On money spent - it’s got to be up there. Definitely different and an improvement to anything seen in the Cryne era. But in hindsight - great signings but it’s very much looking like there hasn’t been enough of them. And again in hindsight - the Cryne era recruitment was a good one - but it would have been nice to have signed some of the young loanees when they became available. That’s where owners with money could fill the gap. I can’t see any problem in loanees if we are gauging them (clearly the owners do). The recruitment strategy needed tweaking - it didn’t need to be thrown out with the bath water.
Do you have any proof whatsoever about how much we paid for players? I bet it's nowhere near what you think it is. If it is then we've had our pants pulled down many times in the space of a couple of months and serious questions have to be asked about the ability of our recruitment team
but here’s the issue. The current owners have money but won’t put any in. For all the stick you give Patrick he stumped up his own cash. I agree we have potential but potential does not equal points in the championship. Even with the talent LJ and Hecky had it took 6 months for a team to gel. Daniel got 10 games with an even younger group of untried players.