to my mind that rules out Mathew Moulding - far too much energy needs to be put into his business for him to be involved in football - He does look like he is on his way to being a multi-billionaire though

No one said that Mathew Moulding was interested. I posed the question as to whether any local people had enough money to take the club forward. His name was mentioned, that's all.

There was no suggestion that he was interested, but he has sponsored Burnley before.

Danieljwaterhouse wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 12, 2020 11:58 am

I think there’s one or two others on this board who need medical
Intervention before I do. I’ll happily wait in line.

Whoa there! The line is long and we have our own ways. Anyway who is "happy" to wait in line doesn't need to be in the line. Do one.

Gordaleman wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 12, 2020 2:00 pm

No one said that Mathew Moulding was interested. I posed the question as to whether any local people had enough money to take the club forward. His name was mentioned, that's all.

There was no suggestion that he was interested, but he has sponsored Burnley before.

Quite right Gordaleman, I was following various different posters and perhaps adding to the confusion, I know nothing of Matt Moulding either.

ClaretTony wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 12, 2020 9:10 am

I'm assuming that's Orlando City. He was only a bit part player I think initially but I thought he'd ended that.

Can he play right side attacking midfield? We may have an opening.

Chester Perry wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 12, 2020 1:46 pm

to my mind that rules out Mathew Moulding - far too much energy needs to be put into his business for him to be involved in football - He does look like he is on his way to being a multi-billionaire though

Let’s give him 10 or 15 years to build up his wealth, by which time the Egyptians may have had their fill

Mail online again and SD refers to creating a way of working that suits the people that count...staff and players.
No mention of Mr Garlick or directors.
A pointed remark or nothing to see.

Nothing to see. Why do people always want to look for problems?

Could this not go in the thread about the other Daily Mail article, seeing as exactly the same discussion will be had over it. Both about the club and the Daily Mail's sport reporting.

Goredaleman because the problems are there. Real problems. Dyche and Garlick are at loggerheads. Nixon saying again this morning there are differences over targets and budget. Rigg coming up with names but nothing followed up. Inertia rules OK

full article - more a man and club out of synch with the norm and the reason for our outstanding success (relatively speaking)

Premier League's longest-serving manager Sean Dyche admits he may be the last of a dying breed: 'I really don't think amazing characters like Arsene and Sir Alex are going to still be around'
- Burnley boss Sean Dyche is the longest-serving manager in the Premier League
- Dyche has been at Burnley for eight years whereas nobody else has done five
- He admits that he is the last of a dying breed and that change is now rife
- Dyche is still irked that Dwight McNeil wasn't called into England under-21 squad
By JOE BERNSTEIN FOR MAILONLINE

PUBLISHED: 07:26, 13 September 2020 | UPDATED: 08:44, 13 September 2020

Sean Dyche acknowledges he might be the last of a dying breed as the Premier League's clear longest-serving manager.

Dyche celebrates his eighth anniversary at Turf Moor next month – whereas none of his rivals have even completed five.

'I think everyone's thirst for change is different now. Culturally we all change a lot more in our lives,' he insists.

'I really don't think amazing characters like Arsene (Wenger) and Sir Alex (Ferguson) are going to still be around.

'Managing directors and CEOs I speak to in business often say every three to five years, change the staff or change the manager.

'There is a general rule of thumb, or certainly a suggestion, that's what is needed. In our case, we haven't changed either.

'What we have done is build a way of working that is appropriate and enjoyable for the people that count, the staff and players.'

Dyche's belief will only strengthen the suspicion that his time at Turf Moor may be coming towards the end of its natural shelf life.

The 49-year-old has worked miracles during his time at Burnley, twice winning promotion into the Premier League, qualifying for Europe and last season finishing in the top half despite having one of the smallest transfer spends in the division.

They kick off the new campaign against Sheffield United in the EFL Cup on Thursday having been quiet in the window again and Dyche is resigned to having transfer activity decided by the Clarets board while he is unsure of how much is in the kitty.

'I might have targets in mind. I might be able to convince them to come to Burnley – but I don't sign the cheques,' he said.

'I can only guide and say "this is what I think we should do." It's then up to them to decide whether we do it or not. It is how it is.'

In the meantime, the Burnley boss is typically robust in support of his current close-knit group.

He can't understand why 20-year-old ever-present Dwight McNeil wasn't called into the last England under-21 squad or among the nominees for PFA Young Player of the Year.

'He'd get more kudos if I was dipping him in and out of the team rather than playing every week,' remarks Dyche.

'It's impossible he wasn't considered a young player of the year when he's played every minute of every game. When Aidy Boothroyd (England under-21 manager) rang up and said Dwight was on standby for the last international break, I honestly thought he meant for Gareth (Southgate) with the seniors.

'I was that surprised he hadn't made the under-21s – you must have some blooming good players in this country if he can't get in.

'Aidy is a good friend of mine so don't give him too much heat, but factually speaking if you've played in every Premier League game for a season-and-a-half and made a difference to team that finished 10th, I am amazed you are not considered to be one of the top products in the country.'

Rodleydave wrote: ↑

Sun Sep 13, 2020 12:04 pm

Goredaleman because the problems are there. Real problems. Dyche and Garlick are at loggerheads. Nixon saying again this morning there are differences over targets and budget. Rigg coming up with names but nothing followed up. Inertia rules OK

Gordaleman doesn’t want to believe it, simple as that.

From Sunday Express. "I don't know what my budget is but that's the way it has always been run here. It's a fact of life that the chairman and the board have a tendency to take transfers right down to the wire. All I have asked is for some more guidelines so that I can target the players I want better. Unfortunately the chairman and the board don't want to work like that."

Ludicrous state of affairs

From the quote above...

"I don't know what my budget is but that's the way it has always been run here. It's a fact of life that the chairman and the board have a tendency to take transfers right down to the wire. All I have asked is for some more guidelines so that I can target the players I want better. Unfortunately the chairman and the board don't want to work like that."

If that's accurate then I believe the chairman and the board are reluctant to commit to some guidelines about finances - i.e. The money available is roughly £XXX amount for wages and the money available is roughly £XXX for signings. The reluctance is likely to be COVID related and having no idea of what may or may not happen with TV monies etc in the coming 12 -18 months, which I understand.

On the flip side, Dyche is needing to know where to target his and the recruitment teams limited resources for finding new players, and the narrowing of those parameters (as in knowing what they are) is the likely cause of the frustration - again which I understand as I am sure the board and MG does too.

It sounds like they needs some counselling to overcome their differences... I'm serious when I suggest that too.

Dyche says that has " always " been how its run, not something that is just happening now due to the current uncertainties.

if that's how it's always been done then why is he spitting his dummy out now?

Because of what he's done Sean, he probably thinks he deserves a bit more slack and a slight easing of the purse strings. And I'd agree with him.
Whilst this Post COVID period is gonna be tough we have to stay in this division over the next few years whilst the situation eases up and if that means spending a little more than usual and maybe having a couple of years in the red by a few million I think it's a gamble to take. It may not have been right in the past but circumstances change and now is as good a time as any to break the mould.
Dyche has proven he can keep us up with good Championship level players who have grown with us and some good experienced Prem players. We need to keep this formula going over the next few years and see out this period even if it means taking a slight hit. Prem status is paramount.

Dyche will stay for now because there isn’t a “better” job going.

If it all starts to go tits up this season, I think we all know where the blame will lie, and it isn't with Sean.

That doesn’t sound like a manager that is expecting significant investment anytime soon.

SGr wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 9:34 am

Dyche will stay for now because there isn’t a “better” job going.

I think there is a lot of truth in this and unfortunately it isnt always going to be the case. It is likely that a vacancy may become available at one or more of Villa, West Ham or Crystal Palace in the first half of the season if they don't get off to a good start. All pose a threat to our retention of Sean Dyche and he may just fancy his chances of taking a club further than he has at Burnley with better finances available. Compensation, although a fair sum is not insurmountable for any of these clubs if they decide that he is the man for them. I will be surprised if Sean is still at Burnley come the end of the season.

This is the biggest risk our club has faced in over a decade and i am not confident we will survive his departure if it is to be this season.

BurnleyFC wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 9:54 am

That doesn’t sound like a manager that is expecting significant investment anytime soon.

According to Daniel waterstone, there is a NDA in place so SD won't be able to mention it.

Zlatan wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 9:06 am

From the quote above...



If that's accurate then I believe the chairman and the board are reluctant to commit to some guidelines about finances - i.e. The money available is roughly £XXX amount for wages and the money available is roughly £XXX for signings. The reluctance is likely to be COVID related and having no idea of what may or may not happen with TV monies etc in the coming 12 -18 months, which I understand.

On the flip side, Dyche is needing to know where to target his and the recruitment teams limited resources for finding new players, and the narrowing of those parameters (as in knowing what they are) is the likely cause of the frustration - again which I understand as I am sure the board and MG does too.

It sounds like they needs some counselling to overcome their differences... I'm serious when I suggest that too.

Counselling from Harry Redknapp ?!!!

Personally I don’t read the situation exactly as you do. I think SD has more idea of what he can spend on players and wages than he is letting on. What he is unhappy and frustrated about is that what he has to work with is less than he had previously and he does not believe it’s enough for what is needed to give him a fighting chance of staying up.
MG is looking at the 2019 year end position where we made only a nominal profit and he will also have a very good idea of the June 20 year end position which will have been impacted by Covid / reduced TV money and gate receipts so very probably a loss making year. He will then be factoring some further reduced revenues into the financial year we are currently in and to me this is where it becomes very difficult between them.
MG will be looking at a reduced wage bill from the £85m to £90m we are likely to post in the 2020 accounts and a limited transfer spend that combined does not result in sustained big losses over the next 2 or 3 years. SD will I guess be saying that if we don’t spend now that he cannot perform the miracle of keeping us up with such a small squad which will inevitably get injuries / loss of form to key players etc.

And ultimately the real blocker to any conciliation between them could well be that MG thinks that relegation is not the worst financial outcome in all of this...as we may have relegation clauses in all of our contracts and we could pretty easily bring in £100m in player sales

TVC15 wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 11:12 am

And ultimately the real blocker to any conciliation between them could well be that MG thinks that relegation is not the worst financial outcome in all of this...as we may have relegation clauses in all of our contracts and we could pretty easily bring in £100m in player sales

I think this is the business head on MG here, he wants to ensure the business endures whatever the future brings; whereas Dyche from the football side wants us to excel - both are right in many respects, unfortunately with this it appears that there's not enough common ground, and I maintain my opinion that it is COVID as the cause.

The last thing we need is Dyche saying "I told you so" at Christmas because we cant field a team due to injuries etc (also bear in mind that Dyche will be acutely aware that we are already down to bare bones - only takes 1 COVID positive in the team and the first team may well need to be the youth team for a couple of games - or is there special dispensation for that situation?)

; nor do we need MG saying "you've wasted another £X Ms on another dud like Gibson"

Both have a right to say both things, but hence the need to counsel them (Who I have no idea - but not bloody Redknapp! )

But MG shouldn't be looking at some individual player transfers that haven't gone according to plan. We all know nothing is guaranteed in football at our level and with our prices. SD could easily go back and say give me more money & I won't get duds like Gibson if that's what you're worried about! He needs to look at the bigger picture, a squad suitable for the Prem & for over nearly 8 years SD has taken us to heights we could only dream about.

Zlatan wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 11:35 am

I think this is the business head on MG here, he wants to ensure the business endures whatever the future brings; whereas Dyche from the football side wants us to excel - both are right in many respects, unfortunately with this it appears that there's not enough common ground, and I maintain my opinion that it is COVID as the cause.

Always going to be the case - club want to spend as little as possible to be successful (understandable) and the manager wants to spend as much as possible to be successful (also understandable).

As you state the common ground is where the two need to align, and it would appear that this is not the case.

It has been noted by a few posters that Dyche's bullish attitude to the board has tempered since the restart where he was very publicly calling them out.. however we haven't backed our manager with funds so that is not the reason.

Can anyone think of a single time a manager got the better of a breakdown with a chairman?

With the manager staying and the chairman leaving?

Quickenthetempo wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 3:29 pm

Can anyone think of a single time a manager got the better of a breakdown with a chairman?

With the manager staying and the chairman leaving?

Alex Ferguson at United - he got the Glazers though and their approach as taken substantially north if £1 billion out of the transfer/infrastructure kitty, mainly for the benefit of financiers

Rodleydave wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 8:11 am

From Sunday Express. "I don't know what my budget is but that's the way it has always been run here. It's a fact of life that the chairman and the board have a tendency to take transfers right down to the wire. All I have asked is for some more guidelines so that I can target the players I want better. Unfortunately the chairman and the board don't want to work like that."

Dyche knows where the door is.

KRBFC wrote: ↑

Sat Sep 12, 2020 8:39 am

He didn’t fail, he kept them up...

by someone forgetting to press 'on'.

Granny WeatherWax wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 3:58 pm

Dyche knows where the door is.

Ah, thats the attitude...

Granny WeatherWax wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 3:58 pm

Dyche knows where the door is.

I'm firmly in the Garlick stinks camp, and have been for a few years now.

Itll be a very sad day when Mr Dyche leaves this football club, and the downward spiral will start then.

The same cant be said about Mr Garlick.

MACCA wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 5:10 pm

I'm firmly in the Garlick stinks camp, and have been for a few years now.

Itll be a very sad day when Mr Dyche leaves this football club, and the downward spiral will start then.

The same cant be said about Mr Garlick.

Because that suits your agenda.

Do you really think Garlick is happy with our squad? Do me a favour. Simple logic says that it matters more to him than anyone that we stay up, he’s just trying to do it in a way that doesn’t bankrupt us.

The finances are simple, we make more staying in the league than getting relegated. Garlick knows that. We play it right every year, as frustrating as the windows might be.

Granny WeatherWax wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 6:43 pm

Because that suits your agenda.

Do you really think Garlick is happy with our squad? Do me a favour. Simple logic says that it matters more to him than anyone that we stay up, he’s just trying to do it in a way that doesn’t bankrupt us.

The finances are simple, we make more staying in the league than getting relegated. Garlick knows that. We play it right every year, as frustrating as the windows might be.

He needs to make things clear then. His business mantra plastered on his business front page suggests that 'support' is the buzz word in his mind. Doesn't seem to be offering Dyche any support. By that I mean. Throw the man a bone at least! Tell him what he can work with.

diamondpocket wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 9:32 am

Because of what he's done Sean, he probably thinks he deserves a bit more slack and a slight easing of the purse strings. And I'd agree with him.
Whilst this Post COVID period is gonna be tough we have to stay in this division over the next few years whilst the situation eases up and if that means spending a little more than usual and maybe having a couple of years in the red by a few million I think it's a gamble to take. It may not have been right in the past but circumstances change and now is as good a time as any to break the mould.
Dyche has proven he can keep us up with good Championship level players who have grown with us and some good experienced Prem players. We need to keep this formula going over the next few years and see out this period even if it means taking a slight hit. Prem status is paramount.

Exactly this. Better to spend our cash reserves, and potentially even take on some (low cost) debt, to invest in the right areas. No problem that taking some time if It means we get better value and it comes off in the end, but to not take some calculated risks at this stage would be a huge mistake - going down in the current environment would be catastrophic.

I think the Board seem to focus too much on the purchase price and not enough on what we can sell them for if we develop them properly, which Sean has got a great record of doing.

Sir Michael of Garlick knows that the most successful way to attract new signings is to do the boardroom up.

Really impress them with a nice piece of oak furniture.

Granny WeatherWax wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 6:43 pm

Because that suits your agenda.

Do you really think Garlick is happy with our squad? Do me a favour. Simple logic says that it matters more to him than anyone that we stay up, he’s just trying to do it in a way that doesn’t bankrupt us.

The finances are simple, we make more staying in the league than getting relegated. Garlick knows that. We play it right every year, as frustrating as the windows might be.

It matters more to him than anyone we stay up?

I'll not get into a debate with you, but one thing that is clear is the guy is tight as cramp.
Will squeeze every last penny from the fans , yet wont even loosen the purse strings with the clubs finances, anyone would think it was his money

It is his money

Tall Paul wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 9:15 pm

It is his money

Since when?

You could say a lot about his transfer expenditure but I’m not sure you can throw out the comment Garlick squeezes every last penny from the fans. Season tickets have stayed pretty much the same for the last 15 years!

Murger wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 9:38 pm

Since when?

Since he took a controlling interest in the club.

Top 5 Burnley Chairmen in my lifetime (in order)

1 Barry Kilby
2 Brendan Flood
3 Frank Teasdale
4 Mike Garlick
5 Peter Shackleton

Granny WeatherWax wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 3:58 pm

Dyche knows where the door is.

Yes he does, and unless the board give him the tools to compete he'll walk through it, as soon as a decent vacancy arises.

I'm curious if Sean does go, does MG not think any new manager wouldn't won't funds to strengthen the squad, it's very rare that a new gaffer doesn't demand his chairman to spend, so I don't see how BFC are any better off post Dyche should he go.

tiger76 wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 10:17 pm

Yes he does, and unless the board give him the tools to compete he'll walk through it, as soon as a decent vacancy arises.

I'm curious if Sean does go, does MG not think any new manager wouldn't won't funds to strengthen the squad, it's very rare that a new gaffer doesn't demand his chairman to spend, so I don't see how BFC are any better off post Dyche should he go.

You can't just magic up the money though. If we keep up the cash reserves then you can probably keep the core of the team together when we go down and have a good stab at promotion.

If you spend most of the money now then going down will precipitate a fire sale to raise enough money for wages.

We could look at loans but realistically they won't come cheap, I'd expect interest rates not far off 10% for us.

Obviously there are inbetween stages but how much would we have to spend to really make a difference, two quality players is probably £40m or so.

aggi wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 11:09 pm

You can't just magic up the money though. If we keep up the cash reserves then you can probably keep the core of the team together when we go down and have a good stab at promotion.

If you spend most of the money now then going down will precipitate a fire sale to raise enough money for wages.

We could look at loans but realistically they won't come cheap, I'd expect interest rates not far off 10% for us.

Obviously there are inbetween stages but how much would we have to spend to really make a difference, two quality players is probably £40m or so.

I planted a magic money tree last year, I've watered it every day and nothing. I'm gonna send it back

claret2018 wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 9:17 am

if that's how it's always been done then why is he spitting his dummy out now?

I'm guessing because he knows how hard it is likely to be to continually over achieve - he rightly want's to protect his reputation, he already has a relegation to his name. I don't blame Dyche for being vocal one bit.

Tall Paul wrote: ↑

Mon Sep 14, 2020 10:05 pm

Since he took a controlling interest in the club.

I thought he had 49% ?

You learn something new every day.

Today I learnt the club means more to Garlick than anyone, and also the money TV broadcasters and sponsors give the club each season is actually his money.

2 crazy facts I would have never believed in a million years were true.

No wonder he isnt keen on spending it, and who can blame him.
If someone gave me 130m, I wouldn't buy a few footballers for a team I support from a distance, thatd be a waste, I'd be on a beach 48 weeks of the year drinking fine beers and eating top notch food.

MACCA wrote: ↑

Tue Sep 15, 2020 7:56 am

You learn something new every day.

Today I learnt the club means more to Garlick than anyone, and also the money TV broadcasters and sponsors give the club each season is actually his money.

2 crazy facts I would have never believed in a million years were true.

No wonder he isnt keen on spending it, and who can blame him.
If someone gave me 130m, I wouldn't buy a few footballers for a team I support from a distance, thatd be a waste, I'd be on a 48 weeks of the year drinking fine beers and eating top notch food.

And Macca what would you do with the £129,500,000 you were left with at the end of those 48 weeks?