Ethan Pinnock

Why would I have a plan? I don't own a football club.

 

Would have been nice to sign someone like Neil Thompson but if you don't want that it's fine.

 

Just like it's a waste of time debating with anybody who thinks everything the club does is *****

 

Patrick Cryne was no fool , we were chucking good money after bad at the likes of Frimpong, Brek Shea et al . Therefore he rightly said **** that I'm not wasting money on has beens who are here for a final wage . 'The plan' was simple but achievable and affordable, it worked wonderfully well .

 

Frimpong was 21 when we signed him.

 

He was still after a final wage cos he was gash.

 

And brek Shea was only 23.

 

He doesn't. He has praised the club plenty. Heidi critical of the plan which the club adopted and he is exactly right to do so.

 

You can't be convinced which is fair enough and I know you're taking on Redstars mantle cos he's done a runner . The plan was simple but effective . No one over the age of 26 , just think how many players that gives us access to .

 

The plan isn't just about signing g good individual players though is it? It's also about selling all your assets.
If the plan was simply that we only look for young players to bring on WITH our established players nobody would have complained but that wasn't the plan. The plan was to cash in on everyone we could and replace them with cheaper alternatives.

 

Jist think how many players it removes access to

 

If we can't find 5/6 decent players under the age of 26 from 92 league clubs and a few non league clubs we ought to sack it off . Do the maths .

 

5/6? Its not 5 a side.

 

ST, I'm sorry mate but what part of......the only way we could compete was by making money on player sales.......is difficult to comprehend? There was no vast pot of money to keep all our players. And yes...the snag is that you're subject to the dangers of recruitment not always working.

 

Aye, but if the plan was followed more sensibly, we would only be needing 5 or 6 signings every summer.

 

Hadn't we received millions for selling john stones why couldn't that have been used to offer renewals to our promotion winning players before anyone came sniffing?

 

I disagree. The club have themselves said that only a low percentage of signings will ever work out so you will surely need to replace those who we have sold because they were good enough and also replace those who have bphavent worked out whilst also replacing those out of contract players who are now too old for the plan. The plan actually means we need to replace far more players than ever before even when it is working because we have changed the age we are willing to keep players from 30 odd to 26. After that it is no longer financially viable to renewal a contract as there is no return.

 

I'm not going to go through all this again. Patrick Cryne made it blatantly obvious how much he rated Conor Hourihane as a player and a person. From what I've seen the high regard was reciprocated. Do you think if it made ANY sort of financial sense to keep him PC wouldn't have done it?

 

Conor Hourihane stated that no contract offer had been made for him in the summer. Patrick cryne didn't dispute this.

Those are the facts, not opinions but facts.

 

That last bit is part of what I mean when I'm talking about following the plan more sensibly. Cashing in on Roberts, despite his age and the huge profit we made on him, will be one of the biggest false economies in the history of the club if we go down. Even if we stay up I'd still say that it was folly of the highest order.