wiseone
12-02-2006, 14:56
What happended to our strategy of buying only players under 25 ?
View Full Version : golden tit
Mutchy
12-02-2006, 14:59
The player wanted by Glenn was bought.
Slip On Shoes
12-02-2006, 15:08
I dont recall this being said by anyone, when was this?
Bumbamuffin
12-02-2006, 15:13
The player wanted by Glenn was bought.
Thing is Mutchy,bearing in mind our current financial position,should JM not have the ability to block the signing? I read the 'Pink' last night and the comment from the 'Fans View' column made sense.JM has stated the desire of the club to buy younger to increase the chances of a sell on value.This is where we now are as a club.Frankowski flies in the face of this.You cannot blame the player as yesterday the service was awful.However,the 'final piece of the jigsaw' gamble has failed in February! We have a player with little re-sale value in a team going nowhere.Mcleod too may have failed but at least with his age,we may have re-couped part of our(more limited)investment.Hoddle clearly wanted the player but you would have thought that with knowledge of our financial situation JM could have insisted on a different approach.Remember Dean Windass?
Thing is Mutchy,bearing in mind our current financial position,should JM not have the ability to block the signing? I read the 'Pink' last night and the comment from the 'Fans View' column made sense.JM has stated the desire of the club to buy younger to increase the chances of a sell on value.This is where we now are as a club.Frankowski flies in the face of this.You cannot blame the player as yesterday the service was awful.However,the 'final piece of the jigsaw' gamble has failed in February! We have a player with little re-sale value in a team going nowhere.Mcleod too may have failed but at least with his age,we may have re-couped part of our(more limited)investment.Hoddle clearly wanted the player but you would have thought that with knowledge of our financial situation JM could have insisted on a different approach.Remember Dean Windass?
Jim Bowen
12-02-2006, 15:14
When Lee wanted to buy Windass but the board blocked it because he was over 30. Can't ever remember there being a policy for only under-25's though.
Slip On Shoes
12-02-2006, 15:17
What does frustrate me about the Frankowski signing is he's been poor so far (admittedly with little service) but people say he needs time to settle in. FFS, we signed a 31 year old for £1.4 million to boost our fading play off hopes. He's got to hit the ground running and score goals from the off and as of yet hasn't so all round to me it looks a desperately poor signing.
Mutchy
12-02-2006, 15:18
I still think Franky could well be an asset to the team and is not necessarily a bad signing. However the wisdom of the purchase in relation to Fryatt for example is very much open to debate. But I repeat, the player wanted by Glenn was bought.
Bumbamuffin
12-02-2006, 15:20
I still think Franky could well be an asset to the team and is not necessarily a bad signing. However the wisdom of the purchase in relation to Fryatt for example is very much open to debate. But I repeat, the player wanted by Glenn was bought.
So if you had a responsible,capable off the field set up,they would never question the validity of a recommended manager signing.Is that what you are saying?
So if you had a responsible,capable off the field set up,they would never question the validity of a recommended manager signing.Is that what you are saying?
Mutchy
12-02-2006, 15:23
No, I'm saying the manager had thebacking he wanted with regard to our main signing during the transfer window.
Bumbamuffin
12-02-2006, 15:30
No, I'm saying the manager had thebacking he wanted with regard to our main signing during the transfer window.
So,presumably,the role of the CEO/board is just to rubber-stamp the recommendation of the manager? Is there no analysis at this level as to whether it is a shrewd signing or not? Should JM not be looking at the signing and think "well it's a 31 yr old whose signing will bea success if we go up THIS season and this in itself is a long shot"?
Frankowski is an incredibly poor signing and JM must take part of the blame.His signing just is not relevant to our current situation. FOR FCKS SAKE WE HAVE LIMITED MONEY AND WE NEED RE-SALE POTENTIAL.WE NEED THE TEAM TO BE BASED ON YOUNG PLAYERS WHO STILL HAVE IT ALL TO PROVE.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
So,presumably,the role of the CEO/board is just to rubber-stamp the recommendation of the manager? Is there no analysis at this level as to whether it is a shrewd signing or not? Should JM not be looking at the signing and think "well it's a 31 yr old whose signing will bea success if we go up THIS season and this in itself is a long shot"?
Frankowski is an incredibly poor signing and JM must take part of the blame.His signing just is not relevant to our current situation. FOR FCKS SAKE WE HAVE LIMITED MONEY AND WE NEED RE-SALE POTENTIAL.WE NEED THE TEAM TO BE BASED ON YOUNG PLAYERS WHO STILL HAVE IT ALL TO PROVE.
I don't know whether to laugh or cry.
Big Mack
12-02-2006, 15:32
Where's the 'no value resale' idea come from? If he has a sparkling world cup we could be quids in! Note the use of 'if' and 'could' thoughsmileys/smiley2.gif
Bumbamuffin
12-02-2006, 15:34
Where's the 'no value resale' idea come from? If he has a sparkling world cup we could be quids in! Note the use of 'if' and 'could' thoughsmileys/smiley2.gif
If I guess the correct lottery numbers...........smileys/smiley2.gif
Awful signing,awful judgement by ALL concerned.
If I guess the correct lottery numbers...........smileys/smiley2.gif
Awful signing,awful judgement by ALL concerned.
Oldgold Wolfcub
12-02-2006, 15:36
The player Hoddle wanted was bought. Was he? Hoddle supposedly wanted McLeod until MK Dons accepted our bid. Did he suddenly not want him? The final piece of the jigsaw? McLeod and Frankie completely different players. Whichever way you package it the same old stuff is in the parcel.
Deutsch Wolf
12-02-2006, 15:36
Awful signing
Two games in and you're slating the guy, writing him off completely. Superb.
Two games in and you're slating the guy, writing him off completely. Superb.
Oldgold Wolfcub
12-02-2006, 15:41
Awful signing
Two games in and you're slating the guy, writing him off completely. Superb.
Life's tough when you are the final piece of the jigsaw.smileys/smiley16.gif
Two games in and you're slating the guy, writing him off completely. Superb.
Life's tough when you are the final piece of the jigsaw.smileys/smiley16.gif
Bumbamuffin
12-02-2006, 15:44
Awful signing
Two games in and you're slating the guy, writing him off completely. Superb.
It's not the ability of the guy I'm commenting on.The service was awful.It is too early to judge on his ability clearly.
However,in our current position,it was too big a gamble.Here we have a 31 yr old whose signing would have been a success if he virtually single handedly fired us to promotion.If not we've got a 32 yr old whose re-sale value is limited,all our funds gone.We are now a club that must rely on selling players not just buying them.
Your argument is based upon the ability of the player.What I'm saying is that one player could NEVER solve our problems alone.So by commiting all of our money on an ageing player when we were never going to go upwas negligent.
Two games in and you're slating the guy, writing him off completely. Superb.
It's not the ability of the guy I'm commenting on.The service was awful.It is too early to judge on his ability clearly.
However,in our current position,it was too big a gamble.Here we have a 31 yr old whose signing would have been a success if he virtually single handedly fired us to promotion.If not we've got a 32 yr old whose re-sale value is limited,all our funds gone.We are now a club that must rely on selling players not just buying them.
Your argument is based upon the ability of the player.What I'm saying is that one player could NEVER solve our problems alone.So by commiting all of our money on an ageing player when we were never going to go upwas negligent.
