Have we (the fans) reached a tipping point?

[SGr]

Whatever Sean wants i am happy to go along with it

What if Sean wants to leave

[Taffy on the wing]

Yes, maybe you are right. I'm really happy to be in the PL but my goodness the football we play is boring most of the time. I don’t know what the solution is as we obviously cannot afford the type of player to bring sexy football to Burnley.

I'll take what we "serve up" any day...... over this pass it around at the back, bring it to the halfway line then retrace your steps because there's nothing on......repeat ad nauseam.
I was watching Tottenham recently and they did this 3 or 4 times in a row....I had to turn it off!

[boatshed bill]

I'll take what we "serve up" any day...... over this pass it around at the back, bring it to the halfway line then retrace your steps because there's nothing on......repeat ad nauseam.
I was watching Tottenham recently and they did this 3 or 4 times in a row....I had to turn it off!

We do something similar, from right wing to goalkeeper in 3 easy moves!

[Claret Toni]

Cash was allowed to build up to help fund the purchase by the new investors, so he went with what he had, but we all knew the score courtesy of his eventual public gripes with the now extremely wealthy ex-chairman.

The 1st 11, or thereabouts, is unrecognisable from the pre Dyche era. The quality of the extended squad was, however, there for us all to witness. Of course his inability to use the funds he has effectively generated to improve the 1st 11 and squad has exasperated him, so he works magnificently grinding out results in the prime money earning competition, probably in the knowledge that the new owners will have, once again, 1st call on the funds; this time to service the new debt.

Yes I would enjoy more pure football (ah Steven Defour memories - in the cup as well), but these are difficult times for the club and I'm just delighted we have this man for all seasons at our helm.

Nowhere near tipping point for the Manager and the New Chairman needs time to prove himself.

[Right_winger]

Whatever Sean wants i am happy to go along with it

This type of attitude is generally from people who don’t have any opinions of their own.

It’s quite sad really.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

This type of attitude is generally from people who don’t have any opinions of their own.

It’s quite sad really.

Why is it?

Dyche has far more expertise than anyone on here and if we are all honest some of the opinions should be deleted before they're posted because they're absolute garbage.

[dandeclaret]

The 'tipping point ' hopefully comes at the end of this season and sees us scrape out of relegation and a new season in the Premiership with a new owner who is willing to bring in 2-3 good quality young players each season who can 'grow ' with the club and appreciate in value to then be sold to bigger clubs for a healthy profit.
I was anticipating such a scenario under Garlick. Instead £40m plus was stacked up while our player assets aged, slowed down, became more injury prone and in the case of Hendrick, simply walked away. I'm struggling with the 'legacy' that he has left behind.
I would hope that the new ownership will take on the challenge of judicious signings of quality young, fast, durable players who can 'grow ' within the club.
That said, if they've already 'plundered' the £40m cash maybe we will still be resorting to bringing in ageing pros such as Dale Stephens and Danny Drinkwater. If that is the case, there is no hope of Sean Dyche renewing his contract at the end of next season.

I can help on the legacy part.

* A category 1 academy
* A brand new training ground, that will be there for the next 20 to 30 years
* Improvements to the ground, including significant changes enabling disabled supporters to be treated with respect
* The best squad of players that most of us have seen, and a business supporting a wage bill of £87m
* A debt free business, which in football is an anomaly
* A cash reserve that was large enough to support the club through what is a somewhat inevitible situation of relegation
* A legacy of a club that over performs against EVERY SINGLE ONE of it's peers. Every one. A club that should by rights be mid to lower table championship enjoying an 8th consecutive season above that level.
* Selling the business to people who could supposedly invest more. There was a significant proportion of the fans that wanted this to happen - but now aren't happy with the reality of what that means.

None of these come for free and require the right decisions to be made. People on this board often seem to quote a number without context. So £40m sound large, until you realise that's less than 6 months of funds for wages at the club. It sounds large until you realise that it's less than a 3rd of your most at risk revenue. It sounds large until you contextualise it against your wage bill running at 6 times your controllable income (Gate receipts and commercial revenue - even that has been shown to be at risk). 40m sounds large until you realise that if you invest £15m in a player purchase, plus a further £2 - £3m in annual salary, would reduce your relegation support fund by half - thus uf relegation happens, triggering the absolute cost cutting panic that tends to lead to relegation spirals through the leagues..... ah but Parachute Payments I hear you say..... they are less than half of our annual wage bill..... ah but we will sell players...... only if people want to buy them......

People now whinging that the club have been sold to people who have leveraged the club with debt, having wanted more investment is so typical of Burnley fans. On the match when they shout Shooooot - and then whinge when it goes wide, don't mean shoot they mean score. When they say sign a pacey right winger - no not Lennon, or Nkudou - or anybody the club can realistically afford. When they say Get new investors, they mean find sugar daddy billionaires who will invest in Burnley, not hard nosed business men who will try and drive the business forwards whilst taking a salary out of the club, and increasing the risk of a debt spiral. Burnley fans, regularly, unappreciative of what they have, and often resentful for what they haven't. No wonder life's frustrating.

If you can't see the legacy that has been left, then you truly have become complacent in the situation, and have lost context of where the natural level of the club is, and the brilliant job that the board have done over the years. They made far fewer mistakes than almost any other club in the British Leagues.

[NewClaret]

I’m still thinking about our second half display against Brighton. Dyche reportedly said he instructed the players to slacken off the framework and play with more freedom/spontaneity/instinctiveness, the result (on this occasion) was impressive and very enjoyable to watch.

Have we (the fans) reached that ‘tipping point’ where we want more open, attacking, creative team performances AND we also accept that this may (marginally?) increase the chance of relegation from the Premier League?

I’m sure Dyche can coach the team to play in a more unpredictable, attacking style but it is a high risk strategy which would eventually (in his own opinion) lead to relegation.

Would YOU prefer the status quo or would you prefer a riskier but more entertaining football strategy going forward.

I’d prefer the status quo.

I watched PNE vs Rovers last night and it was dreadful - everything about it. I do not want to be in the Championship come what may.

What Dyche demonstrated in the Brighton second half was his flexibility. First and foremost we should approach every game seeking to stay tight defensively, then try to play ourselves in to the game, dominate with the ball, and play decent football. Really the players should be able to recognise these key periods in the game when we’re on top and loosen the defensive solidity, then reset. In the PL we won’t dominate 90 minutes against any team so need to be able to switch how we play with and without the ball.

[lewishamclaret]

Great post dande. Frustrations- certainly. But I’m certainly a long way from reaching my tipping point when viewed in that context.

[bodge]

"I'm struggling with the legacy he's left behind".

Crikey O'Reilly as they say in Dublin, that's astonishing.

[Quicknick]

No.

[Duffer_]

A legacy has to endure. Some of the points listed by dande didn't even survive the change in ownership. Too early to say how history will view MG but it looks like he has made more money out of BFC than any other individual in our history. Personally, I wouldn't value his contribution to our success at £75m.

[GodIsADeeJay81]

A legacy has to endure. Some of the points listed by dande didn't even survive the change in ownership. Too early to say how history will view MG but it looks like he has made more money out of BFC than any other individual in our history. Personally, I wouldn't value his contribution to our success at £75m.

If you view him as anything other than a great owner and chairman then the issue isn't him..

[Rileybobs]

A legacy has to endure. Some of the points listed by dande didn't even survive the change in ownership. Too early to say how history will view MG but it looks like he has made more money out of BFC than any other individual in our history. Personally, I wouldn't value his contribution to our success at £75m.

That was the value of his shares. It doesn’t matter how you value his contribution.

[Stayingup]

Unfortunately for the aggrieved Sean Dyche does have the money to pay 200 million to buy four top players and pay them 150k / week (minimum)

[dandeclaret]

A legacy has to endure. Some of the points listed by dande didn't even survive the change in ownership. Too early to say how history will view MG but it looks like he has made more money out of BFC than any other individual in our history. Personally, I wouldn't value his contribution to our success at £75m.

"A legacy has to endure" - only if the custodians believe in that legacy. Otherwise it's easy to destroy. Business is littered with successful legacies, ruined by either a failure to accept the importance and value of it, or an inability to maintain it, once the creators have moved on.

[NewClaret]

This was a thread about playing style. Not really sure why it has become a debate about our ex chairman.

Some folk feel he leaves a great legacy for getting us promoted several times, taking us to (and sustaining) levels not seen in my lifetime at least, investing in the training ground, building some corner stands, keeping us debt free, and protecting our future by building up some large crash reserves.

Others feel more sceptical about his motives, since he sanctioned a takeover that has seen us take on debt, he allegedly walked away with a large chunk of said cash reserves (which most on the opposing side of the argument argue were vital protection against relegation) and under investment in the first team/ground over many years, thus leaving us in a worse position than he otherwise might (not than he found us).

There are valid arguments on both sides. Can we move on?

[Duffer_]

I alluded to it in a midweek game thread, I would roughen up our pitch if it gives us an advantage (or reduces the advantage of our opponents). I want us to compete at the highest possible level for as long as possible. I think SD is the ultimate pragmatist and I trust him to tweak the mixed football to achieve maximum points. So, no, I'm not at a tipping point with regards to footballing style.

[Duffer_]

That was the value of his shares. It doesn’t matter how you value his contribution.

What a strange response but, OK, I trust you will never opine on whether any of our signings represent value for money.

You don’t have to apologise. All I’m doing is giving my opinion back, thought that’s what this place is about?!

[Rileybobs]

What a strange response but, OK, I trust you will never opine on whether any of our signings represent value for money.

Your response is a little stranger. What is the relevance of your second quote?

My point is, Garlick and the other ex-directors haven’t been remunerated for the job that they’ve done. They’ve been remunerated the market value of their shareholding.

To use the much overused housing analogy, if I buy a house and do naff all improvements to it but it increases in value by £100k, you could argue that I don’t deserve to be paid the extra £100k. But that’s the market value of the asset.

Garlick et al sold their shares for what they were worth. Whether or not you think they deserve it is neither here nor there.

[Duffer_]

Garlick et al sold their shares for what they were worth. Whether or not you think they deserve it is neither here nor there.

By the same token a player's transfer fee and wages are driven by the market but I doubt you would dismiss opinions on their value for money as neither here nor there. None of this really "matters" but your fluid ruleset is hard to keep up with.

[Rileybobs]

By the same token a player's transfer fee and wages are driven by the market but I doubt you would dismiss opinions on their value for money as neither here nor there. None of this really "matters" but your fluid ruleset is hard to keep up with.

I wasn’t aware I had a ruleset, fluid or otherwise.

[Duffer_]

I wasn’t aware I had a ruleset, fluid or otherwise.

You do, and it includes having the last word

[Rileybobs]

You do, and it includes having the last word

No it doesn’t.