|
Post by londonroader on Apr 26, 2011 8:02:26 GMT
Actually Londonroader I disagree, I believe with our budget it is quite possible to be aiming for promotion if the budget is spent wisely and if the manager is really good. I have no proof yet I will be surprised if our budget is not in the top ten within the league. Now if we get mired down into mid table mediocrity for a number of seasons will our crowds hold up? As Scoob mentioned we are already spending nearly everything we are taking in so a fall in crowds is potentially very bad in terms of our playing budget or finances. The rebuilding point is very valid and something which has haunted Wilder since he joined. Season to season we do indeed make a number of changes are all of them required possibly not. Do all of them make a huge difference no not really. We started the season with a team that initially was ok but then struggled. We ended one that has mid table running all the way through it. An improvement sure but not one that turned us into a team that stood any chance of challenging for promotion. Look at the last two games for proof. A draw against the league leaders and a very good performance, then a draw against the second from bottom team and a poor performance. This is not the form of a promotion challenging team. Ok so I can forgive Wilder's inexperience for getting it so wrong at the start of the season, but yet I am still disappointed by the amount of improvement. Hand on hearts people, can any of you truly say we have ever looked like a team that would get promoted this season? As to the first paragraph, that is my point, I don't think CW has the time or experience to manage us to a promotion, that's why he needs more money to achieve this aim, I have not seen anything to make me believe CW can manage us out of this league without spending lots of money we don't have. We went for the cheap option this season, young inexperienced players and it has showed for most of the season, our season didn't really take off until CW invested in more experienced players who cost us more money, the 2 Mc's. Do we go with a squad of 22 or a better quality squad of 18 and the problems that brings.
|
|
|
Post by londonroader on Apr 26, 2011 8:07:02 GMT
Building a decent squad or rather a squad of players who have the ability to match or better different styles of play. We have to be able to adapt depending on the style of play we are facing. We can perform against footballing sides but seem to struggle against teams that can mix it. It will be very interesting to see what and how many players both come in and are released or sold before the start of the next season. Those who spoke with Kas Stad Kate on Sat inferred they would rather see the current squad kept with a little tweeking, others want to see 5 or 6 new players. It will certainly be an interesting closed season for the fans. As for the title of this thread, it got people reading it and making comments, so job done. Tweaking or butchery, I will guess the latter.
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Apr 26, 2011 8:34:32 GMT
Budgets do not always dictate your end league position, clubs like Bury etc who it would seem are on smaller budgets that ours have had time to build, and they tweak their squads each year. We on the other hand need the crowds to come through the gates to try and keep the books balanced, and CW has carried out major surgery to the squad each season, even changing the players around mid season, CW would always want a bigger budget as he is on a short term mission to keep the fans interested, progress is the buzz word everyone seems to be using and the club will only keep moving forward with CW short term remit if they chuck money at him, he has not got the luxury of time on his side to build a decent squad, a catch 22 situation really. LR it is very difficult to assess what money clubs have available to them. Bury may have a similar budget to us based on their past overspending. They only produce abreviated accounts but last season they made a loss of £557k which increased the defecit in their P&L Account to almost £3M but this appears to have been funded by the owners rather than building significant debt (Creditors just over £700k). I agree that it is very likely that they have a budget lower than ours but it may not be too far away. Their average crowds are over 4,000 lower and that equates to about £1M difference in crowd revenue but their overspending is more than half of that amount and we do not know what their stadium costs them and what other revenue they derive from it. We know that the rent on our stadium is about £350k plus costs so that could mean that their budget is very similar to ours if they have overspent to the same degree as last year.
|
|
|
Post by ovaltoyou on Apr 26, 2011 8:55:16 GMT
Just to put a fly in the ointment.... Sheffield United could come in with an offer too good to refuse and they have attendances to make your eyes water!!
|
|
|
Post by londonroader on Apr 26, 2011 9:20:04 GMT
Just to put a fly in the ointment.... Sheffield United could come in with an offer too good to refuse and they have attendances to make your eyes water!! And as we sit here talking about CW and his credentials would that be such a lose at this time, the jury is still out on whether he can cut it at this level, so it would be a punt for sheff utd in the league above.
|
|
|
Post by tatabanya on Apr 26, 2011 9:58:25 GMT
An excellent BSP manager is not going to be a bad L2 manager. Football is not a science and at the level we are at there are many gems to be unearthed on the cheap; money is not a guarantee for success. There may not be proof that he is definitely up to this task, but there is nothing to suggest he isnt.
|
|
|
Post by Marked Ox on Apr 26, 2011 11:22:28 GMT
Just to put a fly in the ointment.... Sheffield United could come in with an offer too good to refuse and they have attendances to make your eyes water!! And as we sit here talking about CW and his credentials would that be such a lose at this time, the jury is still out on whether he can cut it at this level, so it would be a punt for sheff utd in the league above. He is already cutting it at this level. In his 1st season as manager in L2 we've been competitive, very comfortably safe from relegation and only a few results from being in the battle for the play-offs. Will we need to improve again next season and push on, yes we will, but to say the jury is out is plain wrong as he has proved he can manage at this level. You may or may not like him as a manager but the team's performance over the season and the lg position proves he can cut it at L2 level. Furthermore, CW going would be a massive loss as the club has improved year on year and based on that it is very likely to happen again next season. Also, the bit in your previous post about CW working on a short-term basis to keep fans interested, well that is the same for every manager in the FL! Also, he is trying to build a squad, look at Ryan Clarke, Batty and Beano all signing new contracts (he has mentioned others staying on (although not who specifically)), and the likes of Worley, Payne, Heslop, Craddock and Jake Wright who signed at least 2 year contracts. As for CW wanting more money, all managers want more money! Furthermore, CW came in and operated with significantly smaller budgets than Jim Smith and Darren Patterson and was successful. In fact, CW is one of the few managers in our history to operate with a budget, and be successful, that means we are break-even or profitable and he is also one the few in the PL/FL or BSP.
|
|
|
Post by Millman on Apr 26, 2011 12:46:17 GMT
Just what is cutting it, and is it enough?
Do we mean that is acceptable that Wilder has managed a mid table finish given the resources provided by a club our size. Maybe so, but should we be doing better, I would say probably. Holding our own in this league for us is not a major achievement, mealy the mark of a competent manager.
Next season will be the measure of Wilder. This season he has done ok, and no more. Next season he must improve and do much better. After all the club is well run now, and the finances are under control. Plus we have a good enough budget. There is no reason for this club with a decent manager in charge not to expect a promotion push (I'm not saying promotion but to be in the reckoning).
|
|
|
Post by m on Apr 26, 2011 13:04:13 GMT
Next season will be the measure of Wilder. This season he has done ok, and no more. Next season he must improve and do much better. After all the club is well run now, and the finances are under control. Plus we have a good enough budget. There is no reason for this club with a decent manager in charge not to expect a promotion push (I'm not saying promotion but to be in the reckoning). A very fair summation of things I'd say.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Apr 26, 2011 13:37:35 GMT
I think Wilder is just trying to tell us that we won't have the biggest budget in the division, mainly because the rent cost takes much out of the club's revenues, and that we don't have the extra income streams of say Chesterfield (who said they had an extra £1MM this year from the new ground - hopefully to be knocked by a few pitch invasion fines).
This was what Kelvin told us after promotion last year, that we had a mid-table budget. I think it is realistic for the club to want Wilder to overachieve to better than mid-table. Look at the clubs and crowds who will finish significantly better than us: Boro, Accrington, Bury all on average crowds of under 3,500.
|
|
|
Post by londonroader on Apr 26, 2011 13:55:12 GMT
And as we sit here talking about CW and his credentials would that be such a lose at this time, the jury is still out on whether he can cut it at this level, so it would be a punt for sheff utd in the league above. He is already cutting it at this level. In his 1st season as manager in L2 we've been competitive, very comfortably safe from relegation and only a few results from being in the battle for the play-offs. Will we need to improve again next season and push on, yes we will, but to say the jury is out is plain wrong as he has proved he can manage at this level. You may or may not like him as a manager but the team's performance over the season and the lg position proves he can cut it at L2 level. Furthermore, CW going would be a massive loss as the club has improved year on year and based on that it is very likely to happen again next season. Also, the bit in your previous post about CW working on a short-term basis to keep fans interested, well that is the same for every manager in the FL! Also, he is trying to build a squad, look at Ryan Clarke, Batty and Beano all signing new contracts (he has mentioned others staying on (although not who specifically)), and the likes of Worley, Payne, Heslop, Craddock and Jake Wright who signed at least 2 year contracts. As for CW wanting more money, all managers want more money! Furthermore, CW came in and operated with significantly smaller budgets than Jim Smith and Darren Patterson and was successful. In fact, CW is one of the few managers in our history to operate with a budget, and be successful, that means we are break-even or profitable and he is also one the few in the PL/FL or BSP. He has done a good job so far while here, the first season he almost turned it around and got us promotion and but for the 5 point deduction might have got us up, last season was patchy, with good spells and poor spells, he almost went into meltdown after Xmas trying to buy/loan his way out of a bad spell but we managed to hold on and came third in the league, the season then became a 3 match season and he went back to plan A and the rest is history, so onto this season after major player surgery we were playing nice stuff but not getting results with a young team, CW then got some old heads in and that coincided with our best run of the season and IMHO that run kept us up this season, the rest of the season has been hit or miss with players coming in and going out but nothing changed on the pitch. As whether CW would be a massive lose we will have to wait until next season, I think losing KT would hit us harder. I do like CW but think he has a big task on his hands, but more importantly it's his employer he has to keep happy and that will be about results and bums on seats.
|
|
|
Post by paulayres on Apr 26, 2011 16:22:01 GMT
As whether CW would be a massive lose we will have to wait until next season, I think losing KT would hit us harder.I do like CW but think he has a big task on his hands, but more importantly it's his employer he has to keep happy and that will be about results and bums on seats.
[/quote]
Losing CW would hit us harder than losing a chairman. The owner would find it easier to recruit a good Chairman than a good manager. IL would have more knowledge of what is required to run the football club than to manage a successful team.
Having said that I dont think we will lose either of them, unless the targets set by the owner are not met.
|
|
|
Post by banzai on Apr 26, 2011 16:26:16 GMT
I actually agree with Paul. A good CEO can be recruited. KT has done a lot of good things but nobody is irreplacable. But I would have more faith in WPL to appoint a new CEO due to their business experience and history of running sports clubs.
With football managers sometimes even good managers don't do good jobs.
|
|
|
Post by Yellowbrains on Apr 26, 2011 22:37:44 GMT
The size of the budget should not dictate the position you finish in the league. Bury have just secured automatic promotion on a far smaller budget than Wilder has to work with. menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/sport/football/s/1201716_fc_united_to_build_35m_new_stadiumAccording to this they get £3000 per match from FC United, which amounts to a pretty decent sum over the course of the season. Is their budget really that much lower than ours? Do you even have the slightest inkling of Bury's budget or ours for that matter?
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Apr 26, 2011 23:19:09 GMT
The size of the budget should not dictate the position you finish in the league. Bury have just secured automatic promotion on a far smaller budget than Wilder has to work with. menmedia.co.uk/manchestereveningnews/sport/football/s/1201716_fc_united_to_build_35m_new_stadiumAccording to this they get £3000 per match from FC United, which amounts to a pretty decent sum over the course of the season. Is their budget really that much lower than ours? Do you even have the slightest inkling of Bury's budget or ours for that matter? See my post above. If they have overspent by another £600k compared to our possible profit of £100k ish then I do not believe that their budget will be much lower than ours. They own their ground so do not have £350k of rent to pay. The size of budget is not the be all and end all as we proved in the conference but it certainly helps.
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Apr 27, 2011 0:19:00 GMT
I think Wilder is just trying to tell us that we won't have the biggest budget in the division, mainly because the rent cost takes much out of the club's revenues, and that we don't have the extra income streams of say Chesterfield (who said they had an extra £1MM this year from the new ground - hopefully to be knocked by a few pitch invasion fines). This was what Kelvin told us after promotion last year, that we had a mid-table budget. I think it is realistic for the club to want Wilder to overachieve to better than mid-table. Look at the clubs and crowds who will finish significantly better than us: Boro, Accrington, Bury all on average crowds of under 3,500. Slappy do you believe that we only have a mid-table budget? I guess it depends on where mid-table is considered to start. If mid-table is 8th to 16th then we could have the 8th highest budget. Also remember that the budgets mentioned at the Fans Forum were anticipating £250k profit and it seems that some of that has been spent. Also crowds have been higher than anticipated but KT has mentioned £100k profit recently. It seems that the actual budget could be significantly higher than planned at the start of the season so could have pushed us higher in the spending league.
|
|
|
Post by Godders on Apr 27, 2011 5:14:29 GMT
I'd be absolutely horrified if we lost Chris Wilder as manager. For me he's absolutely excellent, he's taken us up and got us in to a top half finish in League 2 - improvements have been made year on year.
This season has been a success in my eyes, we've stabilised as a league 2 club and Wilder will have a very good view of where we need to improve next season, a season in which I fully expect we'll be challenging for promotion.
Good budget does not equal success, we should be very careful to remember that.
I have every faith that Wilder is the right man to lead us forward.
|
|
|
Post by Mark on Apr 27, 2011 10:51:02 GMT
I think Wilder is just trying to tell us that we won't have the biggest budget in the division, mainly because the rent cost takes much out of the club's revenues, and that we don't have the extra income streams of say Chesterfield (who said they had an extra £1MM this year from the new ground - hopefully to be knocked by a few pitch invasion fines). This was what Kelvin told us after promotion last year, that we had a mid-table budget. I think it is realistic for the club to want Wilder to overachieve to better than mid-table. Look at the clubs and crowds who will finish significantly better than us: Boro, Accrington, Bury all on average crowds of under 3,500. Slappy do you believe that we only have a mid-table budget? I guess it depends on where mid-table is considered to start. If mid-table is 8th to 16th then we could have the 8th highest budget. Also remember that the budgets mentioned at the Fans Forum were anticipating £250k profit and it seems that some of that has been spent. Also crowds have been higher than anticipated but KT has mentioned £100k profit recently. It seems that the actual budget could be significantly higher than planned at the start of the season so could have pushed us higher in the spending league. What was said last year (15 July 2010) was that we would have a budget that was mid-table / mid-lower end of the table in League 2. Presumably that was why we started the season with a team of youngsters fresh from the Conference or released from league club academies. Where the wage bill finished I don't know. We've seen the numbers for Shrewsbury, Wycombe, and it is clear that some teams are definitely spending for promotion.
|
|
|
Post by KLYellow on Apr 27, 2011 13:01:27 GMT
My view from afar....
Is it fair to say that the target for this year was the playoffs,therefore the owners are a little disappointed we missed out?
Did CW get serious financial backing this season (within reason) and allowed to bring what players he felt could get us into the playoffs? And some of those players have not worked out?
Are the owners a bit disappointed with the tactics sometimes used and results (Stockport)?
I think with a few bumper gates next season, season tickets and average gates should be slightly up. I think if I was KT or IL I would tell CW to set a small squad of good players he feels can get us into playoffs next season. Playoffs I feel should be "expected" next season, if we fail to achieve that then maybe its time for CW to move on
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Apr 27, 2011 14:54:17 GMT
I have been trying to get an idea of what other clubs spent last year but it is very difficult because many produce abbreviated accounts so do not show P&L breakdowns.
Wycombe and Shrewsbury appear to have very large budgets with their wages bills (players and other staff) last season exceeding our Turnover. Wycombe made a loss of £1.2M after profit on player sales of over £0.5M!
Chesterfield may have a large budget. They made a loss of £1M last year so must have spent a lot on the team but their abreviated accounts do not tell us much.
Port Vale have a large wage bill (£2.5m) but according to their accounts only £1.3M relates to players, that seems fairly low and probably similar to our budget.
As already mentioned I would be surprised if Bury have a much higher budget.
Accrington made a loss of £285k last season but I can't see how their budget can be anywhere near ours when their average crowd is 5400 (£1.4M) below ours!
Bradford's budget is impossible to establish for their abbreviated accounts.
Crewe spend £2.8M on wages last season but that includes 26 Admin Staff (double ours?) and 151 match day staff as well as 74 coaching/playing staff so their playing budget could be high.
Southend may have a larger budget but their last accounts are to July 2009 for their relegation season from League One where there wage bill was an astronomical £3.9M with losses of over £2M for two years in a row! How can they sustain a large playing budget after two years in L2?
I've not had time to look at all of the club's accounts but how can clubs with half our support (ie every club from 12th to 24th in the attendance league) have large playing budgets when their ticket revenue is £1M below ours.
I am very sceptical about the suggestions that we have a lower mid-table budget.
|
|
|
Post by londonroader on Apr 27, 2011 16:49:28 GMT
I have been trying to get an idea of what other clubs spent last year but it is very difficult because many produce abbreviated accounts so do not show P&L breakdowns. Wycombe and Shrewsbury appear to have very large budgets with their wages bills (players and other staff) last season exceeding our Turnover. Wycombe made a loss of £1.2M after profit on player sales of over £0.5M! Chesterfield may have a large budget. They made a loss of £1M last year so must have spent a lot on the team but their abreviated accounts do not tell us much. Port Vale have a large wage bill (£2.5m) but according to their accounts only £1.3M relates to players, that seems fairly low and probably similar to our budget. As already mentioned I would be surprised if Bury have a much higher budget. Accrington made a loss of £285k last season but I can't see how their budget can be anywhere near ours when their average crowd is 5400 (£1.4M) below ours! Bradford's budget is impossible to establish for their abbreviated accounts. Crewe spend £2.8M on wages last season but that includes 26 Admin Staff (double ours?) and 151 match day staff as well as 74 coaching/playing staff so their playing budget could be high. Southend may have a larger budget but their last accounts are to July 2009 for their relegation season from League One where there wage bill was an astronomical £3.9M with losses of over £2M for two years in a row! How can they sustain a large playing budget after two years in L2? I've not had time to look at all of the club's accounts but how can clubs with half our support (ie every club from 12th to 24th in the attendance league) have large playing budgets when their ticket revenue is £1M below ours. I am very sceptical about the suggestions that we have a lower mid-table budget. Does all this really matter. Whatever budget CW had, it was either to small or he's not good enough!
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Apr 27, 2011 20:20:16 GMT
LR it probably does not really matter but I don't think that lack of budget can be blamed for failing to get into the play-offs or even the top half of the table. However, to suggest that Wilder is not good enough on the strength of one season is ridiculous. If he fails to get into the play offs in the next couple of seasons you may be right. Shrewsbury have had a large and stable wage budget for four seasons but have failed to make the auto promotion places and may not do so this season.
The whole point of this thread was about realistic expectations and our budget is very relevant to that.
|
|
|
Post by yelloexile on Apr 27, 2011 20:29:00 GMT
I have been trying to get an idea of what other clubs spent last year but it is very difficult because many produce abbreviated accounts so do not show P&L breakdowns. Wycombe and Shrewsbury appear to have very large budgets with their wages bills (players and other staff) last season exceeding our Turnover. Wycombe made a loss of £1.2M after profit on player sales of over £0.5M! Chesterfield may have a large budget. They made a loss of £1M last year so must have spent a lot on the team but their abreviated accounts do not tell us much. Port Vale have a large wage bill (£2.5m) but according to their accounts only £1.3M relates to players, that seems fairly low and probably similar to our budget. As already mentioned I would be surprised if Bury have a much higher budget. Accrington made a loss of £285k last season but I can't see how their budget can be anywhere near ours when their average crowd is 5400 (£1.4M) below ours! Bradford's budget is impossible to establish for their abbreviated accounts. Crewe spend £2.8M on wages last season but that includes 26 Admin Staff (double ours?) and 151 match day staff as well as 74 coaching/playing staff so their playing budget could be high. Southend may have a larger budget but their last accounts are to July 2009 for their relegation season from League One where there wage bill was an astronomical £3.9M with losses of over £2M for two years in a row! How can they sustain a large playing budget after two years in L2? I've not had time to look at all of the club's accounts but how can clubs with half our support (ie every club from 12th to 24th in the attendance league) have large playing budgets when their ticket revenue is £1M below ours. I am very sceptical about the suggestions that we have a lower mid-table budget. Does all this really matter. Whatever budget CW had, it was either to small or he's not good enough! It would be great if it was that simple. One factor missing is also that of the players. Some of that is down to how they are trained, how they are used and also our formation and if it's down to tactics or just that our players are in some cases a little inexperienced. I think it's a little of all of the above. It's whether you believe that our current squad of players are capable of improvement (some are fairly young), or they are at the limit of their ability. I'm looking forward to seeing a plyer like Alfie come on next year. The thing is though in that in getting more from the players do we either need a 'better' or 'more experienced' manager, or should our coaching staff be better / more experienced? Some of this certainly seems to come across in both defending and when we have attacking set pieces. Often our opposition seem to have more options and answers. I don't think we need wholesale changes. A start would be a player like Heslop pulling the strings all season, not just for a quarter of it, and Wright getting back some of the form he showed at the end of last season - saying that, was he made to look good due to the quality of the Conference?
|
|
|
Post by Snake (RIP) on Apr 27, 2011 21:19:12 GMT
IL has already but £4million into the club He's not a multi-millionaire He is a multi-millionaire if he's put £4m into the club. Sums up TiU Mk II perfectly in your response, hablopicasso. Moving on... The topic would read better if it was entitled Wugby –v- Wilder, or more precisely Wigan Warriors –v- Oxford United. Everyone likes a Sugar Daddy, no one likes a Rent Boy.
|
|
|
Post by Millman on Apr 28, 2011 9:02:33 GMT
We know we can't afford to overspend again, so increased budgets can only come with increased revenue. This is where IL can help us. We don't want big bundles of cash to spend on players. We do need a sensible plan and investment to buy the stadium (and to tie its ownership to the club) this what we need IL to do to secure our future. Given this and assuming it leads ro greatly increased revenue for us will place us in a massively strong position.
Even breaking even while others are breaking the bank is a good long term plan. Eventually and possibly sooner rather than later those clubs who are amassing debts at our level are going to be in big trouble. There are fewer and fewer sugar daddies out there with enough free cash in these hard times who can afford the expense of a burning cash on these clubs. Ultimately they will be called into account leaving us in a very strong position.
The other thing we must do is spend more wisely. We have in the last couple of years taken on players who barely featured at all and who have been quickly jettisoned. Others we have taken on loan when maybe we should have been sticking with what we have (Doble a prime example). Maybe more money spent on scouting will save money wasted on players?
|
|
|
Post by scoob on Apr 28, 2011 9:40:50 GMT
Millman I agree with all of that.
I am amazed by the amount of debt that some clubs have been able to build up. Swindon had cumulative losses of £13M a year ago and had to sell their best players despite some very wealthy benefactors bailing them out. They have the fifth highest crowds in Legue One but still can't sustain that level.
Wycombe's (to use Hissing Sid's analogy) previous Sugar Daddy(ies) as usual ran up huge bills then ran out of cash and seems to have sold out to a predator who is likely to become their Rent Boy if his plans come to fruition. At least IL does not have plans to build a rugby stadium and let the football club use their turf (or does he?). It will be interesting to see what happens to them if they go up and whether they can continue to spend in the way they have in the past.
Southend made losses of almost £4.5M in just two years (2007/2008 & 2008/2009) and have debts of almost £8M.
Gillingham had debts of about £5M having shown a loss of almost £500k in their last accounts.
Maybe those who feel that consolidation at League Two are right and maybe IL's plans will come to fruition which will mean that we are stronger when we make the step up to the next level. I am not disappointed about the lack of promotion but I am disappointed by the failure to challenge for the play-offs. However, like KT said on his YP video yesterday I feel that next season should be an exciting one.
|
|
|
Post by socrates on Apr 29, 2011 16:53:11 GMT
The other thing we must do is spend more wisely. We have in the last couple of years taken on players who barely featured at all and who have been quickly jettisoned. Others we have taken on loan when maybe we should have been sticking with what we have (Doble a prime example). Maybe more money spent on scouting will save money wasted on players? YES! God think of the wages we have wasted under Wilder on players like Rhodes, Kelly, Killock, Cain, Grant, Hackney, Gaughan. That money could have been spent on a proper scotuing network which would help us recruit better because I'm not sure enough work was done checking on players like Hall, Heslop, Purkiss, Worley
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2011 22:20:37 GMT
The other thing we must do is spend more wisely. We have in the last couple of years taken on players who barely featured at all and who have been quickly jettisoned. Others we have taken on loan when maybe we should have been sticking with what we have (Doble a prime example). Maybe more money spent on scouting will save money wasted on players? YES! God think of the wages we have wasted under Wilder on players like Rhodes, Kelly, Killock, Cain, Grant, Hackney, Gaughan.That money could have been spent on a proper scotuing network which would help us recruit better because I'm not sure enough work was done checking on players like Hall, Heslop, Purkiss, Worley Jesus you're right. That bill must have come run into the hundreds!
|
|
|
Post by KLYellow on Apr 30, 2011 1:22:01 GMT
In the end, all we want is transparency from the club. We need to understand the budgets, constraints and targets from KT and CW. Thats why a fans forum is important before the season starts.
Lets make sure OXVOX organise one before the next season starts.
|
|
|
Post by Godders on Apr 30, 2011 4:57:41 GMT
So you want Wilder to ensure that every signing he makes is a good one for the club? What world are you living in!?
|
|