And some people say Tan doesn’t back the managers, or spend any money!
+ Visit Cardiff FC for Latest News, Transfer Gossip, Fixtures and Match Results |
Interesting Read
https://www.thestar.co.uk/sport/foot...2994305?page=1
And some people say Tan doesn’t back the managers, or spend any money!
Stoke's net spend of £160m was a surprise considering where they are now.
You can see why Swansea fans aren’t happy. The owners haven’t pumped much money into their squad.
Another consequence Of a having a non working Academy I suppose - many other throw money at it clubs are able to recoup some of their transfer spending by being able to sell home produced players for eight figure fees in some cases.
Producing saleable assets from the Academy is one major factor - but another is whether the club has been in the Premier League or not during the 10 year period. I imagine most clubs who have been promoted have spent more on players than they have recouped when they were later relegated (more than offset in most cases by TV money). Apples and pears in that list.
So in ten years, we spent £85m more than we received? Am I reading that correctly? It sounds a lot, but if you say £8.5m a year, it doesn't sound quite so bad! I wonder what Stoke fans think about the amount they've splashed up the wall?
A few of our signings at least could have worked out.
i.e. Murphy, Whyte, Decordova-reid could all have gone for a profit if they had kicked on.
But players like Pack, Flint, Bacuna, cunningham etc aren't likely to have any residual value to speak of towards end of their contracts.
I guess you need a mixture of both types of signings (and for some of the ones you sign to develop to actually develop), but over the last few years we've made too many of the latter IMO.
Whyte kicking on? I get your point about Murphy and Reid though.
When was the last time we signed an exciting youngster? When was the last time we signed a youngster that might need a season with the under 23s but is one for the future? We don't. It's all about the here and now, regardless of the manager. There's no forward planning. The blame for that lies with the board's transfer committee.
yes they rely far too much on the manager, who is only ever going to go for the here and now, as there's a good chance that they won't be there to reap the benefits of the ones for the future.
a director of football - and a forward thinking one is what we need for longer term success
Absolutely, as there's bugger all football knowledge on the board, apart from the legend Tan, knower of everything.
Unfortunately I reckon they have no interest in spending extra money on a director of football, neither does Tan want someone with more say than him, possibly.
Good quick summary but transfer prices are only the start of it. It’s wages that are the killer usually
But it is a sort of ‘look how well we’re doing compared to .............’, clubs that have had a couple of promotions and all that goes with them in those ten years knock those figures into a cocked hat whereas others who’ve gone on a Viv Nicholson like spend, spend, spend yet achieved bugger all are the ones who need a long, hard look at themselves.
The article is a Wales Online type of shock, horror attention grabber, ‘ Man who earns a £1000 a week spends a lot more than a man who earns £200 a week’. Never!!!!!!!