Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
super dave

Selling Bell = good business sense

Recommended Posts

Even though it seems the majority are a bit annoyed at his sale, in reality it makes good sense.The player wanted to move for personal reasons.Even though I don''t doubt his commitment, it''s better for him and us that he''s moved on.In our position we don''t want players in our ranks that are unhappy, for whatever reason.His sale allows us to pay the remaining money owed to Luton, offer Crofty a good new deal and fund signings for new player/s.Even though I doubt we made much profit on him, it''s still a good deal if you can see the big picture.Hopefully before the deadline passes we''ll have managed to secure the signature of Purse + a striker and have Crofty signed up on a new deal.I don''t believe that would have been able to happen unless we''d have managed to bring in additional funds.Hopefully it''ll all turn out for the best in a few days time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="sadlerman"]Even though it seems the majority are a bit annoyed at his sale, in reality it makes good sense.

The player wanted to move for personal reasons.

Even though I don''t doubt his commitment, it''s better for him and us that he''s moved on.

In our position we don''t want players in our ranks that are unhappy, for whatever reason.

His sale allows us to pay the remaining money owed to Luton, offer Crofty a good new deal and fund signings for new player/s.

Even though I doubt we made much profit on him, it''s still a good deal if you can see the big picture.

Hopefully before the deadline passes we''ll have managed to secure the signature of Purse + a striker and have Crofty signed up on a new deal.

I don''t believe that would have been able to happen unless we''d have managed to bring in additional funds.

Hopefully it''ll all turn out for the best in a few days time.
[/quote]

yeah yeah yeah, good business sense my a**e. keep believing that the club is following good business sense then look at the league table? notice anything?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Barclay_Boy"]

[quote user="sadlerman"]Even though it seems the majority are a bit annoyed at his sale, in reality it makes good sense.

The player wanted to move for personal reasons.

Even though I don''t doubt his commitment, it''s better for him and us that he''s moved on.

In our position we don''t want players in our ranks that are unhappy, for whatever reason.

His sale allows us to pay the remaining money owed to Luton, offer Crofty a good new deal and fund signings for new player/s.

Even though I doubt we made much profit on him, it''s still a good deal if you can see the big picture.

Hopefully before the deadline passes we''ll have managed to secure the signature of Purse + a striker and have Crofty signed up on a new deal.

I don''t believe that would have been able to happen unless we''d have managed to bring in additional funds.

Hopefully it''ll all turn out for the best in a few days time.
[/quote]

yeah yeah yeah, good business sense my a**e. keep believing that the club is following good business sense then look at the league table? notice anything?

[/quote]

 

Bell was sh*te..................good riddance, he was lazy and slow , did not have the ability to take a player on , better off without . I don''t believe that the people who build him up into to being a good player , actually ever go to carrow road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I have to agree, with it as well.

Bell had showed some nice touches on occasions and he never got a chance on his prefered side of the pitch, however he always reminded me of a player who would play on a rain soaked, churned up, muddy pitch and then come off after 90 minutes with his kit still looking like it was just put on. We do no need that type of player at the moment, so if the money goes into a goal scorer or even a centre back, I will be happy.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barnacle_buoy sez:

Bell was sh*te..................good riddance, he was lazy and slow , did not have the ability to take a player on , better off without . I don''t believe that the people who build him up into to being a good player , actually ever go to carrow road.

Yup, and Huckerby was past it.....good job we despatched him....

Oh, and yeah, that blinkered fool of an average Chumpionship manager Chris Coleman (who''s on a tight budget) and who''s team plays in a less than average attended stadium at Coventry) must be a sucker wanting to buy Bell.....That''s unless Coleman can see something in Bell''s game - that we astute and highly observant extremely football knowledgeable and critical eyed armchair fans, obviously can''t......[:|]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The fact is Croft plays in Bell''s favoured position and must be the first name on the team sheet at the moment.  We clearly can afford the luxury of having an understudy the moment.  Surely it makes sense to let Bell go and invest the money in an area of the field where its desperately needed.  If we manage to bring in a good central defender instead of Bell then Gunn has done the right thing.  I guess we wait and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will only prove to be good business sense if the proceeds are used to bring in a commanding and experienced centre back and/or an experienced striker before 5pm on Monday. If not it is nothing more than asset stripping for non football reasons.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is it that in every thread discussing the merits of the sale of Bell there are people who justify it by talking of investing the money in a good centre back and/or striker?There are 48 hours left before the window shuts after that it''s back to loans again and we are tied with the way we can use them.In recent years I have seen no evidence to support the hope that money generated from player sales will be significantly re-invested in the team. In Shackell we sold a reasonably decent defender for a substantial fee, this was in the current financial year, we have sold Bell now and Eventguard and heaven only knows what else.Put all this income together and we still plead poverty and seem unable to enter the transfer market for a last ditch attempt at strengthening our team.And yet still some people don''t see the problem.Shackell + Bell + Eventguard - x = Not enough to buy a defender.What the hell is ''x'' ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With respect, the point I was making is that it can ONLY be justified if the money is reinvested. I don''t actually believe that it will be! Apart from anything else, I object to the sale because I think the lad was a very good player who never got a real chance here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Been to all the homes games this season bar 1 and bell has had onegood game we arefortunate to get our money back we made a mistahe signing him and it will be better invester on alower league centre forward who will bring the best out of our small strikers

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Chunky Norwich"]But that''s yet another contracted player off. How many do we have left? About enough for a starting XI and half a subs bench[/quote]Correct.Call me cynical and I am I freely admit it when it comes to our Club politics these days but I can''t help noticing that Bell had the longest contract at our club.Were we to be relegated this year Bell would be on his contract signed at Championship levels for a further three years. Obviously one would expect some kind of divisional structure to be implemented vis a vis remuneration in this contract but I suggest this is one more piece of evidence to support my theory that we are budgeting for relegation and have been for some 18 months now.I also read on the Cov site that Coleman became aware that bell wanted ''nearer his family'' and moved in on him.The City boss said: "We looked to bring David in during the

summer but he joined Norwich. We knew that he was keen to move nearer

his home in Northampton, so we pursued it and got our chance
I understood there were regulations involved and suggest that if the Club could not enforce those regulations on a recently signed player with 3 years contract left then they didn''t try too hard for whatever reason.Since losing Bell has categorically weakened our squad to some degree in a time of need I suggest it would have been good business sense to enforce the regulations and forbid Coventry from speaking with Bell until the Summer.Try and keep Bell onside with the promise of a favourable move in just a few months time by all means. If his form dropped then sue the backside off Coleman for unsettling him.Since Cov are the geographically closest team at this level to Bells home in Northampton I also suggest that in being outbid by us in the Summer for his services they can not have offered him a particularly tempting package. This may have been because he was injured but IMO although competent he has done little with us for his desirability to have increased sufficiently in the few months we''ve had him for Cov to make him a significantly inflated offer.I also pass observation that a famously skint Luton splashed out £80k on a striker within hours of the Bell deal being announced.I may be thought of as a Conspiracist by some around here but unlike those with a less inquisitive nature at least I base my conspiracies on research and facts!![;)]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Beauseant"]With respect, the point I was making is that it can ONLY be justified if the money is reinvested. I don''t actually believe that it will be! Apart from anything else, I object to the sale because I think the lad was a very good player who never got a real chance here.[/quote]If this is directed at me Beausant then please do not take offence I was actually replying to CanaryRoos 10:31 post. I think it''s quite clear reading your post that like many you only feel it makes sense if the fee is re-invested, you do also make the effort to convey slight doubt that it might not be. And just to further this point I''m not even having a go at CanaryRoo or anyone in particular for expressing the view per se it is just there is overwhelming precedent set recently at this club that ''profits from player trading'' will appear in the accounts rather than on the pitch where I feel we might all be better served.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="CanaryRoo"]The papers are reporting we got $500,000.  That would have to be a profit as he was injured when we got him.  [/quote]500 thousand dollars??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''ve been in Australia too long!I of course meant the queens very own pound sterling.  Not only that, I don''t have a pounds sign on my keyboard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Completely agree Beau. IF the player was unsettled then there''s nothing we can do, but let him go. But will we replace like with like?

Going on the past record of this board, I rather doubt it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="Beauseant"]With respect, the point I was making is that it can ONLY be justified if the money is reinvested. I don''t actually believe that it will be! Apart from anything else, I object to the sale because I think the lad was a very good player who never got a real chance here.[/quote]

Welcome to the dark side Beau [6] [;)].

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Beauseant"]

It will only prove to be good business sense if the proceeds are used to bring in a commanding and experienced centre back and/or an experienced striker before 5pm on Monday. If not it is nothing more than asset stripping for non football reasons.

 

[/quote]fair comment beau...if selling bell allows us to strengthen in key areas then great - this might help us to stay up///if not it might have been more valuable to keep him until the end of the season... 

Share this post


Link to post
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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...