The Plan and the future

I agree that it is weaker now than when we got promoted, I think you’d have to be very ‘happy clapper club can do no wrong’ to disagree.

Where I think we maybe disagree is that I think we are in a better position now than we were at the start of 2017/2018 season. At that point, Davies, Pinnock, Lindsay and Moore were no more than what Radlinger, Diaby, Mads and Schmidt are today.

One thing I do think the club might be missing out is utilising the loan market. Whilst I agree with Conway’s idea of not developing other teams players for them.... We seem to be taking the approach that some loans are bad therefore all loans are bad. (Although this discussion is prob for another thread, just throwing it in there to show i don’t just praise the club blindly for all decisions)

 

I don’t think the calculation is that easy. You need to take into account the transfer fees received for all outgoings..(5)? against the transfer fees paid for the incoming (12)? Whilst it’s difficult to calculate that with undisclosed fees, I’m an sure that the money received>money spent, but on top of that we have 12 people’s wages to pay for. Also maybe there’s still money in the kitty for Jan, next summer etc. Why do we have to be so short term in our thinking?

I agree that profit is all they’re here for, dunno if you saw that in the edited part of my post. I think though that they’re not here to skim a million off transfers each year. I think they want to grow the club in the medium to long term and sell for a big profit. In order to do that, we need to be in a better place than when they arrived, which for us as fans, will also be a good thing. I could be wrong on this, i’m wrong on a lot of things. None of us know yet.

 

I agree entirely with that comparison you've made. And at the end of that season we were relegated. And now we're back to the position we were in when the new owners took over and they've been sold. And we're starting again. Again.

Considering the success rate of our recruitment team I'd be foolish to write off any of the signings made this summer.

I envisage one of two things happening:
We manage to stay up and next summer we sell all the players that shone in this league and helped us do that. And we start again. Again.

We're relegated. Not because the players signed are crap, but it's just too big an ask for so many young and inexperienced players to consistently reach the required standard in their first season together. Particularly as we're threadbare in key positions. No one particularly shines and no one is sold.

The following season a number of players do begin to play well, just like last time, and the team does well, just like last time. And that summer we sell the best ones again. And we start again. Again. And that may be in the Championship, having won promotion. Or that may be in League one, having just missed out.

 

How can you state so soon into the new ownership regime that there is no progress and year on year improvement?

 

We have always sold players so for me it’s just not an issue.
I don’t feel the need to question the owners’ motives either.
Quite a number of fans like myself are finding the current setup and strategy more appealing than other ideas we tried previously as I outlined in a prior post.
And while I do like discussion and debate I don’t think it looks or feels right to be analysing all of this every time we lose a match.

 

I agree that profit is all they’re here for, dunno if you saw that in the edited part of my post. I think though that they’re not here to skim a million off transfers each year. I think they want to grow the club in the medium to long term and sell for a big profit. In order to do that, we need to be in a better place than when they arrived, which for us as fans, will also be a good thing. I could be wrong on this, i’m wrong on a lot of things. None of us know yet.[/QUOTE]

People look to the NICE model for reference and guidance for their motives, so couple of things on that:
Not the same owners although Conway and Chien (largest shareholder)are involved.
NICE in my opinion are in a better place than where they were when they came in, in the sense their infrastructure is much better, they are self sufficient, the club is worth more, still attracting decent names with likes of Vieira etc as a Manager.
Some will argue they have lost places in the league, fair enough, but they are still in top league and PSG aside can challenge any club in the league.
Chien and co bought NICE allegedly for around 20 million and selling for around 90, that’s where there interest lies.

Before anyone says it I know we are not in NICE, but would any of us really care if in 5 years they had established us as a Championship(or Premier) side, improved the infrastructure of club, sold us to a richer person but made a profit on that sale.

 

I’d go with not flogging players on long contracts and getting market value for those we do flog.

 

We are selling players now only when they don't commit longer term to the club, or where others are prepared to pay them excessive amounts that we do not intend to match. We are not selling because we are desperate as a club. That's a big difference. Mr Conway has said that receipts will be reinvested in the squad, and that appears to be the case. Of course they will take time to develop. But we are aiming for a better bridge across those development cycles by signing players on longer contracts. I don't think 'cashing in' on players is what the owners are about at all. I think they are interested in the longer term chance of pitching for the Premier League - where the big money is. That will also be good business for them if they can do it in a sustainable fashion.

And by the bye, I think Radlinger, Anderson and Diaby have the potential to be better than Davies, Pinnock and Lindsay. But we will have to be patient.

 

Had a quick look through the nice transfers. Last season they sold 55m of players and spent 25m I should imagine there was a fair dividend paid out based on those numbers. This season received 19m and spent nothing. Got the info from transfermarkt so not sure exactly how accurate that info is.

 

It’s just the general consensus seemed to be when we were signing these lads on 4 year contracts with a further one in our favour that it was good as it meant we’d get to keep our best players for several years before we had to sell.

I find it more attractive than the strategy under the majority of Cryne’s time but Cryne’s strategy made sense as he loved the club & was a multi millionaire but didn’t have the kind of money where he could afford to lose millions hence shorter contracts & a lot of free transfers.

Me joining in on this post & analysing it is more a reaction to us selling Kieffer Moore with two years left on his deal rather than losing a game. I can’t make sense of it. A £4m fee when relegation costs you £6m doesn’t seem worth it when we’re left (at least until January) without a striker who can do what he can.

 

I'm not sure how you can come to that conclusion 4 games in.

Radlinger & Collins look far better than Davies

Mads & Diaby look a strong pairing, probably neither is as good as Pinnock I admit, but both look as good as Lindsay to me.

Will Schmidt, Chaplin & Wilks be more effective than Moore would have been? Who knows.

I'd say most of our weaknesses / worries as identified by many posters here seem to be holding midfield & full backs. We didn't sell any & have brought in Sibbick & Oduor at fullback.