The £100 million

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
123EasyasBFC
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2022 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 621 times
Has Liked: 184 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by 123EasyasBFC » Sun Feb 18, 2024 7:21 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Sun Feb 18, 2024 6:37 pm
Not so much that he wasted money, because he didn't really do badly with what he had. But he should have sold players (some at their peak value) rather than let them run their contracts down.
He did extremely well with what he had, the best years watching Burnley in a long time, I was just saying even dyche made some poor signings that on the face of it when signed looked like excellent signings.

Gibson was close to an England call up at Boro before we signed him and Vydra was championship top scorer but when you think combined they cost nearly 30m and we only got 8m back on them both, it’s pretty poor business

Dark Cloud
Posts: 6653
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 9:03 am
Been Liked: 2006 times
Has Liked: 3347 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Dark Cloud » Mon Feb 19, 2024 8:50 am

When you think about it, £100 million sounds an awful lot, but is it? You would probably get 3/4 players of proven PL quality for that and if you were a top 6 club you'd probably get 2. We got 12/13? players. That's because we were shopping in a far cheaper market and buying potential and then (in theory) adding value. Could have been a great plan, but it isn't. It's failed spectacularly because too much "potential" equals too much inexperience and that's been evident from first kick.

forzagranata
Posts: 713
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 10:56 pm
Been Liked: 225 times
Has Liked: 442 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by forzagranata » Mon Feb 19, 2024 11:43 am

Dark Cloud wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 8:50 am
When you think about it, £100 million sounds an awful lot, but is it? You would probably get 3/4 players of proven PL quality for that and if you were a top 6 club you'd probably get 2. We got 12/13? players. That's because we were shopping in a far cheaper market and buying potential and then (in theory) adding value. Could have been a great plan, but it isn't. It's failed spectacularly because too much "potential" equals too much inexperience and that's been evident from first kick.
3 or 4 players of Premier League quality might have been a decent idea.

Luton spent how much on Barkley and Townsend while loaning Lokonga?
This user liked this post: Dark Cloud

ClaretOfMancunia
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2023 12:15 pm
Been Liked: 47 times
Has Liked: 53 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by ClaretOfMancunia » Mon Feb 19, 2024 11:45 am

Luton spent just £25M and look a Premier League outfit.
This user liked this post: forzagranata

Spike
Posts: 2705
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 1:07 pm
Been Liked: 598 times
Has Liked: 1238 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Spike » Mon Feb 19, 2024 12:09 pm

warksclaret wrote:
Sun Feb 18, 2024 10:32 am
What is paramount is reducing our wage bill, which will help the club. Cork,Rodriguez, JBG,Taylor , Brownhill will all be on mega wages. Peacock Farrell, Bastian, McNally, Weghorst are others that should be got off our books. We know clearly where we need to recruit
We clearly knew in April last year what we needed !!

turfytopper
Posts: 1276
Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 8:19 am
Been Liked: 409 times
Has Liked: 3432 times
Location: Crawley West Sussex

Re: The £100 million

Post by turfytopper » Mon Feb 19, 2024 12:12 pm

I cannot see Oderbert being worth what we paid for him? He has potential, then I thought Zaroury and Benson had too.
O'Shea is the only one we are likely to see some money back from (imo) .

I have to agree... Dyche would have invested that sort of money far better. We have a group of young players with no experience of the Premier League.
I'm certain that last year's team if it could have been kept together would have done far better.
These 2 users liked this post: forzagranata k90bfc

StayingDown4Ever
Posts: 1314
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2022 7:02 am
Been Liked: 269 times
Has Liked: 161 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by StayingDown4Ever » Mon Feb 19, 2024 12:14 pm

Spike wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 12:09 pm
We clearly knew in April last year what we needed !!
This year we know in February what we need and what division we will be in (Vincent, if you’re reading this the answer is not more left wingers).
This user liked this post: Spike

Nori1958
Posts: 3833
Joined: Tue May 03, 2022 10:45 am
Been Liked: 1112 times
Has Liked: 347 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Nori1958 » Mon Feb 19, 2024 12:26 pm

ClaretOfMancunia wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 11:45 am
Luton spent just £25M and look a Premier League outfit.
Only teams getting points reductions will keep them in the league though

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9474
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1185 times
Has Liked: 779 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Jakubclaret » Mon Feb 19, 2024 1:11 pm

Nori1958 wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 12:26 pm
Only teams getting points reductions will keep them in the league though
That's fair statement taking into consideration they are only 4/5pts behind the likes of forest Brentford & palace.

ClaretOfMancunia
Posts: 162
Joined: Thu Sep 21, 2023 12:15 pm
Been Liked: 47 times
Has Liked: 53 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by ClaretOfMancunia » Mon Feb 19, 2024 2:16 pm

Nori1958 wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 12:26 pm
Only teams getting points reductions will keep them in the league though
Correct, but I meant more that they are capable of putting up a fight at this level - on a quarter of what we spent. They're not shipping five goals at home and they've took a coupe of big scalps already.

Nori1958
Posts: 3833
Joined: Tue May 03, 2022 10:45 am
Been Liked: 1112 times
Has Liked: 347 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Nori1958 » Mon Feb 19, 2024 2:41 pm

ClaretOfMancunia wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 2:16 pm
Correct, but I meant more that they are capable of putting up a fight at this level - on a quarter of what we spent. They're not shipping five goals at home and they've took a coupe of big scalps already.
I agree they've done well, far better than I expected, but that fight puts them one place above us in real terms, probably still get relegated and we took 4 points off them
Very similar to our first promotion, money spent elsewhere but still get a few good results, unfortunately, just fighting spirit is not enough at this level.

bumba
Posts: 3133
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 12:21 pm
Been Liked: 691 times
Has Liked: 200 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by bumba » Mon Feb 19, 2024 3:43 pm

forzagranata wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 11:43 am
3 or 4 players of Premier League quality might have been a decent idea.

Luton spent how much on Barkley and Townsend while loaning Lokonga?
Imagine our lineup if we signed these three plus a couple that we signed, we could have spent less than half what we have and been much stronger.

Muric
Roberts Beyer O'Shea Taylor
Lokonga
Barkley Berge
Townsend Koleosho
Foster
This user liked this post: forzagranata

ŽižkovClaret
Posts: 7070
Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
Been Liked: 2176 times
Has Liked: 3110 times
Location: Praha
Contact:

Re: The £100 million

Post by ŽižkovClaret » Mon Feb 19, 2024 3:45 pm

ClaretOfMancunia wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 11:45 am
Luton spent just £25M and look a Premier League outfit.
How much resale value is there at Luton? We have a young side, we'll be relegated but i think there is still something there potentially

Swizzlestick
Posts: 4073
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 9:40 pm
Been Liked: 1507 times
Has Liked: 581 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Swizzlestick » Mon Feb 19, 2024 3:52 pm

bumba wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 3:43 pm
Imagine our lineup if we signed these three plus a couple that we signed, we could have spent less than half what we have and been much stronger.

Muric
Roberts Beyer O'Shea Taylor
Lokonga
Barkley Berge
Townsend Koleosho
Foster
This is getting a bit 'benefit of hindsight'. Didn't we go for Lokonga and he turned us down? I'm sure he agreed initially. Barkley was a gamble that has paid off so far for Luton, but there were hardly a long list of suitors and he wasn't a regular in France. I'd have signed Townsend but he hasn't even been a first team starter there.

The keeper, I agree, we've ballsed up royally there. Roberts and Beyer have found it tough in the PL.

Nori1958
Posts: 3833
Joined: Tue May 03, 2022 10:45 am
Been Liked: 1112 times
Has Liked: 347 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Nori1958 » Mon Feb 19, 2024 3:54 pm

Swizzlestick wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 3:52 pm
This is getting a bit 'benefit of hindsight'. Didn't we go for Lokonga and he turned us down? I'm sure he agreed initially. Barkley was a gamble that has paid off so far for Luton, but there were hardly a long list of suitors and he wasn't a regular in France. I'd have signed Townsend but he hasn't even been a first team starter there.

The keeper, I agree, we've ballsed up royally there. Roberts and Beyer have found it tough in the PL.
I don't think there would have been full agreement on here or elsewhere had we gone for Barkley

Big Vinny K
Posts: 2499
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
Been Liked: 1031 times
Has Liked: 280 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Big Vinny K » Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:00 pm

Swizzlestick wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 3:52 pm
This is getting a bit 'benefit of hindsight'. Didn't we go for Lokonga and he turned us down? I'm sure he agreed initially. Barkley was a gamble that has paid off so far for Luton, but there were hardly a long list of suitors and he wasn't a regular in France. I'd have signed Townsend but he hasn't even been a first team starter there.

The keeper, I agree, we've ballsed up royally there. Roberts and Beyer have found it tough in the PL.
“A bit” ?!!!!

Lokongo turned us down according to the reports - we could have kidnapped him i suppose. Hasn’t he been out injured quite a bit this season ? (Might be wrong)

Barkley - been brilliant for them no doubt. But there is a hell of a lot of other managers in the league who have also missed out here as if they would have thought or known ge was going to be as good as he has been he would have gone to a much bigger club than Luton (or Burnley).

Townsend - the reasons have been already explained. And Koleosho and Odabert have both been a success this season anyway.

bumba
Posts: 3133
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 12:21 pm
Been Liked: 691 times
Has Liked: 200 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by bumba » Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:04 pm

Big Vinny K wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:00 pm
“A bit” ?!!!!

Lokongo turned us down according to the reports - we could have kidnapped him i suppose. Hasn’t he been out injured quite a bit this season ? (Might be wrong)

Barkley - been brilliant for them no doubt. But there is a hell of a lot of other managers in the league who have also missed out here as if they would have thought or known ge was going to be as good as he has been he would have gone to a much bigger club than Luton (or Burnley).

Townsend - the reasons have been already explained. And Koleosho and Odabert have both been a success this season anyway.
In what sense have they been a success?
Odabert wouldn't go for anymore than we paid, he's shown glimpses but been largely ineffective in games he needs lots more experience before his value goes up.
Koleosho was starting to play better and was always a threat but his end product needs some serious work.
Not sure we understand the definition of success in the same way.

Jakubclaret
Posts: 9474
Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
Been Liked: 1185 times
Has Liked: 779 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Jakubclaret » Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:13 pm

With this horrific season it's difficult to work out how anybody or anything can be described as a success anything but. Some players on odd occasions fleetingly have done slightly better than their counterparts if you are being generous.

Big Vinny K
Posts: 2499
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
Been Liked: 1031 times
Has Liked: 280 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Big Vinny K » Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:17 pm

bumba wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:04 pm

Not sure we understand the definition of success in the same way.
Given the utter rubbish you talked about Maatsen then yes you are correct we have a very different definition of success.
This user liked this post: nettiepicot92

KRBFC
Posts: 18135
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3804 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by KRBFC » Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:23 pm

Talking about “what if Dyche had been given £100m” is just stupid talk for Football manager enthusiasts.

The wage bill under Dyche was around £90m a year. What is it now? £30m?

You can spend more when the wage bill is lower, I thought that would be pretty obvious

bumba
Posts: 3133
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 12:21 pm
Been Liked: 691 times
Has Liked: 200 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by bumba » Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:25 pm

Big Vinny K wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:17 pm
Given the utter rubbish you talked about Maatsen then yes you are correct we have a very different definition of success.
I haven't watched any of his Dortmund games to know if he's improved his defensive abilities in the 8/9 months he's away from Burnley but whilst he was with us up against good opposition he struggled defensively.

KRBFC
Posts: 18135
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3804 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by KRBFC » Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:25 pm

bumba wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:04 pm
In what sense have they been a success?
Odabert wouldn't go for anymore than we paid, he's shown glimpses but been largely ineffective in games he needs lots more experience before his value goes up.
Koleosho was starting to play better and was always a threat but his end product needs some serious work.
Not sure we understand the definition of success in the same way.
More Anti BFC talk, not even a positive word for either of our two kids on the wing, two of our bright sparks from a poor season.

bumba
Posts: 3133
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 12:21 pm
Been Liked: 691 times
Has Liked: 200 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by bumba » Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:39 pm

KRBFC wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:25 pm
More Anti BFC talk, not even a positive word for either of our two kids on the wing, two of our bright sparks from a poor season.
Sorry forgot you'd transformed to Mr.Brightside, no anti BFC talk there it's two facts about both players. Both are going to be good players but how I've described there performances are correct.
Maybe in 12 months I'll be the next number 1 fan like you are this season, you've shown the way your a star

KRBFC
Posts: 18135
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:18 am
Been Liked: 3804 times
Has Liked: 1071 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by KRBFC » Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:47 pm

bumba wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:39 pm
Sorry forgot you'd transformed to Mr.Brightside, no anti BFC talk there it's two facts about both players. Both are going to be good players but how I've described there performances are correct.
Maybe in 12 months I'll be the next number 1 fan like you are this season, you've shown the way your a star
Odobert hasn’t shown anything to be worth over the £8m we paid?

Koleosho hasn’t been a successful signing at £3m?

Just anti BFC talk, I thought even the most negative of cry babies on here would acknowledge those two have been bright sparks in a dark season. I thought wrong, burn it all down the ground

bumba
Posts: 3133
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2016 12:21 pm
Been Liked: 691 times
Has Liked: 200 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by bumba » Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:56 pm

KRBFC wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:47 pm
Odobert hasn’t shown anything to be worth over the £8m we paid?

Koleosho hasn’t been a successful signing at £3m?

Just anti BFC talk, I thought even the most negative of cry babies on here would acknowledge those two have been bright sparks in a dark season. I thought wrong, burn it all down the ground
Where did I say they weren't good signings?
I've said Odabert needs more experience for his value to go up, Koleosho has only played about 4/5 months then been out injured he looks a prospect but his end product needs to improve. £3 million is a snip if he can improve his end product, Adama Traore was exciting with pace when he burst on the scene but his end product never improved.
Show me the anti BFC talk in the paragraph you quoted?
Your talking rubbish.

Conroy92
Posts: 1351
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2016 9:06 pm
Been Liked: 504 times
Has Liked: 30 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Conroy92 » Mon Feb 19, 2024 5:03 pm

KRBFC wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:23 pm
Talking about “what if Dyche had been given £100m” is just stupid talk for Football manager enthusiasts.

The wage bill under Dyche was around £90m a year. What is it now? £30m?

You can spend more when the wage bill is lower, I thought that would be pretty obvious
Is the wage bill 30m though. 👀 I don't actually know I'm just interested but it seems quite a low figure that. Considering the improved contracts for some at the back end of last season and the signings this term. Then with the squad size itself. We must have a squad twice the size of Dyches (without the padding out of under 21's, ones that we didn't purchase I might add :D )
What do we think our wage bill stands at right now?
Where's Chester Perry he's good with the finances!

Big Vinny K
Posts: 2499
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
Been Liked: 1031 times
Has Liked: 280 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Big Vinny K » Mon Feb 19, 2024 5:38 pm

KRBFC wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 4:23 pm
Talking about “what if Dyche had been given £100m” is just stupid talk for Football manager enthusiasts.

The wage bill under Dyche was around £90m a year. What is it now? £30m?

You can spend more when the wage bill is lower, I thought that would be pretty obvious
The wage bill will be at least double £30m now - at least.
It is true that after his first summer VK reduced the wage bill from around £90m to £30m.

It’s a point I’ve always argued that it’s not just about transfer spend but also about our wage bill.

The other area people who are using this £100m number as a stick against the club always seem to conveniently forget is the £80m or so we brought in from selling players after being relegated. We only went on to spend £35m or so of that in the season after.

So a net spend of between £50m and £60m over VKs tenure is not that significant relative to most other clubs - especially when you factor in our reduction in the total wage bill.

Iloveyoubrady
Posts: 1853
Joined: Sun Sep 24, 2017 11:30 am
Been Liked: 300 times
Has Liked: 28 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Iloveyoubrady » Mon Feb 19, 2024 5:38 pm

Think Trafford, amdouni, Odobert, Koleosho and Berge are all worth as much or more than we paid. Ramsey and Tresor seem to be the two shockers imo.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19426
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3165 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Chester Perry » Mon Feb 19, 2024 5:44 pm

Conroy92 wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 5:03 pm
Is the wage bill 30m though. 👀 I don't actually know I'm just interested but it seems quite a low figure that. Considering the improved contracts for some at the back end of last season and the signings this term. Then with the squad size itself. We must have a squad twice the size of Dyches (without the padding out of under 21's, ones that we didn't purchase I might add :D )
What do we think our wage bill stands at right now?
Where's Chester Perry he's good with the finances!
£30m or less is what the noises from club were suggesting for the Championship last season - I find it a stretch (even before promotion bonuses - particularly when it was probable that they were paying Dyche and his potted backroom until January last year.

Add in the new players and a raft of new deals and Premier League uplifts in existing deals - no sales of note but a few loans and a growing off the pitch presence, it obvious that sum will have grown somewhat. I would also include the Management fee that ALK charge (even if it is a separate accounting cost) £1.5m in our last Premier League season, but we have another of them living here full time now so may well have gone up.

I will stress again I have no issue for owners (including Pace and Co) being paid for the time they spend at the club, they are obviously not just sitting around doing nothing.

Personally I would be surprised if it was less than £60m this season and I would not be too surprised if it was over £70m

Big Vinny K
Posts: 2499
Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
Been Liked: 1031 times
Has Liked: 280 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Big Vinny K » Mon Feb 19, 2024 5:58 pm

Chester Perry wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 5:44 pm
£30m or less is what the noises from club were suggesting for the Championship last season - I find it a stretch (even before promotion bonuses - particularly when it was probable that they were paying Dyche and his potted backroom until January last year.

Add in the new players and a raft of new deals and Premier League uplifts in existing deals - no sales of note but a few loans and a growing off the pitch presence, it obvious that sum will have grown somewhat. I would also include the Management fee that ALK charge (even if it is a separate accounting cost) £1.5m in our last Premier League season, but we have another of them living here full time now so may well have gone up.

I will stress again I have no issue for owners (including Pace and Co) being paid for the time they spend at the club, they are obviously not just sitting around doing nothing.

Personally I would be surprised if it was less than £60m this season and I would not be too surprised if it was over £70m
Don’t think your figures are too far off CP.

The wage bill was down to under £30m after the first summer - I know that for a fact. But you won’t see that number in any accounts because like you say bonuses for going up, signing other players in January, new contracts etc.

Even if the wage bill is around £70m now that’s still a £20m reduction on the numbers under Dyche. Personally I believe that’s quite a big contributory factor to how we have been able to afford to spend like we did last summer (it’s not the sole reason obviously).

Our problems could come when we get relegated this season as we do not have the big wage earners we had last time that we can easily get rid of as we did with Tarks, Mee, Collins, Dwight, Cornet, Wout etc. And it’s also unlikely we can raise anything like £80m in player sales.

In fact if you make the logical assumption that some of our top earners now are the players who cost most in transfer fees it could make our position even more precarious with the likes of Tresor, Amdouni, Trafford etc having a poor season and could be hard to sell without taking a hit.

We are in a very different position to the last time we were relegated.

alwaysaclaret
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:51 am
Been Liked: 238 times
Has Liked: 443 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by alwaysaclaret » Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:02 pm

Iloveyoubrady wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 5:38 pm
Think Trafford, amdouni, Odobert, Koleosho and Berge are all worth as much or more than we paid. Ramsey and Tresor seem to be the two shockers imo.
Doubt anybody will pay over £19m for a keeper that's shipped 55 goals after 25 games.

Swizzlestick
Posts: 4073
Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2016 9:40 pm
Been Liked: 1507 times
Has Liked: 581 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by Swizzlestick » Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:21 pm

Iloveyoubrady wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 5:38 pm
Think Trafford, amdouni, Odobert, Koleosho and Berge are all worth as much or more than we paid. Ramsey and Tresor seem to be the two shockers imo.
Fair play to us if we manage to get a profit on either Trafford or Amdouni

123EasyasBFC
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2022 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 621 times
Has Liked: 184 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by 123EasyasBFC » Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:28 pm

bumba wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 3:43 pm
Imagine our lineup if we signed these three plus a couple that we signed, we could have spent less than half what we have and been much stronger.

Muric
Roberts Beyer O'Shea Taylor
Lokonga
Barkley Berge
Townsend Koleosho
Foster
Lokonga was the one for me we needed, Barkley was a risk due to his previous 18 months and at start of summer he could well of been holding out for Saudi, Townsend another gamble, he could of broke down injured early doors

StayingDown4Ever
Posts: 1314
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2022 7:02 am
Been Liked: 269 times
Has Liked: 161 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by StayingDown4Ever » Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:30 pm

123EasyasBFC wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:28 pm
Lokonga was the one for me we needed, Barkley was a risk due to his previous 18 months and at start of summer he could well of been holding out for Saudi, Townsend another gamble, he could of broke down injured early doors
A lot of our recent signings seem to have broken down injured.

123EasyasBFC
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2022 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 621 times
Has Liked: 184 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by 123EasyasBFC » Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:34 pm

StayingDown4Ever wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:30 pm
A lot of our recent signings seem to have broken down injured.
Your right they have but given Townsend had just come back from a serious knee injury there is more risk then what’s happened to the likes of koleosho, Redmond, Beyer and foster.

I was all for the links to Milner, Evans and Dier in the summer. There’s a reason nobody else took a chance on Barkley but fair play to Luton it’s worked for them.

I think it was right decision to not sign townsend

StayingDown4Ever
Posts: 1314
Joined: Sat Mar 26, 2022 7:02 am
Been Liked: 269 times
Has Liked: 161 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by StayingDown4Ever » Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:40 pm

123EasyasBFC wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:34 pm
Your right they have but given Townsend had just come back from a serious knee injury there is more risk then what’s happened to the likes of koleosho, Redmond, Beyer and foster.

I was all for the links to Milner, Evans and Dier in the summer. There’s a reason nobody else took a chance on Barkley but fair play to Luton it’s worked for them.

I think it was right decision to not sign townsend
Yes, I agree with you on that. Was just an observation really on all the injuries we seem to have had.

123EasyasBFC
Posts: 3120
Joined: Sat Jul 23, 2022 11:09 pm
Been Liked: 621 times
Has Liked: 184 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by 123EasyasBFC » Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:44 pm

StayingDown4Ever wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:40 pm
Yes, I agree with you on that. Was just an observation really on all the injuries we seem to have had.
Injuries can be freak incidents but you can also look at the new head physio we signed from Man City, have the players struggled with the physical side of being a prem player at training and in games

CoolClaret
Posts: 7457
Joined: Sat May 06, 2017 7:39 pm
Been Liked: 2256 times
Has Liked: 2171 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by CoolClaret » Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:46 pm

Wages spiralled to those amounts after a prolonged period in the PL with Dyche, as they would with any team that does similar.

Wages will naturally decrease depending on being in the PL/Champ with reductions that tend to be baked in to players' contracts these days - not sure why this always seems to get overlooked.

boatshed bill
Posts: 15265
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
Been Liked: 3164 times
Has Liked: 6762 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by boatshed bill » Mon Feb 19, 2024 7:09 pm

123EasyasBFC wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 6:44 pm
Injuries can be freak incidents but you can also look at the new head physio we signed from Man City, have the players struggled with the physical side of being a prem player at training and in games
The young players may well be struggling, both physically and mentally.

alwaysaclaret
Posts: 1394
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 11:51 am
Been Liked: 238 times
Has Liked: 443 times

Re: The £100 million

Post by alwaysaclaret » Mon Feb 19, 2024 8:03 pm

boatshed bill wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2024 7:09 pm
The young players may well be struggling, both physically and mentally.
Not the only thing their struggling with.

Post Reply