+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
I'm going to repeat something I remember (prolly imperfectly) reading (again) that Murphy and Reid were signed with a view to Cardiff being back in the Championship. They were young yet proven. Time will tell if this was a master stroke. And while it seems different, they both played in 27 games or more in the Premiership last season - a good hardening process. That they are still around is testament that the management team is still backing them - and they have bought into the bigger scheme of things.
If this is true, it gives an insight into the thinking of City management and explains many decisions such as the lack of investment last season. In a nutshell, City expected to be relegated - even planned for it. That they were so close to staying up in the Land of Milk and Honey was a bonus - and caught them out. They were possibly one signing from staying in the Premiership - which is actually quite remarkable.
If City make two further decent signings, it could be argued that we are stronger than a couple of seasons ago - and the long-term management plan is intact.
Alternatively, this could all be bollocks.
Last summer it did look like we were signing a Championship All-Star's XI in preparation for a Premier League campaign, especially when we signed Greg Cunningham.
We'll see if it works out.
Not even with the prospect of yet another promotion notched up?
And I can think of examples of clubs who appear to endorse bounces between the PL and the Ch because a season fighting for promotion meant high gates and loads of interest.
If the club (ie Tan) really wanted to consolidate in the PL, far more money would have been invested - especially bearing in mind what was recouped from TV money and increased gates. His decision to limit spending made no business sense whatsoever - even given what happened with Malky (altho I think Malky would have kept us up with that squad).
No because he wouldn't waste his time here and would go elsewhere.
Reid and Murphy are good players who should kick on. We didn't do a Fulham (because that worked out well). We signed players for sensible money that we thought could make the step up. We didn't mortgage our future like other promoted clubs have done. They'll know how hard it is to get back on an even keel after a relegation so they didn't want to risk that happening in the future. If they wanted to bounce back, they wouldn't have spent it January.
Actually, limiting spending made sense from the business side. Investing more probably doesn't shift your odds of survival that much. We've seen big spending teams go down and shoestring teams survive.
A businessman would look at it and think - if I spend more, will we still get relegated? Possibly. If I don't spend, will we stay up? Possibly. If I want to be very sure we stay up (as there is a broad link between wages and league position), is it worth that immediate immense investment? Probably not.
There were a few key games we needed to win in the run-in to survive (one that we did, Brighton, one that we lost, Fulham, and some others) and the difference wasn't a signing or two, it was the tactics and approach to the games.
Excellent post Lardy, spot on.
He could have been and we'll never know. But that's sort of my point.
Cyclops said he was looking at it from a business sense, and I was too. If you invest £15m in a new outlet then you've done your market research and you're pretty sure it'll make you money. If you invest £15m in a striker, you don't know if you're getting Chopra or Cornelius. The variables are harder to control.
We can agree or disagree with the club's transfer dealings but it can definitely be defended from a business sense.
Lets take an example. When we invest as private individuals, we generally have to define our attitude towards risk. At the bottom of the scale is little/no risk which brings minimal returns, though a safe investment. Then we go up the scale, until we are prepared to take a high risk for high gains.
Your model of 'possibles' is near the bottom of the risk scale. We missed staying up by a whisker - maybe by a goal or two. With the minimum prospect of riches of hundreds of millions from just a couple of seasons in the PL (from TV money and sell-out crowds), surely an extra spend of £20-30m is not such a big risk spend. For every example of spend=fail, an example of spend wisely=consolidation can be produced.
As I've said before, it makes little business sense for Tan to start spending now to try to achieve the promotion which had already been attained.
There's a risk in spending too much, and equally in spending too little. Clubs like Norwich, Watford, Bournemouth, who seem to know their way around the transfer markets can get away with spending less than the likes if City, who at times seem like they haven't got a clue. I think VT trusts Warnock's football judgement implicitly - and rightly so. I just think he doesn't trust him, nor Dalman or Choo in spending relatively large sums on players...