| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. 18:03 - Feb 4 with 5918 views | felixstowe_jack |
|  |
| |  |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 12:35 - Feb 5 with 1163 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 12:31 - Feb 5 by STID2017 |
Whittaker was not sold because nobody offered enough money to satisfy the greedy Yanks.
Had the bid been high enough he would have gone
Not sure why anyone ( pro or anti owners, pro or anti Martin) would believe anything else
Not sure they will get offers as generous for him in the summer |
That’s the same for any player.
Nothing to do with greed, they don’t take any money from the club.
it’s about not selling our players cheaply.
On one hand you moan about not having enough financial power in the window, the next you are criticising them for ensuring anyone being sold is done so at a level that matches our values.
Can’t have it both ways. |  |
| |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 12:59 - Feb 5 with 1135 views | jack247 |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 12:21 - Feb 5 by Dr_Parnassus |
But it’s not a Russell Martin thing at all, as I’ve just showed.
He’s lost Obafemi this season which appears to be a player and manager instigated decision. The season before he lost Flynn Downes (who they signed anyway) and that was due to the level of offer from a big Premier League club.
To suggest losing one player to the Premier League in his whole managerial stint is somehow abnormal and as such will put people off is dishonest in the extreme.
Whitaker wasn’t brought back to be sold, which is why he wasn’t sold and they rejected every bid for him.
Of course we will spend less than what we bring in, our club model for as long as I have supported the club has been that way. We generate extra revenues needed to service overheads by player sales, what we can spare after that goes back into the playing squad. |
Which is why I said it’s not a Russell Martin thing. It happens every season. I’m not even complaining about it, just making the point it will keep happening and the next manager will have to accept it. I don’t think Sousa or Roberts would go for that.
In Potters season we cleared out a good chunk of the PL squad
Coopers first - James and McBurnie
Coopers second - Rodon
Martins first - Roberts and Lowe
Martins second - Downes | | | |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:00 - Feb 5 with 1135 views | STID2017 |
Nowhere have I ever posted that the owners take money from the club ( although they may be entitled to dividends, but not sure how as our value is constantly decreasing)
However neither are they great benefactors of the club.
They would happily have sold Whittaker and offloaded anyone else had the price been right, to allow them to keep the club going without having to inject any money.
The well will run dry and they will cut and run, leaving our club in deep trouble |  |
| |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:04 - Feb 5 with 1127 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 12:59 - Feb 5 by jack247 |
Which is why I said it’s not a Russell Martin thing. It happens every season. I’m not even complaining about it, just making the point it will keep happening and the next manager will have to accept it. I don’t think Sousa or Roberts would go for that.
In Potters season we cleared out a good chunk of the PL squad
Coopers first - James and McBurnie
Coopers second - Rodon
Martins first - Roberts and Lowe
Martins second - Downes |
You said it’s not “just” a Martin thing. It’s not a Martin thing at all.
In the years after a relegation, it’s not secret that cloth has to be cut accordingly, that’s the whole reason you have parachute payments. To lower your outgoings to adjust to life outside the big leagues.
Considering these are our first two seasons outside of that, it’s remarkable he’s only lost one player he wanted to keep, and that was to an 8 figure Premier League bid which is par for the course with any club.
I think you are trying to paint a false picture of an unattractive environment as opposed to a normal Championship environment. | |
| |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:06 - Feb 5 with 1123 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:00 - Feb 5 by STID2017 |
Nowhere have I ever posted that the owners take money from the club ( although they may be entitled to dividends, but not sure how as our value is constantly decreasing)
However neither are they great benefactors of the club.
They would happily have sold Whittaker and offloaded anyone else had the price been right, to allow them to keep the club going without having to inject any money.
The well will run dry and they will cut and run, leaving our club in deep trouble |
Dividends has nothing to do with business value. It’s about profit.
To say they are greedy suggests a personal gain. It’s definition is “an intense SELFish desire”. Acting in the best interests of the club by not selling our hottest young prospects on the cheap is neither selfish or greedy.
All owners sell players if the price is tight, that’s football. Nothing to do with being a bad benefactor. | |
| |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:09 - Feb 5 with 1125 views | STID2017 |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:04 - Feb 5 by Dr_Parnassus |
You said it’s not “just” a Martin thing. It’s not a Martin thing at all.
In the years after a relegation, it’s not secret that cloth has to be cut accordingly, that’s the whole reason you have parachute payments. To lower your outgoings to adjust to life outside the big leagues.
Considering these are our first two seasons outside of that, it’s remarkable he’s only lost one player he wanted to keep, and that was to an 8 figure Premier League bid which is par for the course with any club.
I think you are trying to paint a false picture of an unattractive environment as opposed to a normal Championship environment. |
"It’s not a Russell Martin thing. The same thing happened with Potter and Cooper. In all fairness I’m sure they all came into the job with their eyes wide open.
Whittaker was brought back to be sold. He didn’t want to come back and Martin didn’t want him back. The deal just broke down.
Piroe will be gone if a decent bid comes in.
We’ll spend less than we raise in August.?"
Just to clarify what he said. Read the first 6 words.
His post is unedited if you want to go back and check it.
Happy to help | |
| |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:16 - Feb 5 with 1109 views | onehunglow |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 12:31 - Feb 5 by STID2017 |
Whittaker was not sold because nobody offered enough money to satisfy the greedy Yanks.
Had the bid been high enough he would have gone
Not sure why anyone ( pro or anti owners, pro or anti Martin) would believe anything else
Not sure they will get offers as generous for him in the summer |
I believe Whittaker was brought back to be sold
That they saw fit to turn down what seemed to be a ludicrous high bid damns them as much as Martin and his coaching | |
| |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:19 - Feb 5 with 1107 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:09 - Feb 5 by STID2017 |
"It’s not a Russell Martin thing. The same thing happened with Potter and Cooper. In all fairness I’m sure they all came into the job with their eyes wide open.
Whittaker was brought back to be sold. He didn’t want to come back and Martin didn’t want him back. The deal just broke down.
Piroe will be gone if a decent bid comes in.
We’ll spend less than we raise in August.?"
Just to clarify what he said. Read the first 6 words.
His post is unedited if you want to go back and check it.
Happy to help |
First of all, how can you quote me if I’m on ignore? Please don’t tell me you are making a mockery of the forum rules?
Onto your assumption, incorrect.
Martin was part of the decision making meeting to bring back Whittaker. He was brought back to play, although only a small part in Martins eyes dependent on transfer window incomings, due to WBA pulling out of the Grant deal, that work load may well now increase.
Rangers offered millions and we refused point blank.
Everyone will be gone if a decent bid comes in, that goes for every player on the planet outside the elite.
I have read what he says, my response covers it perfectly as intended. | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:21 - Feb 5 with 1104 views | jack247 |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:04 - Feb 5 by Dr_Parnassus |
You said it’s not “just” a Martin thing. It’s not a Martin thing at all.
In the years after a relegation, it’s not secret that cloth has to be cut accordingly, that’s the whole reason you have parachute payments. To lower your outgoings to adjust to life outside the big leagues.
Considering these are our first two seasons outside of that, it’s remarkable he’s only lost one player he wanted to keep, and that was to an 8 figure Premier League bid which is par for the course with any club.
I think you are trying to paint a false picture of an unattractive environment as opposed to a normal Championship environment. |
If we ignore the firesale after relegation, we raised around £60m for the players mentioned. We were doing it while we were receiving parachute payments. That’s just on the headline sales each season.
I think the most we spent in that period was around £2m on Obafemi.
I’m not convinced that’s run of the mill.
We’ll see with the next appointment anyway. My guess is it will be another relatively unknown, young manager. | | | |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:21 - Feb 5 with 1104 views | Boundy |
Not for yesterday no , a good case for his going should be for more than just that .but as we've seen with no backing by the Board then if he goes who comes in under the same conditions we 've seen since the yanks have been here , we may laugh at Cardiff but we are imo becoming a replica , the cheap option every time. I believe Martin will keep us up, should someone else come in now,I'm not so sure because we could end up with a Russell Slade . | |
| "In a free society, the State is the servant of the people—not the master." |
| |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:29 - Feb 5 with 1084 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:21 - Feb 5 by jack247 |
If we ignore the firesale after relegation, we raised around £60m for the players mentioned. We were doing it while we were receiving parachute payments. That’s just on the headline sales each season.
I think the most we spent in that period was around £2m on Obafemi.
I’m not convinced that’s run of the mill.
We’ll see with the next appointment anyway. My guess is it will be another relatively unknown, young manager. |
Of course it’s run of the mill. The accounts are public knowledge.
Our wage bill was pushing £100m with amortised payments owed to a host of clubs after a £50m spend the season prior.
Championship income is about £25m, parachute payment is £40m for year 1.
That’s a £35m shortfall, plus the amortised payments + amortised transfer fees of new players (we spent £7m under Potter).
You are looking at about £45m needed in player sales just to keep our head above water, that’s without looking ahead to the year after where income will be reduced further, before dropping off completely. [Post edited 5 Feb 2023 13:31]
| |
| |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:31 - Feb 5 with 1076 views | KeithHaynes |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:21 - Feb 5 by jack247 |
If we ignore the firesale after relegation, we raised around £60m for the players mentioned. We were doing it while we were receiving parachute payments. That’s just on the headline sales each season.
I think the most we spent in that period was around £2m on Obafemi.
I’m not convinced that’s run of the mill.
We’ll see with the next appointment anyway. My guess is it will be another relatively unknown, young manager. |
God help him then.
Because at this point nobody would come near the place. |  |
| |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:39 - Feb 5 with 1049 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:31 - Feb 5 by KeithHaynes |
God help him then.
Because at this point nobody would come near the place. |
I don’t agree, I think we are an extremely attractive proposition.
To have the level of talent in our squad plus a few million to spend every year. It’s a wonderful gig. | |
| |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:39 - Feb 5 with 1051 views | jack247 |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:29 - Feb 5 by Dr_Parnassus |
Of course it’s run of the mill. The accounts are public knowledge.
Our wage bill was pushing £100m with amortised payments owed to a host of clubs after a £50m spend the season prior.
Championship income is about £25m, parachute payment is £40m for year 1.
That’s a £35m shortfall, plus the amortised payments + amortised transfer fees of new players (we spent £7m under Potter).
You are looking at about £45m needed in player sales just to keep our head above water, that’s without looking ahead to the year after where income will be reduced further, before dropping off completely. [Post edited 5 Feb 2023 13:31]
|
Ok, so do you think Martins successor will have to sell his best player(s) and replace on the cheap, most, if not every season? | | | |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:46 - Feb 5 with 1039 views | Dr_Parnassus |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:39 - Feb 5 by jack247 |
Ok, so do you think Martins successor will have to sell his best player(s) and replace on the cheap, most, if not every season? |
Probably not.
But we will need to make sales of course, as we have done as far back as I remember. From Torpey, to Stu Roberts, to Trundle, to Scotland, to Sinclair, to Allen, to Gylfi, to James, to Downes.
This is what being a manager of a club our size is all about. Sousa, Laudrup, Potter, Rodgers et al thought it was a good place to come - nothings changed in terms of approach, except we have more money we can source than ever before for club running purposes. | |
| |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 14:03 - Feb 5 with 1027 views | STID2017 |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:16 - Feb 5 by onehunglow |
I believe Whittaker was brought back to be sold
That they saw fit to turn down what seemed to be a ludicrous high bid damns them as much as Martin and his coaching |
I agree that if they wanted to sell they should have accepted the highest offer.
Not sure they will get as much in the summer | |
| |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 14:03 - Feb 5 with 1024 views | onehunglow |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:39 - Feb 5 by jack247 |
Ok, so do you think Martins successor will have to sell his best player(s) and replace on the cheap, most, if not every season? |
What his successor will do is to bin Fisher
That would be a start
Follow that up by concentrating on the basics | |
| |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 18:58 - Feb 5 with 953 views | SullutaCreturned |
| Should Martin be sacked after his inept use of Substitutions today. on 13:19 - Feb 5 by Dr_Parnassus |
First of all, how can you quote me if I’m on ignore? Please don’t tell me you are making a mockery of the forum rules?
Onto your assumption, incorrect.
Martin was part of the decision making meeting to bring back Whittaker. He was brought back to play, although only a small part in Martins eyes dependent on transfer window incomings, due to WBA pulling out of the Grant deal, that work load may well now increase.
Rangers offered millions and we refused point blank.
Everyone will be gone if a decent bid comes in, that goes for every player on the planet outside the elite.
I have read what he says, my response covers it perfectly as intended. |
Martin being part of that meeting doesn't mean he agreed to bringing him back. If the owners decided then Martin s outgunned, I'm sure you know that?
Exactly how much did Rangers offer? Wasn't it a total bid of 2 million including add ons? Now I think that a reasonable bid, depending on the additinal clauses because they may never have been met which often happens for various reasons, including clubs stopping selecting the player and selling them on. Keeping Whittaker wasn't the problem though, the problem was in not getting cover where we are desperate despite everything the owners said about deals being done and then, when the deals were almost complete the owners stepping in and stopping them.
Your first sentence, that's why I believe that in the event of conflict both parties should have to put the other on ignore. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.