2010 Play off semi

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

I think and correct me if I am wrong , that we had a massive wage bill under Jones and he , possibly as much as warnock , preferred older experienced players to youth . We didn't make many big money signings under Jones but considering our income we were shelling out wages well above what was coming in .

---

Peter Ridsdale confirmed as much once in a radio interview, where he said he and Jones decided on an approach of paying little in transfer fees in order to have a larger wage bill which might attract some better free transfers.

Where did we get chopra from again? Jay was free from wolves wasn’t he? That team probably cost less than Gary madine....:facepalm:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by goats

Where did we get chopra from again? Jay was free from wolves wasn’t he? That team probably cost less than Gary madine....:facepalm:

---

By then we'd paid Sunderland the £4 million they'd paid us for him. Jay wasn't wanted by Wolves after a disappointing stint there.

With the Chopra transfer, it's probably close. Without it, it isn't.

Ultimately the team was put together from freebies and misfits by offering them good wages to perform. They failed to get us promoted, regardless of the entertainment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

Peter Ridsdale confirmed as much once in a radio interview, where he said he and Jones decided on an approach of paying little in transfer fees in order to have a larger wage bill which might attract some better free transfers.

---

Ricky Simicea was a quality player , box to box midfielder

His follow up goal at Palace after chopra had hit the bar was great anticipation

He was worth his wages , whatever they were

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

Ricky Simicea was a quality player , box to box midfielder

His follow up goal at Palace after chopra had hit the bar was great anticipation

He was worth his wages , whatever they were

---

Probably not great as he was out of favour.

I remember not being the greatest fan of his when he signed. I didn't think he would do much for us given his previous appearances, particularly at Villa. Apparently he told Jones he wanted to be a box to box midfielder and Jones told him to do it. We had a great few months from him. Even West Brom fans were asking why he never performed for them like he did for us.

Sadly it was short lived and we finished in the bottom half.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

I think and correct me if I am wrong , that we had a massive wage bill under Jones

---

You're wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

Peter Ridsdale confirmed as much once in a radio interview, where he said he and Jones decided on an approach of paying little in transfer fees in order to have a larger wage bill which might attract some better free transfers.

---

That was the strategy, but to describe the wage bill as massive is inaccurate by Championship standards at the time. The wage bill that year was £16.7 million and the operating loss was under a million. The main problem was the club didn't have a rich backer and had no way to service its mounting debts.

Compare those figures to the recent Warnock promotion season, when the wage bill was more than £48 million and the operating loss was £34 million.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

That was the strategy, but to describe the wage bill as massive is inaccurate by Championship standards at the time. The wage bill that year was £16.7 million and the operating loss was under a million. The main problem was the club didn't have a rich backer and had no way to service its mounting debts.

Compare those figures to the recent Warnock promotion season, when the wage bill was more than £48 million and the operating loss was £34 million.

---

What was the average championship wage then though? We we up there? Clearly, it’s ridiculous now mind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

That was the strategy, but to describe the wage bill as massive is inaccurate by Championship standards at the time. The wage bill that year was £16.7 million and the operating loss was under a million. The main problem was the club didn't have a rich backer and had no way to service its mounting debts.

Compare those figures to the recent Warnock promotion season, when the wage bill was more than £48 million and the operating loss was £34 million.

---

It was still one of the highest wage bills in the division at the time.

The staggering stat for me in this is how much the Championship wage bill has risen in a decade.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Bloop

McPhail had one of the best footballing minds of all the players I've seen over the years down the City. Rarely chose the wrong option and one of those players who was always able to create a little bit extra time and space for himself.
Better than any of the current squad in that position.

---

Agree with this, wouldn't put any of our current midfielders in the team ahead of McPhail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blue blood

Agree with this, wouldn't put any of our current midfielders in the team ahead of McPhail.

---

Yep, in a decade, we've never brought in a centre midfielder whose strength is passing and being an attacking fulcrum.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

You're wrong.

---

So , we did have a huge wages bill under jones then , according to your answer below ?

Very large wages , very little income coming in as most of the time we were at Ninian Park

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

That was the strategy, but to describe the wage bill as massive is inaccurate by Championship standards at the time. The wage bill that year was £16.7 million and the operating loss was under a million. The main problem was the club didn't have a rich backer and had no way to service its mounting debts.

Compare those figures to the recent Warnock promotion season, when the wage bill was more than £48 million and the operating loss was £34 million.

---

inaccurate is not wrong

Not quite correct , fair enough

But not wrong

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

That was the strategy, but to describe the wage bill as massive is inaccurate by Championship standards at the time. The wage bill that year was £16.7 million and the operating loss was under a million. The main problem was the club didn't have a rich backer and had no way to service its mounting debts.

Compare those figures to the recent Warnock promotion season, when the wage bill was more than £48 million and the operating loss was £34 million.

---

our wage bill was one of the highest in the division and considering our low turnover , it meant we were paying wages well beyond our means

Thats massive in my book

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

our wage bill was one of the highest in the division and considering our low turnover , it meant we were paying wages well beyond our means

Thats massive in my book

---

Why we had to sell off our top players. It was hardly as if we had to sell them to survive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

By then we'd paid Sunderland the £4 million they'd paid us for him. Jay wasn't wanted by Wolves after a disappointing stint there.

With the Chopra transfer, it's probably close. Without it, it isn't.

Ultimately the team was put together from freebies and misfits by offering them good wages to perform. They failed to get us promoted, regardless of the entertainment.

---

Didn’t we get Chopra initially for £500k or something, then sell him to Sunderland for £5m only to buy him back for a very similar amount the season after, which suggests to me that very little of the transfer fee that Sunderland were supposed to pay, actually came our way and we got him back for close to zero, especially as we were skint at the time?

No way would we pay £5m for anyone back then!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bobby Dandruff

Didn’t we get Chopra initially for £500k or something, then sell him to Sunderland for £5m only to buy him back for a very similar amount the season after, which suggests to me that very little of the transfer fee that Sunderland were supposed to pay, actually came our way and we got him back for close to zero, especially as we were skint at the time?

No way would we pay £5m for anyone back then!

---

You are right. As I said, we'd paid Sunderland the £4m they'd paid us for him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

Why we had to sell off our top players. It was hardly as if we had to sell them to survive.

---

well either way you look at it , the club was paying wages it couldn't afford , for several years , under jones and Ridsdale

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

That was the strategy, but to describe the wage bill as massive is inaccurate by Championship standards at the time. The wage bill that year was £16.7 million and the operating loss was under a million. The main problem was the club didn't have a rich backer and had no way to service its mounting debts.

Compare those figures to the recent Warnock promotion season, when the wage bill was more than £48 million and the operating loss was £34 million.

---

I may be wrong. But wasnt the loss that high as huge promotion bonuses were paid.?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

well either way you look at it , the club was paying wages it couldn't afford , for several years , under jones and Ridsdale

---

Yeah I bet Robbie Fowler Jimmy Floyd and Trevor Sinclair didnt come cheap.

Even got Bellamy , Ramsey on loan and still ultimately failure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

Wasn't it you who coined that phrase for that side - flat track bullies?

---

I can remember using it after Chopra scored four in that 6-1 win over Derby, but it was a phrase that had been around in cricket for a o long time before that. I first heard it used in relation to the batsman Graham Hick who had a fantastic record with Worcestershire in county cricket, but found the step up to test cricket very difficult- he barely ever came up with a score when the pressure was really on or the conditions were testing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hilts

I may be wrong. But wasnt the loss that high as huge promotion bonuses were paid.?

---

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/...-down-15944305

You're not wrong. We paid £23m in bonuses at the end of that season.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hilts

I may be wrong. But wasnt the loss that high as huge promotion bonuses were paid.?

---

prior to the promotion bonuses the wage bill would have been about 30m , which was about the median level in the league

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the other bob wilson

I can remember using it after Chopra scored four in that 6-1 win over Derby, but it was a phrase that had been around in cricket for a o long time before that. I first heard it used in relation to the batsman Graham Hick who had a fantastic record with Worcestershire in county cricket, but found the step up to test cricket very difficult- he barely ever came up with a score when the pressure was really on or the conditions were testing.

---

It certainly has merits.

In the two seasons 2009/10 and 2010/11 we scored 4 or more goals on 11 occasions. In all of our Championship seasons since 2011 we've scored 4 or more goals on 10 occasions! Those sides knew how to steam roller the opposition.

On the other side of the coin, in 2009/10 we failed to score in 12 games, which is higher than our Championship average since promotion in 2002. We had the lowest number of games where we scored just 1 or 2 and would still be low even if you considered that we scored 4 or more more often. That 2009/10 season is ranked 5th best in terms of clean sheets but 5th worst for conceding 3 or more goals in a game. The figures are better for 2010/11.

In an attacking sense, those two seasons were pretty exciting, but for every yin there's a yang and we paid for it defensively. Both of our promotions were built on a solid defence. Teams that win automatic promotion don't usually have the defensive stats that we had in those seasons. Those that did, tended to need to add another 10-15 goals to their 'for' tally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

It was still one of the highest wage bills in the division at the time.

---

Was it? The average wage bill for the Championship in 2009/10 was apparently £15 million. City's wage bill that year was £16.7 million - above the average for sure, but one of the highest in the division? I don't have the figures for every club, but Newcastle's wage bill was £47 million, Middlesbrough's was £31 million and West Brom's was £23 million.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Was it? The average wage bill for the Championship in 2009/10 was apparently £15 million. City's wage bill that year was £16.7 million - above the average for sure, but one of the highest in the division? I don't have the figures for every club, but Newcastle's wage bill was £47 million, Middlesbrough's was £31 million and West Brom's was £23 million.

---

some of those would have included promotion bonuses though? which are typically a large proportion of the wage bill

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

Was it? The average wage bill for the Championship in 2009/10 was apparently £15 million. City's wage bill that year was £16.7 million - above the average for sure, but one of the highest in the division? I don't have the figures for every club, but Newcastle's wage bill was £47 million, Middlesbrough's was £31 million and West Brom's was £23 million.

---

I recall someone at the time pointing out that ours was certainly in the top 6 wage budgets in the division.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

I recall someone at the time pointing out that ours was certainly in the top 6 wage budgets in the division.

---

yep that's probably about right, DJ didn't spend a huge amount in transfer fees as he preferred to use the budget on wages to attract players here. and the budget was heavily focused around the core first team, with fringe players on a lot less

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rjk

some of those would have included promotion bonuses though? which are typically a large proportion of the wage bill

---

I bow to your greater knowledge.

Middlesbrough finished 11th.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

I bow to your greater knowledge.

Middlesbrough finished 11th.

---

also Middlesbrough, Newcastle and west brom had all been relegated the season before, and would have had a parachute payment and had a squad full of premier League wages. seems as though West brom were the best prepared for relegation, Newcastle brute forced it and Middlesbrough were a total mess.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

I recall someone at the time pointing out that ours was certainly in the top 6 wage budgets in the division.

---

I don't recall that. However, as you've already noted, Ridsdale and Jones definitely devised a strategy based around paying above-average wages and paying either below-average fees or no fees at all. It would be almost impossible to calculate exactly how much each squad in the division cost their clubs in terms of fees and wages combined, but I have very little doubt that City were generally punching above their weight under the Ridsdale and Jones regime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

I don't recall that. However, as you've already noted, Ridsdale and Jones definitely devised a strategy based around paying above-average wages and paying either below-average fees or no fees at all. It would be almost impossible to calculate exactly how much each squad in the division cost their clubs in terms of fees and wages combined, but I have very little doubt that City were generally punching above their weight under the Ridsdale and Jones regime.

---

absolutely, for most of their time we were operating out of ninian park with no parachute payments and average crowds around the low to mid teens of thousands, we would definitely have had a far smaller income than many of our rivals

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

I don't recall that. However, as you've already noted, Ridsdale and Jones definitely devised a strategy based around paying above-average wages and paying either below-average fees or no fees at all. It would be almost impossible to calculate exactly how much each squad in the division cost their clubs in terms of fees and wages combined, but I have very little doubt that City were generally punching above their weight under the Ridsdale and Jones regime.

---

Which is what I said , in a nutshell , big wages above income and turnover , for several years under Ridsdale and jones

Thanks

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman

I don't recall that. However, as you've already noted, Ridsdale and Jones definitely devised a strategy based around paying above-average wages and paying either below-average fees or no fees at all. It would be almost impossible to calculate exactly how much each squad in the division cost their clubs in terms of fees and wages combined, but I have very little doubt that City were generally punching above their weight under the Ridsdale and Jones regime.

---

I definitely agree that we did punch above our weight, all things considered.We did keep increasing our debt, but that seems to be of less a concern in football nowadays. Certainly Ridsdale's contacts and footballing knowledge way exceeds that of the current board. Our transfer activities over the last 7 or 8 seasons have been far poorer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

I definitely agree that we did punch above our weight, all things considered.We did keep increasing our debt, but that seems to be of less a concern in football nowadays. Certainly Ridsdale's contacts and footballing knowledge way exceeds that of the current board. Our transfer activities over the last 7 or 8 seasons have been far poorer.

---

Really.?

2 promotions says otherwise.

Easy to look back through tinted specs and reminisce. It was indeed an enjoyable team to watch at times, but ultimately every season I became more frustrated with the ways we would contrive to **** things up.

Our success since has largely been built on hard work, solid defence and goals spread around the squad. It hasn't been as easy on the eye but it's clearly more efficient.

A team with the workrate, leadership and togetherness of the last few years combined with the attacking talents of that squad from 2010 would interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trigger

Easy to look back through tinted specs and reminisce. It was indeed an enjoyable team to watch at times, but ultimately every season I became more frustrated with the ways we would contrive to **** things up.

Our success since has largely been built on hard work, solid defence and goals spread around the squad. It hasn't been as easy on the eye but it's clearly more efficient.

A team with the workrate, leadership and togetherness of the last few years combined with the attacking talents of that squad from 2010 would interesting.

---

I like a mix of warnockball and a bit of flair

I think given a chance , we will get that under Harris

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY

I like a mix of warnockball and a bit of flair

I think given a chance , we will get that under Harris

---

at our best under Jones we could be direct and we could play the fancy stuff, I remember a Coventry manager (possibly Coleman) saying the same about us at the time.
we were also doing things like focussing on box entries and restricting shots from poor locations a long time before it became fashionable.
unfortunately we could also be bullied at times.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Eric the Half a Bee

I've always avoided looking at that final for obvious reasons. What is amazing is that he picked a pretty fluid, attacking midfield of players who were all comfortable on the ball and were good passers, yet chose to launch long balls out of defence because this midfield was outnumbered.

If someone with a bit of nous could have taken over that side after that playoff defeat, we'd have won automatic the following season with the players we had.

---

Whenever I've re-watched the game since, I've restricted my viewing to the 2 City goals and Chopra's early shot against the bar. However I watched a bit more the other day and we looked a lot more scrappy than I remembered on the day, and also Blackpool had a lot more possession than I thought. Still can't watch their goals though..