+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

  1. #1

    Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.


  2. #2

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    A bit rich, Warnock implying that he wasn’t backed financially, perhaps a member of the board should reply citing the money spent on what turned out to be duds.

  3. #3

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    I wonder if Warnock ever phones Dalman to remind him how much he spent on Gary Madine and Isaac Vassell?

    I suspect not.

  4. #4

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Quote Originally Posted by The Lone Gunman View Post
    I wonder if Warnock ever phones Dalman to remind him how much he spent on Gary Madine and Isaac Vassell?

    I suspect not.
    maybe Dalman might call him instead now

  5. #5

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Wales Online also carries a piece about the appointment of David Hughes and the club's plans for the Academy.

    https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/...iting-19252700

    Based on what I've been told there are some factual errors in the story, so maybe I shouldn't trust it, but the figure of £100 million spent while Warnock was manager is certainly not miles out and, correctly, gives the impression that he could have few complaints about the level of support he was given by the Board. In the summer of 2017, our parachute payments had stopped and attendances had been falling, so money was bound to be fairly tight. However, he was given around £2 million to spend on Lee Tomlin that summer and given his reluctance to play Tomlin over the next two and a bit years as he failed to get the player to hit the heights he did under Neil Harris last season, it seems to me he should have used that money to sign Watkins if he was that sure about him.

  6. #6

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Quote Originally Posted by the other bob wilson View Post
    Wales Online also carries a piece about the appointment of David Hughes and the club's plans for the Academy.

    https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/...iting-19252700

    Based on what I've been told there are some factual errors in the story, so maybe I shouldn't trust it, but the figure of £100 million spent while Warnock was manager is certainly not miles out and, correctly, gives the impression that he could have few complaints about the level of support he was given by the Board. In the summer of 2017, our parachute payments had stopped and attendances had been falling, so money was bound to be fairly tight. However, he was given around £2 million to spend on Lee Tomlin that summer and given his reluctance to play Tomlin over the next two and a bit years as he failed to get the player to hit the heights he did under Neil Harris last season, it seems to me he should have used that money to sign Watkins if he was that sure about him.
    Not only that, but he spent as much bringing in Ward and Bogle that summer, too!

  7. #7

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    He would’ve ended up with 1 goal in about 40 appearances then ended up at Sheff Wed for free.

  8. #8

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Imagine the man who signed Madine, Vassel and Glatzel coming to you and asking to sign another striker for a couple of million

  9. #9

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Quote Originally Posted by the other bob wilson View Post
    Wales Online also carries a piece about the appointment of David Hughes and the club's plans for the Academy.

    https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/...iting-19252700

    Based on what I've been told there are some factual errors in the story, so maybe I shouldn't trust it, but the figure of £100 million spent while Warnock was manager is certainly not miles out and, correctly, gives the impression that he could have few complaints about the level of support he was given by the Board. In the summer of 2017, our parachute payments had stopped and attendances had been falling, so money was bound to be fairly tight. However, he was given around £2 million to spend on Lee Tomlin that summer and given his reluctance to play Tomlin over the next two and a bit years as he failed to get the player to hit the heights he did under Neil Harris last season, it seems to me he should have used that money to sign Watkins if he was that sure about him.
    transfermarkt says that we spent a total of just under £60m on transfer fees while Warnock was managing the club, plus the £15m for Sala.

  10. #10

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Quote Originally Posted by the other bob wilson View Post
    Wales Online also carries a piece about the appointment of David Hughes and the club's plans for the Academy.

    https://www.walesonline.co.uk/sport/...iting-19252700

    Based on what I've been told there are some factual errors in the story, so maybe I shouldn't trust it, but the figure of £100 million spent while Warnock was manager is certainly not miles out and, correctly, gives the impression that he could have few complaints about the level of support he was given by the Board. In the summer of 2017, our parachute payments had stopped and attendances had been falling, so money was bound to be fairly tight. However, he was given around £2 million to spend on Lee Tomlin that summer and given his reluctance to play Tomlin over the next two and a bit years as he failed to get the player to hit the heights he did under Neil Harris last season, it seems to me he should have used that money to sign Watkins if he was that sure about him.
    We did receive a parachute payment in the summer of 2017. They used to be spread over 4 years.

  11. #11

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Something doesn't quite ad up here.

    So we spent 1.6 million on Danny Ward on the 23rd June, then 3 million on Lee Tomlin on the 13 July at which point we announced that there would be no more signings.

    Watkins didn't join Brentford until the 18th July, we then went on to sign Bogle in August for about 1 million and Madine in the January for 6!

    To say that the club didn't want to spend the money is clearly not right, that's more than 10 million on attacking players in that same season, and we all know that Warnock was the only one on the "transfer committee" that had any kind of footballing knowledge.

    Brentford also took a coupe of seasons to bring Watkins through - I seem to recall they had him playing as a left winger to begin with, as they had other strikers ahead of him. I can't recall Warnock being prepared to do that with any young player during his time here, Watkins was 21 at the time he joined Brentford - the only other players signed by Warnock that young were the McKay twins and Marko Grujic on loan.

    I really can't see it.

  12. #12

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rjk View Post
    Something doesn't quite ad up here.

    So we spent 1.6 million on Danny Ward on the 23rd June, then 3 million on Lee Tomlin on the 13 July at which point we announced that there would be no more signings.

    Watkins didn't join Brentford until the 18th July, we then went on to sign Bogle in August for about 1 million and Madine in the January for 6!

    To say that the club didn't want to spend the money is clearly not right, that's more than 10 million on attacking players in that same season, and we all know that Warnock was the only one on the "transfer committee" that had any kind of footballing knowledge.

    Brentford also took a coupe of seasons to bring Watkins through - I seem to recall they had him playing as a left winger to begin with, as they had other strikers ahead of him. I can't recall Warnock being prepared to do that with any young player during his time here, Watkins was 21 at the time he joined Brentford - the only other players signed by Warnock that young were the McKay twins and Marko Grujic on loan.

    I really can't see it.
    Classic revisionism from Warnock.

  13. #13

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Players and their agents are not daft. There are many factors to consider when joining another team, not just the money (well perhaps agent might be stretching it!).

    Warnock has become known for getting the best out of a squad that's failing (we were failing, and I personally am thankful for his services) but not for developing youngsters.
    My guess is that there would have been many clubs looking to get Olly Watkins on their books but Cardiff under Warnock would have been well down the list.

    Of course Warnock is not going to come out and say Watkins was available for transfer but he didn't want to sign for me.

    He really doesn't help himself by rubbing people up the wrong way by giving these interviews.
    I suppose it's all about building up the product that is Neil Warnock.

    You can see why his a marmite character and not anywhere in between.

  14. #14

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rjk View Post
    Something doesn't quite ad up here.

    So we spent 1.6 million on Danny Ward on the 23rd June, then 3 million on Lee Tomlin on the 13 July at which point we announced that there would be no more signings.

    Watkins didn't join Brentford until the 18th July, we then went on to sign Bogle in August for about 1 million and Madine in the January for 6!

    To say that the club didn't want to spend the money is clearly not right, that's more than 10 million on attacking players in that same season, and we all know that Warnock was the only one on the "transfer committee" that had any kind of footballing knowledge.

    Brentford also took a coupe of seasons to bring Watkins through - I seem to recall they had him playing as a left winger to begin with, as they had other strikers ahead of him. I can't recall Warnock being prepared to do that with any young player during his time here, Watkins was 21 at the time he joined Brentford - the only other players signed by Warnock that young were the McKay twins and Marko Grujic on loan.

    I really can't see it.
    Most things that Neil Warnock says in public need to be taken with a large pinch of salt.

  15. #15

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    These type of managers stories are like groundhog day, so many managers and their self praise quests , didn't Alex McLeish say he nearly signed Messi as an 18 yr old for Rangers on loan , player decided not too , due to the warm weather .

    Anyways we'd have put right Watkins development

  16. #16

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Lucky escape for Ollie I would say.

    A couple of years playing alone up top with Warnockball and that would have been him sliding down the leagues in a very Madine-esque way.

  17. #17

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Quote Originally Posted by blue lewj View Post
    Lucky escape for Ollie I would say.

    A couple of years playing alone up top with Warnockball and that would have been him sliding down the leagues in a very Madine-esque way.
    Probably end up brawling on Caroline street or just hanging around Looking for fights anyway

  18. #18

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Warnock just digs himself deeper and deeper into a hole. He should keep his mouth shut.

  19. #19

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Quote Originally Posted by NYCBlue View Post
    Warnock just digs himself deeper and deeper into a hole. He should keep his mouth shut.
    Excellent post. Warnock really didn't do anything for us while he was here did he ? Apart that is from saving us from relegation one season and getting us promoted to the Premier League the next, whilst spending under £10m in the process. Also filling the stadium and getting the fans behind the club again. Useless manager.

  20. #20

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Quote Originally Posted by dml1954 View Post
    Excellent post. Warnock really didn't do anything for us while he was here did he ? Apart that is from saving us from relegation one season and getting us promoted to the Premier League the next, whilst spending under £10m in the process. Also filling the stadium and getting the fans behind the club again. Useless manager.
    You're being harsh; he wasn't totally useless.

  21. #21
    Heisenberg
    Guest

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Quote Originally Posted by dml1954 View Post
    Excellent post. Warnock really didn't do anything for us while he was here did he ? Apart that is from saving us from relegation one season and getting us promoted to the Premier League the next, whilst spending under £10m in the process. Also filling the stadium and getting the fans behind the club again. Useless manager.
    Do you have these responses saved in a folder labelled 'WArNocK Material' ready to copy and paste?

  22. #22

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Quote Originally Posted by Heisenberg View Post
    Do you have these responses saved in a folder labelled 'WArNocK Material' ready to copy and paste?
    If it wasn't for the fact the account was registered in April 2015, I'd be convinced it was Warnock's missus account.

  23. #23

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Quote Originally Posted by dml1954 View Post
    Excellent post. Warnock really didn't do anything for us while he was here did he ? Apart that is from saving us from relegation one season and getting us promoted to the Premier League the next, whilst spending under £10m in the process. Also filling the stadium and getting the fans behind the club again. Useless manager.
    Indeed. Relegation was an absolute certainty after 11 games.

  24. #24

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Quote Originally Posted by dml1954 View Post
    Excellent post. Warnock really didn't do anything for us while he was here did he ? Apart that is from saving us from relegation one season and getting us promoted to the Premier League the next, whilst spending under £10m in the process. Also filling the stadium and getting the fans behind the club again. Useless manager.
    Please don't respond to my posts unless you can come up with something at least somewhat relevant to what I've posted.

    Read what I post, check the title of the thread, and if you want to attribute any sort of tone or meaning to what I posted maybe check your post to see if any words match.

  25. #25

    Re: Warnock - City Board wouldn't spend £2 million on Ollie Watkins.

    Quote Originally Posted by the other bob wilson View Post
    Warnoch has always been a nasty piece of work. He praised Tan and Dalman when he was here now he's like a bitter ex partner

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •