collapse collapse

Please donate to help towards the costs of keeping this site going. Thank You.

Recent Topics

Kits 25/26 by London Villan
[Today at 04:44:16 PM]


Summer 2025 Transfer Window - hopes, speculation, rumours etc. by Dante Lavelli
[Today at 04:41:30 PM]


FFP by DB
[Today at 04:35:47 PM]


International Rugby by UK Redsox
[Today at 04:27:48 PM]


The International Cricket Thread by Mellin
[Today at 04:14:10 PM]


Pre season 2025 by ChicagoLion
[Today at 03:54:07 PM]


Yasin Ozcan (now out on loan at Anderlecht) by Somniloquism
[Today at 01:41:10 PM]


Other Games 2025-26 by VILLA MOLE
[Today at 11:18:27 AM]

Follow us on...

Author Topic: Champions League Contention  (Read 340571 times)

Online Clampy

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 30209
  • Location: warley
  • GM : PCM
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #855 on: February 13, 2024, 08:50:57 PM »
Newcastle couldn't even afford to take Kalvin Philips on loan.

Online dave.woodhall

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 63303
  • Location: Treading water in a sea of retarded sexuality and bad poetry.
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #856 on: February 13, 2024, 09:11:04 PM »
Think we must be close to FFP limit hence why we didnt spend. But if evertons points deduction gets reversed it will be a bit of a mockery.

Personally think we should look at re naming a stand for money. The Ellis one would get my vote

I was no big supporter of Ellis in fact I think he held the club back over time
but I wouldn’t change the name of that stand now it would seem a bit petty and somewhat disrespectful



It's what he would have wanted.

Offline Percy McCarthy

  • Member
  • Posts: 35580
  • Location: I'm hiding in my hole
    • King City Online
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #857 on: February 13, 2024, 11:11:53 PM »
Penny pinching is bollocks when you've got Chelsea needing to sell £100m by 30th June, with their other shady financials to come home to roost, Forest to be docked points, Everton docked points and be docked them again. Man City to be punished back to the 19th century. This is football in 2024.

I’m sure I just read somewhere that Chelsea can spend £200m this summer before any sales.

Online Beard82

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 4787
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Suffolk
  • GM : 07.12.2025
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #858 on: February 13, 2024, 11:23:18 PM »
Penny pinching is bollocks when you've got Chelsea needing to sell £100m by 30th June, with their other shady financials to come home to roost, Forest to be docked points, Everton docked points and be docked them again. Man City to be punished back to the 19th century. This is football in 2024.

I’m sure I just read somewhere that Chelsea can spend £200m this summer before any sales.
If thats a case it shows the law is an arse

Offline Smithy

  • Member
  • Posts: 7190
  • Location: Windsor, Royal Berkshire, la de da
  • GM : 12.12.2024
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #859 on: February 14, 2024, 12:15:11 AM »
Penny pinching is bollocks when you've got Chelsea needing to sell £100m by 30th June, with their other shady financials to come home to roost, Forest to be docked points, Everton docked points and be docked them again. Man City to be punished back to the 19th century. This is football in 2024.

I’m sure I just read somewhere that Chelsea can spend £200m this summer before any sales.

Chelsea might have some money to spend, but only because they have a huge commercial operation. I'd be amazed if it was £200m, but given how their spending in the last 18 months has all been on crazy long contracts (before the loophole was closed), I suspect their FFP position isn't that precarious. It's just their transfer business is going to start at about -£80m every year for the next 7 or 8 years.  If they're making enough money to absorb that, lucky them.

Offline RamboandBruno

  • Member
  • Posts: 4114
  • Location: Birmingham about 4 miles from Villa Park
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #860 on: February 14, 2024, 08:09:39 AM »
Think we must be close to FFP limit hence why we didnt spend. But if evertons points deduction gets reversed it will be a bit of a mockery.

Personally think we should look at re naming a stand for money. The Ellis one would get my vote

I was no big supporter of Ellis in fact I think he held the club back over time
but I wouldn’t change the name of that stand now it would seem a bit petty and somewhat disrespectful



It's what he would have wanted.
Always and always will be the Witton Lane to me. Not that I sit there mind.

Offline algy

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6086
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Gogledd Cymru
  • GM : 26.03.2025
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #861 on: February 14, 2024, 08:19:47 AM »
Think we must be close to FFP limit hence why we didnt spend. But if evertons points deduction gets reversed it will be a bit of a mockery.

Personally think we should look at re naming a stand for money. The Ellis one would get my vote

I was no big supporter of Ellis in fact I think he held the club back over time
but I wouldn’t change the name of that stand now it would seem a bit petty and somewhat disrespectful



It's what he would have wanted.
Always and always will be the Witton Lane to me. Not that I sit there mind.
Me too. I've yet to refer to it as anything other than the Witton Lane Stand.

However, I do tend to agree with John E here. Unless it transpires that Herbert was a war criminal or something, now that the stand's named after him it wouldn't feel right to me to remove it.

Offline Ads

  • Member
  • Posts: 42816
  • Location: The Breeze
  • GM : 17.04.2024
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #862 on: February 14, 2024, 08:39:14 AM »
Penny pinching is bollocks when you've got Chelsea needing to sell £100m by 30th June, with their other shady financials to come home to roost, Forest to be docked points, Everton docked points and be docked them again. Man City to be punished back to the 19th century. This is football in 2024.

I’m sure I just read somewhere that Chelsea can spend £200m this summer before any sales.

Chelsea might have some money to spend, but only because they have a huge commercial operation. I'd be amazed if it was £200m, but given how their spending in the last 18 months has all been on crazy long contracts (before the loophole was closed), I suspect their FFP position isn't that precarious. It's just their transfer business is going to start at about -£80m every year for the next 7 or 8 years.  If they're making enough money to absorb that, lucky them.

They lost £121.3m in their last set of accounts and are desperately trying to flog home grown players.

Offline Rigadon

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 8946
  • GM : 13.06.26
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #863 on: February 14, 2024, 09:06:11 AM »
If this FFP stuff is going to be the new norm, they absolutely need to nail Man City and Chelsea who’ve both taken the absolute piss.

Offline chrisw1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10073
  • GM : 21.08.2025
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #864 on: February 14, 2024, 09:45:41 AM »
We are close to playing our second string; no choice with so many first team players sidelined.

To be fair once Pau is back we have two first teamers out (Ezri and Kamara), not counting Ty and Emi B as they haven’t been involved all season. The team is still strong.

That’s not really fair because we are also missing M E B and Big Tyrone, to say that they aren’t first team is a bit weird? These are all injuries that have impacted our season. If Mings has been fit we probably wouldn’t have had the other injuries in our back line as work loads would have been less.

My point was more that it’s a stretch to say we’re close to second string in the context of this season. We got to 2nd in the league with no involvement from Ty and Emi B, so in the context of our performance this season we’re missing two first teamers (assuming Pau is actually back). Doesn’t diminish the value Ty or Emi B would make, but they just haven’t been a factor.
Also, we signed Lenglet to replace Tyrone.  Nowhere near as influential, but in terms of squad numbers it's something that isn't being taken into account in some of this discussion.

Offline chrisw1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10073
  • GM : 21.08.2025
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #865 on: February 14, 2024, 09:48:06 AM »
On the other hand, we've had two transfer windows to do something about the strength of the squad.

Only Aston Villa could be in perhaps our strongest position ever at the start of January for qualifying for the champions league and focus more on penny pinching.

Some will see that as unfair and talk about a longer term strategy of recruitment and that good players aren’t usually available so you’d have to overpay. Some will say that if we overspend in January we have to make up for it in the summer.

But at some point, it is about going for it and making it happen with signings. If we don’t qualify for the champions league this season we’ll have to sell anyway. We’re seemingly focused on making excuses for what we have done rather than what we haven’t. Chelsea, Man Utd and Newcastle will all be stronger next season.
Abiding with FFP is hardly penny pinching.  We can debate the wisdom of some decions (Philogene vs Zaniolo, Rogers etc) but I'm not sure penny pinching is a fair analysis.

Offline chrisw1

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10073
  • GM : 21.08.2025
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #866 on: February 14, 2024, 09:50:26 AM »
Think we must be close to FFP limit hence why we didnt spend. But if evertons points deduction gets reversed it will be a bit of a mockery.

Personally think we should look at re naming a stand for money. The Ellis one would get my vote

I was no big supporter of Ellis in fact I think he held the club back over time
but I wouldn’t change the name of that stand now it would seem a bit petty and somewhat disrespectful

I'd rename it without money.  For some sort of sponsorship I'd be biting hands off.

Offline dicedlam

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 3415
  • GM : 04.12.2025
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #867 on: February 14, 2024, 10:41:31 AM »
Think we must be close to FFP limit hence why we didnt spend. But if evertons points deduction gets reversed it will be a bit of a mockery.

Personally think we should look at re naming a stand for money. The Ellis one would get my vote

I was no big supporter of Ellis in fact I think he held the club back over time
but I wouldn’t change the name of that stand now it would seem a bit petty and somewhat disrespectful



It's what he would have wanted.

I can't remember correctly but was the naming of the stand put to a vote? If it was, I can only think it must of been the board members only.

Offline AV82EC

  • Member
  • Posts: 12283
  • Location: Macclesfield
  • GM : 22.02.2024
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #868 on: February 14, 2024, 10:42:11 AM »
Think we must be close to FFP limit hence why we didnt spend. But if evertons points deduction gets reversed it will be a bit of a mockery.

Personally think we should look at re naming a stand for money. The Ellis one would get my vote

I was no big supporter of Ellis in fact I think he held the club back over time
but I wouldn’t change the name of that stand now it would seem a bit petty and somewhat disrespectful



It's what he would have wanted.

I can't remember correctly but was the naming of the stand put to a vote? If it was, I can only think it must of been the board members only.

Put to a vote! Ha ha ha ha ha

Offline algy

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6086
  • Age: 43
  • Location: Gogledd Cymru
  • GM : 26.03.2025
Re: Champions League Contention
« Reply #869 on: February 14, 2024, 11:03:09 AM »
Think we must be close to FFP limit hence why we didnt spend. But if evertons points deduction gets reversed it will be a bit of a mockery.

Personally think we should look at re naming a stand for money. The Ellis one would get my vote

I was no big supporter of Ellis in fact I think he held the club back over time
but I wouldn’t change the name of that stand now it would seem a bit petty and somewhat disrespectful



It's what he would have wanted.

I can't remember correctly but was the naming of the stand put to a vote? If it was, I can only think it must of been the board members only.

Put to a vote! Ha ha ha ha ha
It was a "surprise" from the builders, wasn't it?  Doug just turned up one day to see his name plastered across the Witton Lane stand, completely unbeknownst to him.  He was busy teaching George Clooney how to make pancakes, I imagine.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal