting system is failing. And where is all the money going if we're debt free  

Hambag

[Samwam27 519]

Just saying. But I think we've got one of the best scouting teams we've had in a long time.

As has been said in another thread, none of our summer signings has broken into the first team, which is concerning

[Nuff Said 5,092]

25 minutes ago, Samwam27 said:

Just saying. But I think we've got one of the best scouting teams we've had in a long time.

As has been said in another thread, none of our summer signings has broken into the first team, which is concerning

You mean apart from Amadou,  with Byram a close contender to play? 

[wcorkcanary 4,329]

1 hour ago, Indy said:

This will only work if we go down and keep Aarons, Lewis, Cantwell, Buendía and Godfrey, if they depart for a few million we then go back to square one!

The whole point of a sustainable club is to build on young players and gems like Pukki, lose these after gaining 150 million in our first season back down and we could find ourselves there for another three years or more.

True Indyo, but I'm not convinced that will.neccesarily be the case, one or two maybe but not all.

[JF 694]

11 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

You mean apart from Amadou,  with Byram a close contender to play? 

Being a close contender isn’t breaking into the first team is it. 

[Nuff Said 5,092]

3 minutes ago, JF said:

Being a close contender isn’t breaking into the first team is it. 

No, but if you read what I wrote I think I made the point that the statement "none of our summer signings has broken into the first team" is wrong.

 

On top of Amadou clearly now being a first team regular, I tried to make the point that Byram has impressed and if it wasn't for Max, I don't think there are many on here who would oppose him being picked regularly. Indeed one or two posters have suggested he should be picked ahead of Aarons. It's not breaking into the first team, agreed, but equally it shows that we are not suddenly scouting duds, which I think was Samwam's implication.