Were you taking something while writing all that, [MENTION=54054]Whitey[/MENTION]? It started lucidly enough then it veered into spontaneous vitriol half-way through and ended with abusing the Chief Executive. Some interesting and fair points but taken as a whole it reads like you were having some kind of episode.
You should have given him the Hemsworth brand refresh. You know, like when you changed HT's avatar to the Steele/Bobby/Gazza thing? I'm pretty sure 442 wouldn't mind you giving him a Keith/Gary Jones/Steve Parkin avatar.
My like button has vanished now. I wasn't abusing Ben Mansford, for the record. The 'monkey' thing relates to the 'organ grinder'. The organ grinder being our owner. And it was your advice to drink heavily. So get yourself onto the blame list.
That pretty much sums up my feelings. There is a general feeling on here that everything is the fault of whoever was the team manager at the time. No one ever addresses the problem of inadequate budgets, particularly pay budgets, which has forced successive managers to take risks on recruiting players from lower leagues. No one can be 100% right when they are betting against the marketplace and KH was spectacularly wrong on one or two occasions, but without the funds to tempt known quality players to the club, this is the risk that he thought he had to take.
Yeah, I got that but I still doubt he'd consider it a compliment all the same. My advice is always to drink heavily. Even my avatar gets in on the act.
Butterfield (800k). Stones (3m). Vaz Te (500k). Golbourne (350k). Davies (350k). There's five million pounds of players he developed/recruited. And if we're being fair, and using hindsight, Butterfield would have gone for at least twice that amount had Michael Brown not existed, Stones was sold on the cheap (hindsight), as was Vaz Te (massively) and 700k for two players that most on here cared little for was decent business. Not to mention the bids turned down and interest shown over the years for Done, McNulty, Perkins and Dawson. Was that not part of Keith's remit? To build a squad using our own standout youth talent and lower league players? And to then sell them at a profit? As well as retaining our second tier status. It seems clear to me that we strayed from that strategy once Flitcroft was appointed. We're now a club with seemingly no direction. I mean, is Patrick Cryne that ill that he can't release a statement? And where's the 'chairman' in all of this? The club - from what I can see - is ******.
I was completely unaware when I chose it but it's actually an advert for Dubonnet, sponsors of the Dubonnet Cup that Barnsley played for in Paris in 1910. [MENTION=6779]Turvey Tyke[/MENTION], being a wealth of such knowledge, pointed it out to me afterwards but I didn't have the bottle to pretend that I'd been clever enough to choose it deliberately.
Depends which we you look at this one. Craig Davies and Vaz Te, we made money (not enough in my opinion). Butterfield and Stones were products of previous management/Academy, so you cannot grant all the success to Hill here. Then what about the pile of sh!te he has brought in, maybe not on big transfer fees, but wasting valuable wages. I am not convinced that Keith Hill made BFC any profit, in the long run......relegation will be the final proving point.
Well said Whitey, that was a really good comment and perspective. It's all well and good just saying Hill was at fault and brought some ***** in, but he was working within the budget we have and we don't have the funds to compete in this division. He's proved at Rochdale (and looking like he'll prove it again) that he can build a team to be successful in a league but it's all about having the resources to compete at that level. So he's doing it at Rochdale on, what I imagine is, a L2 budget, so he is competing on a level playing field. Unfortunately for us having a budget for L1 or L2 isn't going to work, I do despair that whilst the club are trying to run things along the right lines, we are keeping within our budget, we aren't spending beyond our means, but when other clubs aren't doing that and are just allowed to throw money at the situation and rack up huge debts (Huddersfield, Bolton) we don't have a fecking pray. Got to say that I really am starting to become disillusioned by the whole sorry mess of football in this country.
We made money on Golbourne. Butterfield and Stones were products of our academy and I'm not suggesting Keith is solely responsible for their development. But he did build a team around Jacob, and then gave Stones the platform to go out and make mistakes. He got about 50 games out of the pair of them. We made £3.8m. I'm crediting him massively for that. Others won't. As is their right. Of course he signed some duds. His loanees (Danny Drinkwater the exception) were massive failures. But it was only 12 months ago that Dawson was lauded as a hero on here. And just 8 months ago Perkins named POTY. Kelvin was "Yaya Tutu". Mellis "better than Butterfield" and Wiseman and Kennedy weren't the 'pile of *****' now suggested regularly. Football supporters are fickle. As for your final point I disagree totally. If we go down this season it will not be the fault of Keith Hill. He hasn't been manager of this club for over 12 months. He left us 4 points shy of safety. We go down this season, then in terms of managers I'll be pointing my finger of blame at Flitcroft. Perhaps even Wilson to some degree, but time will tell on that one. But I won't be blaming a guy who left in 2012 for a relegation in 2014.
Whitey, it's clear to me that we disagree on a helluva log of things BFC......but that's what a Forum discussion is there for. I am baffled as to why you cannot attach any blame to Keith Hill if BFC get relegated, and I mean totally baffled. The Club has moved backwards since he joined and will result in relegation this season. We still have a massive hangover from his sidekick Flicker and a load of League 1 / 2 players blocking up our first team and squad. Keith Hill had a say in the vast majority of this. This on-line forum media love affair you have with Hill / Flitcroft / Rochdale is clouding your judgement.
No love affair with Rochdale. I've friends there now, one of them posted in this thread, the chap you had a pop at. So I wish them well. Why would I not? Unlike some, I'm not spending my days raging in hatred at anybody and everybody who isn't affiliated to Barnsley FC. Keith Hill was deemed by the majority of us, and the board, to have failed as BFC manager. He was dismissed. But it's my opinion that it wasn't all bad during his tenure, and it's also my opinion that he can't be blamed for any relegation that may be forthcoming. And as it stands, unlike yourself I've still got faith in BFC staying up. And when we do, I take it - using your logic - I can laud Keith for keeping us up, can I? You can't keep trotting out the lower league theory either. As I've already pointed out - which you've ignored - the likes of Perkins (POTY), Dawson, TK, Etuhu and Wiseman were spoken about in glowing terms some months ago. And O'Grady was "the best centre forward" since Shipperley. Not bad for a lower leaguer, eh? Bobby Hassell came from Mansfield, Mellis originates from Sheff Utd, Steele from Peterborough, Cranie was signed from Coventry. So the 'theory' is ********. Call them ****/gash or whatever. But the lower league thing bores me. We've had some cracking lower league players. Jean-Yves M'Voto started out at European giants PSG, so again using that theory and it's logic, I suppose he's a reight player is he? I can argue all day. It's pissing it down outside, I've a day off doing nowt. Hit me with your best shot...