I remember some saying that we should have sold to Padfield and Co who hasnt been seen or heard of since in Football. Maybe we dodged a fatal bullet on that one? A lot of things are said and dragged up to be ridiculed again at a later date.
Quote from: "Mazrim"I remember some saying that we should have sold to Padfield and Co who hasnt been seen or heard of since in Football. Maybe we dodged a fatal bullet on that one? A lot of things are said and dragged up to be ridiculed again at a later date.I can remember people saying we should talk to them. I don't think anybody suggested selling to them.
Too right I'm cantankerous, I'm fed up to the back teeth.If someone had suggested that our 4th season would see us finishing above Liverpool, reaching the FA Cup semi-final and the League Cup final, they woudnt have been believed.
Quote from: "Villadawg"Too right I'm cantankerous, I'm fed up to the back teeth.If someone had suggested that our 4th season would see us finishing above Liverpool, reaching the FA Cup semi-final and the League Cup final, they wouldn't have been believed. People like to portray it as a symptom of liverpool being unusually poor last season but 64 points and good cup runs was exactly what was needed to catch up with the traditional Sky4. If you'd told me that after four years, we'd still be playing central defenders at right back, and would have Emile Heskey on £60K a week, I wouldn't have believed you either.
Too right I'm cantankerous, I'm fed up to the back teeth.If someone had suggested that our 4th season would see us finishing above Liverpool, reaching the FA Cup semi-final and the League Cup final, they wouldn't have been believed. People like to portray it as a symptom of liverpool being unusually poor last season but 64 points and good cup runs was exactly what was needed to catch up with the traditional Sky4.
I don't think that Ellis did talk to Padfield actually. And as far as I recall, Disco Stu was one of the posters who was most vehemently opposed to padfield.
I don't think we should get too hung up on what Heskey gets paid, although I'm sure some will, but more be concerned of the issue it represents, which is our overall wage bill. Most would agree we had a good summer in 2010, with players being bought in that improved us, which of course means that we'd be paying more in wages than we did in 08/09. However, in terms of revenue that didn't translate to a higher league position or increased attendances, plus the cup runs don't generate massive income. So we can debate if we made progrss on the field as much as we like, but off it we did not pump up the turnover too much.So, we're paying more and getting about the same in, so percentage wise it takes a hit and that needs to be addressed. Which is what I think we're seeing this summer.
A lot of it stems from the Moscow thing and especially the alleged arrogance showed by MON in his speech at the 'lets make up' dinner afterwards when I gather he effectively dismissed anyone elses opinion on how to run our club.
Good point. If wages were to stay at their present level over the next 12-months, then we'd experience an improvement in the ratio as turnover increases by at least the new sponsorship deal.Maybe that's the plan - not let the wages increase any higher than they are now?
Quote from: "John M"Good point. If wages were to stay at their present level over the next 12-months, then we'd experience an improvement in the ratio as turnover increases by at least the new sponsorship deal.Maybe that's the plan - not let the wages increase any higher than they are now?I think the plan is to get rid of players that we don't use or need and replace them with players we do. I think it's really that simple.
Does anyone really think those people DCF is talking about have formed that opinion after one pre season friendly?I'm imagining not.