Come on Mr Garlick say something. What the he'll is going on ?

Actions speak louder than words.

Aclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 7:49 pm

Come on Mr Garlick say something. What the he'll is going on ?

Season prices frozen again, what more do you want?

I remember when the chairman wouldn't back Coyle. Hope its not history repeating as that ended in tears

That didn't turn out too bad for us, look at how we went on and look at how Coyle went on..
Bolton backed him and he took them down.

The clubs finances are more important than any player or manager, even one who's done wonders for us like Dyche.

Wembley09 wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 8:07 pm

That didn't turn out too bad for us, look at how we went on and look at how Coyle went on..
Bolton backed him and he took them down.

The clubs finances are more important than any player or manager, even one who's done wonders for us like Dyche.

Yup. Club is bigger than the manager. Club is bigger than the players.

This season has gone, put the money we're saving on wages towards new signings for next season. I'm hoping that's what Garlick is thinking!

Dyche is not very good at purchasing players. Far too picky and slow. Our squad needs overhauled because Dyche has kicked the can for too long.

It's not about now, it's about the future of the Club. Until we know that there will likely be a next season, we need to be very careful on what we commit to.

No point in the Chairman getting involved in a playground fight with a spoilt little kid who has thrown his dummy out of the pram

What do you want the chairman to say, go on then here's 40k a week for you Aaron, here's 40k a week for you Joe here's 40k a week for you Phil here's 40k a week for you Geoff and some green and white wall paper.

I think those willing to give the Chairman the benefit of the doubt get my vote. Let's be fair he has done rather a good job up to date.

Sensible approach getting rid of deadwood

Woodleyclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 10:04 pm

Sensible approach getting rid of deadwood

Exactly. Who on earth, at the present time, would want to give contract extensions to the entirely pointless Lennon and Hart. We’re safe (fortunately) we really don’t need them for the next 5 weeks or so. Unfortunately we’ve signed far too many of these “pension top up” players. The time to scout youth is long overdue.

We are 8 games short of season end. 24 points.
Nothing left beyond the starters at the moment.
That is very, very wrong.

To be fair we don’t have all the facts. If the season had run it’s normal course then some of these would have played to the end and walked away. Unfortunate circumstances but I get the feeling Dyche (wrongly in my opinion) wanted to offer longer term contracts to some and the chairman has said no.

But will we have more than 40 points at season end. Two games a week for about 5 weeks is tough for a small squad and with injuries too.

Hendrick has a deal on the table but he wants to be the top earner.
Bardsley offered one month extension but wants another year

With all this indecision and uncertainty the Chairman needs to grow a pair and make a statement. We penny pinch over short term contracts then pay considerable wages and salaries to a chief exec, a managing director, a management team, and a PR team, and its left to SD to not only manage the team but also be the only one who is man enough to face the media

paulatky wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 10:20 pm

Hendrick has a deal on the table but he wants to be the top earner.
Bardsley offered one month extension but wants another year

Beardsley the only one I’d be tempted to offer a 12 month contract to. Hendricks I think wants too much and has other offers on the table.

paulatky wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 10:20 pm

Hendrick has a deal on the table but he wants to be the top earner.
Bardsley offered one month extension but wants another year

How much does Hendrick want?

Garlick was there tonight reckon he might go back with a bit more tomorrow if he’s any sense

Garlick: get Bardsley signed up pronto

Sounds like Bardsley is not being unrealistic. If true about Hendrick then he can go as he quite simply is not our top player to justify being the biggest earner.Sadly we missed him tonight

ralphc wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 10:20 pm

To be fair we don’t have all the facts. If the season had run it’s normal course then some of these would have played to the end and walked away. Unfortunate circumstances but I get the feeling Dyche (wrongly in my opinion) wanted to offer longer term contracts to some and the chairman has said no.

Thought that is why you have a manager.

warksclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 10:23 pm

With all this indecision and uncertainty the Chairman needs to grow a pair and make a statement. We penny pinch over short term contracts then pay considerable wages and salaries to a chief exec, a managing director, a management team, and a PR team, and its left to SD to not only manage the team but also be the only one who is man enough to face the media

News to me. Last I heard we didn't have a chief exec and none fo the directors get a salary. Yes, Sean Dyche is the highest earner - but is that controversial?

As far as this short squad goes, I don't think anyone is blaming the Chairman for not giving Lennon and Hart and Legzdins another year or two years or whatever they are asking. I hope not, anyway. I don't think anyone is blaming the Chairman for the injuries to Wood, Barnes, Gudmondsson, and presumably Brady. All that we can blame the Chairman for is the decision not to pay Bardsley and Hendrick what they want - and until we know what it is they do want, we don't know how much blame goes where.

Certainly making Hendrick the highest paid player, if that's what he wants, would be foolish. Because then every player as good as him or better (which certainly includes Pope, Mee, Tarkowski, Taylor, Westwood, Wood, Barnes, McNeil) would want to be highest paid player as well.

Will we really miss Lennon, Hart, Ledgzins? No...not at all. I see the useless Brady has once again taken up his place on the physio’s table. If Hendrick and Bardsley don’t want to play for Burnley FC then I don’t want them to either. Two embarrassments this evening. The Plane and Sean Dyche.

Wokingclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 11:03 pm

Garlick: get Bardsley signed up pronto

Exactly, he's a key part of the puzzle.

warksclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 11:15 pm

If true about Hendrick then he can go as he quite simply is not our top player to justify being the biggest earner. Sadly we missed him tonight

That's the reason we need to re-sign Hendrick, although not as the highest earner, but well within the top pay scale.

We have a CEO - Neil Hart.
We have had a CEO for years like most other clubs.
We do not have a managing director as such.
We have a board of directors and none of them have taken a penny out of the club in recent years.

exilecanada wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 11:29 pm

Exactly, he's a key part of the puzzle.

What if his demands are seen as excessive?

paulatky wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 10:20 pm

Hendrick has a deal on the table but he wants to be the top earner.
Bardsley offered one month extension but wants another year

If Hendrick wants to be our top earner, he's been on the wacky baccy, he's an OK squad player, but he's never nailed down a true position during his stint at Burnley, arguably he's suffered from being seen as a jack of all trades, and master of none, but i wouldn't push out the boat for him, and anyway we've acquired Brownhill as a right sided midfielder now, so it's not a position we're short in, unless he lowers his demands i'd be saying goodbye and good luck, if he and his agent can get a better deal in this climate, then all well and good for them.

Bardsley i'd give another year to, even with all the uncertainty surrounding football, the one thing we do know is that we'll still be a PL club come September, and Bardsley's down enough to merit a one year deal in my eyes, yes he's getting on in years, but his football brain is as sharp as ever, and ideally the one part of the team we'd keep together is our back 5, they're an integral part of our success.

warksclaret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 11:15 pm

Sounds like Bardsley is not being unrealistic. If true about Hendrick then he can go as he quite simply is not our top player to justify being the biggest earner.Sadly we missed him tonight

It's not true about Hendrick

boatshed bill wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 11:33 pm

What if his demands are seen as excessive?

True, that's what negotiation is all about. Upper management appears to say 'my way or the highway".

exilecanada wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 11:52 pm

True, that's what negotiation is all about. Upper management appears to say 'my way or the highway".

OK, so we don't know the detail.
But what sort of deal would you offer:
Hart? I'd go nothing at all
Legzdins? ditto
Lennon? ditto
Bardsley? 1 year on a reduced wage
Hendrick? 2 years on what he's on now.

I would have thought everybody would understand that the knock on affects of the last 3 months are damaging. We are lucky that we can come through this, but I should imagine a lot of the transfer budget has gone.
It has to be cheaper to keep Hendrick that find a replacement, but that's only relevant if he wants to stay.

boatshed bill wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 11:56 pm

OK, so we don't know the detail.
But what sort of deal would you offer:
Hart? I'd go nothing at all
Legzdins? ditto
Lennon? ditto
Bardsley? 1 year on a reduced wage
Hendrick? 2 years on what he's on now.

First 3 have zero value, Bardsley on same wage, Hendrick 5% increase.

Colburn_Claret wrote: ↑

Mon Jun 22, 2020 11:58 pm

I would have thought everybody would understand that the knock on affects of the last 3 months are damaging.

That really is the key to this dilemma. Cat is certainly among the pigeons.

If i understood SD correctly pre-match there is still a possibility we'll secure both Bardsley and Hendrick - but neither will play/will be selected whilst that is unresolved

Tonight's performance plays into the hands of both players - if they are genuinely interested in staying

EarbyClaret wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:05 am

If i understood SD correctly pre-match there is still a possibility we'll secure both Bardsley and Hendrick - but neither will play/will be selected whilst that is unresolved

Tonight's performance plays into the hands of both players - if they are genuinely interested in staying

Not sure it makes any difference. If they want to play they'll sign.

exilecanada wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:00 am

First 3 have zero value, Bardsley on same wage, Hendrick 5% increase.

So not substantially different to what I think.
When it comes down to it we're paying a lot of our ageing non-performers.

I think the Chairman has spoken rather loudly and firmly up to now, you're just not listening or agreeing with him but either way it's not going to make any difference. I am positive he knows what SD thinks and wants but as rightly pointed out it's what happens prior to the start of next season that counts not the next few weeks, just my opinion of course.

Have seen melt downs on here over the years regarding players leaving and being injured and it has never been as bad as people predicted.

KateR wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:20 am

I think the Chairman has spoken rather loudly and firmly up to now, you're just not listening or agreeing with him but either way it's not going to make any difference. I am positive he knows what SD thinks and wants but as rightly pointed out it's what happens prior to the start of next season that counts not the next few weeks, just my opinion of course.

Have seen melt downs on here over the years regarding players leaving and being injured and it has never been as bad as people predicted.

Chairman needs to sack Dyche fast as he will now slowly start to poison the club unintentionally.

FactualFrank wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:07 am

Not sure it makes any difference. If they want to play they'll sig

I meant it strengthens their hand (and the manager's come to that) if they consider staying on the right terms is still a possibility. I sense Hendrick is in the enviable position of having options - less do Bardsley

Either way, fully committed, I think we would have put up a better display tonight if they were involved

Bfcboyo wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:22 am

Chairman needs to sack Dyche fast as he will now slowly start to poison the club unintentionally.

complete knee jerk reaction and totally against what you say as of today but am willing to watch over the next two months and see where it goes, plus change my mind if I see what you state.

Bfcboyo wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:22 am

Chairman needs to sack Dyche fast as he will now slowly start to poison the club unintentionally.

We can't afford that. Only one thing can explain today's bench selection - Sean has been tapped up. We need to get the £10m compo, not pay him to get rid.

KateR wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 23, 2020 12:27 am

complete knee jerk reaction and totally against what you say as of today but am willing to watch over the next two months and see where it goes, plus change my mind if I see what you state.

X

Things are blatantly looking strained, Dyche’s pre-match interview showed that.

Garlick obviously has more to balance than Dyche. He does though need to work hard to ensure that Dyche feels that they’re at least on the same page.

I’m not suggesting that the Chairman should be bending over backwards for Dyche, but I do think that Dyche has demonstrated his willingness to work within certain constraints. Dyche surely wouldn’t be overly unrealistic in his expectations - his whole tenure has focussed on balancing what is right for the club longer term, whilst delivering on the pitch.

Keeping Dyche will prove to be far cheaper than backing him against a wall, to the point that he decides enough is enough. It’d be disastrous to lose Dyche now.

Hopefully Garlick works to put things right and bloody quickly.

It would seem four players have refused to play for the club when fit and within current contract

And Dyche, plus others on here, seem to think that is ok and we should be bowing to their demands?

jojomk1 wrote: ↑

Tue Jun 23, 2020 5:34 am

It would seem four players have refused to play for the club when fit and within current contract

And Dyche, plus others on here, seem to think that is ok and we should be bowing to their demands?

I’d really like to know the individual players’ positions. I don’t understand why they are not even in the squad when they have another week on their contacts. In value terms that must be getting on for £200,000.
Is there not some sort of moral obligation that should be at work here? They’ve been paid to do nothing for 3 months. I would have thought the least they can do is to play out the rest of the season, contract extensions or not.
From where I’m sitting have no empathy for the players at all, however please tell me I’m missing something.

Jojomk1, that last point wasn’t aimed at you. I think we’re in agreement!