Talking Point: No blame game needed for Ulloa move

Leo Ulloa

Leo Ulloa

First published in Sport by , Chief sports reporter

No blame game is required over the sale of Leo Ulloa to Leicester.

Nobody can blame Ulloa, 28 this Saturday, for wanting to play in the Premier League, earning himself a big pay increase in the process.

Nobody can blame Albion for letting him go to Leicester.

They have negotiated well to get an £8 million downpayment, rising to a potential £10 million with add-ons. There is never anything to be gained from holding back a player's career.

But let's not pretend the man from Argentina will not be missed. Of course he will.

Some absolute rubbish has been written about Ulloa on social media in recent weeks.

Reading it you would have thought he never scored a goal or put in a shift for the Seagulls.

These blinkered critics must have suffered amnesia.

Have they forgotten the ten goals he scored in his first 20 games against the likes of Arsenal, Cardiff and Crystal Palace?

Or the 16 goals he contributed last season, when his victims included his new table-topping employers, Hull and QPR, despite missing more than two months with a fractured foot bone?

Have they forgotten how he relentlessly led the line alone through the middle, occupying two centre-halves?

And have they forgotten how often he was back inside his own box heading away a corner or free-kick?

The persistent moaning at referees over the buffetings he received and the occasional flashes of Latin American temperament were a little irritating but that was a small price to pay for Ulloa's massive contribution to consecutive top six finishes.

What matters now is how Albion go about compensating for his departure.

It does not neccessarily have to be a like-for-like replacement. That may well not be the case now that Sami Hyypia is in charge and the emphasis has shifted marginally towards a more pacey, high-tempo style.

Ulloa's goals and general contribution have to be replaced somehow. Ashley Barnes and company did a pretty good job during his injury absence last October and November, when Albion still managed to accumulate 15 points from nine matches.

Now it is up to Craig Mackail-Smith, newcomer Chris O'Grady and the one or two strikers Hyypia is yet to sign to fill the void. The chances of mounting a serious challenge again pretty much depend on it.

Comments (89)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:52am Thu 24 Jul 14

AlanDuffy says...

Having watched the game last night and the sheer mediocrity of some of the players on show, is it any wonder Leo wanted to move on. Yes, I think we got a very good price for him, and there was no point in standing in his way if he wanted to go. I would now like to see some of the money re-invested in a number of decent players ( we all know the positions we need to fill ) and soon. We've been promised signings for weeks and have known who we would need since the end of last season. Leo's departure was no surprise either and provisions should have been made. If COG can step up to the plate and replace him, then I'd say it was a fantastic bit of business. Only time will tell. But, like a lot of other season ticket holders I have spoken to, I am getting a little frustrated by the club apparently dragging their heels on recruitment, while all around us clubs ( with the exception of maybe Reading and Blackpool ) are strengthening. Our squad is significantly weaker than at the start of last season. TB said that we had targets and that a number of players could be brought in "tomorrow". So who/where are they?
Having watched the game last night and the sheer mediocrity of some of the players on show, is it any wonder Leo wanted to move on. Yes, I think we got a very good price for him, and there was no point in standing in his way if he wanted to go. I would now like to see some of the money re-invested in a number of decent players ( we all know the positions we need to fill ) and soon. We've been promised signings for weeks and have known who we would need since the end of last season. Leo's departure was no surprise either and provisions should have been made. If COG can step up to the plate and replace him, then I'd say it was a fantastic bit of business. Only time will tell. But, like a lot of other season ticket holders I have spoken to, I am getting a little frustrated by the club apparently dragging their heels on recruitment, while all around us clubs ( with the exception of maybe Reading and Blackpool ) are strengthening. Our squad is significantly weaker than at the start of last season. TB said that we had targets and that a number of players could be brought in "tomorrow". So who/where are they? AlanDuffy
  • Score: 49

10:52am Thu 24 Jul 14

BobGear says...

What is the point of this article?
Who are you arguing with?
What is the point of this article? Who are you arguing with? BobGear
  • Score: -17

10:55am Thu 24 Jul 14

seagullsays says...

An excellent player for us in the short time he was here, and unusual for the Argus to have such a go at the critics. Not sure why they're bothering, as it won't stop them.

Looking forward is best for all concerned. We need new signings, preferably quickly, in several positions. Debating LU is irrelevant, other than how to spend the £8m we got for him. The stats on this Soriano guy being rumoured about look good. But stats can deceive of course.
An excellent player for us in the short time he was here, and unusual for the Argus to have such a go at the critics. Not sure why they're bothering, as it won't stop them. Looking forward is best for all concerned. We need new signings, preferably quickly, in several positions. Debating LU is irrelevant, other than how to spend the £8m we got for him. The stats on this Soriano guy being rumoured about look good. But stats can deceive of course. seagullsays
  • Score: 11

10:58am Thu 24 Jul 14

mikeygit says...

I agree Ulloa was a very good player for us--but come on a pointless article---like it or not Ulloa is yesterdays news. In business one always looks forward not back. And football IS a business. BUT YES lets get players in NOW:
I agree Ulloa was a very good player for us--but come on a pointless article---like it or not Ulloa is yesterdays news. In business one always looks forward not back. And football IS a business. BUT YES lets get players in NOW: mikeygit
  • Score: 2

11:06am Thu 24 Jul 14

don't wanna do it like that says...

BobGear wrote:
What is the point of this article?
Who are you arguing with?
Think they want arguments amongst the posters.
[quote][p][bold]BobGear[/bold] wrote: What is the point of this article? Who are you arguing with?[/p][/quote]Think they want arguments amongst the posters. don't wanna do it like that
  • Score: 10

11:17am Thu 24 Jul 14

AburridoEnTrabajo says...

And the talking point is?
And the talking point is? AburridoEnTrabajo
  • Score: 8

11:22am Thu 24 Jul 14

Willie, Willie Irvine says...

don't wanna do it like that wrote:
BobGear wrote:
What is the point of this article?
Who are you arguing with?
Think they want arguments amongst the posters.
Oh no they don't....
[quote][p][bold]don't wanna do it like that[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BobGear[/bold] wrote: What is the point of this article? Who are you arguing with?[/p][/quote]Think they want arguments amongst the posters.[/p][/quote]Oh no they don't.... Willie, Willie Irvine
  • Score: 24

11:35am Thu 24 Jul 14

JeffLomer says...

The only headline I want to read about Leo is he's scored a bag full off goals made so many appearances kept Leicester up, here you go Brighton here's your other 2 million we promised, not interested about a player who wants to wear another clubs shirt!!
Up the Albion!!
The only headline I want to read about Leo is he's scored a bag full off goals made so many appearances kept Leicester up, here you go Brighton here's your other 2 million we promised, not interested about a player who wants to wear another clubs shirt!! Up the Albion!! JeffLomer
  • Score: 9

11:40am Thu 24 Jul 14

heathgate says...

To the posters above, if you dont like the Argus, go read something else.

To the 'Talking Point' - We will mess Ulloa, awesome player at this level, but we cannot continue to move forward if we dont speculate in the trf market, playing it safe is going to result in us becoming a yo yo club. FFP is restricting us, but it applies to many other clubs too, all of who are managing to recruit seemingly at will. Big question is "what is stopping high profile players coming to brighton?"
To the posters above, if you dont like the Argus, go read something else. To the 'Talking Point' - We will mess Ulloa, awesome player at this level, but we cannot continue to move forward if we dont speculate in the trf market, playing it safe is going to result in us becoming a yo yo club. FFP is restricting us, but it applies to many other clubs too, all of who are managing to recruit seemingly at will. Big question is "what is stopping high profile players coming to brighton?" heathgate
  • Score: 5

11:56am Thu 24 Jul 14

Kit Napier's Beard says...

AlanDuffy wrote:
Having watched the game last night and the sheer mediocrity of some of the players on show, is it any wonder Leo wanted to move on. Yes, I think we got a very good price for him, and there was no point in standing in his way if he wanted to go. I would now like to see some of the money re-invested in a number of decent players ( we all know the positions we need to fill ) and soon. We've been promised signings for weeks and have known who we would need since the end of last season. Leo's departure was no surprise either and provisions should have been made. If COG can step up to the plate and replace him, then I'd say it was a fantastic bit of business. Only time will tell. But, like a lot of other season ticket holders I have spoken to, I am getting a little frustrated by the club apparently dragging their heels on recruitment, while all around us clubs ( with the exception of maybe Reading and Blackpool ) are strengthening. Our squad is significantly weaker than at the start of last season. TB said that we had targets and that a number of players could be brought in "tomorrow". So who/where are they?
Bravo well put. Getting too close to 9 August IMO for "new" players to fully settle in
[quote][p][bold]AlanDuffy[/bold] wrote: Having watched the game last night and the sheer mediocrity of some of the players on show, is it any wonder Leo wanted to move on. Yes, I think we got a very good price for him, and there was no point in standing in his way if he wanted to go. I would now like to see some of the money re-invested in a number of decent players ( we all know the positions we need to fill ) and soon. We've been promised signings for weeks and have known who we would need since the end of last season. Leo's departure was no surprise either and provisions should have been made. If COG can step up to the plate and replace him, then I'd say it was a fantastic bit of business. Only time will tell. But, like a lot of other season ticket holders I have spoken to, I am getting a little frustrated by the club apparently dragging their heels on recruitment, while all around us clubs ( with the exception of maybe Reading and Blackpool ) are strengthening. Our squad is significantly weaker than at the start of last season. TB said that we had targets and that a number of players could be brought in "tomorrow". So who/where are they?[/p][/quote]Bravo well put. Getting too close to 9 August IMO for "new" players to fully settle in Kit Napier's Beard
  • Score: 8

11:56am Thu 24 Jul 14

SeagullOverSelsey says...

seagullsays wrote:
An excellent player for us in the short time he was here, and unusual for the Argus to have such a go at the critics. Not sure why they're bothering, as it won't stop them.

Looking forward is best for all concerned. We need new signings, preferably quickly, in several positions. Debating LU is irrelevant, other than how to spend the £8m we got for him. The stats on this Soriano guy being rumoured about look good. But stats can deceive of course.
Which Soriano? Johnathan,Roberto,Br
uno or Fernando?!
[quote][p][bold]seagullsays[/bold] wrote: An excellent player for us in the short time he was here, and unusual for the Argus to have such a go at the critics. Not sure why they're bothering, as it won't stop them. Looking forward is best for all concerned. We need new signings, preferably quickly, in several positions. Debating LU is irrelevant, other than how to spend the £8m we got for him. The stats on this Soriano guy being rumoured about look good. But stats can deceive of course.[/p][/quote]Which Soriano? Johnathan,Roberto,Br uno or Fernando?! SeagullOverSelsey
  • Score: 0

11:58am Thu 24 Jul 14

Joel'sGrandad says...

Willie, Willie Irvine wrote:
don't wanna do it like that wrote:
BobGear wrote:
What is the point of this article?
Who are you arguing with?
Think they want arguments amongst the posters.
Oh no they don't....
Brilliant!

It seems players are picking and choosing where they go. They don't seem desperate to get a new club in a hurry any more.
A direct result of too much money in the game at our level and above.
If we're going to compete on the field we need to compete in the transfer market too.
One last point re Leo. What a terrific player he was for us and he goes with our thanks and best wishes.
Now can we just move on please. UTA
[quote][p][bold]Willie, Willie Irvine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]don't wanna do it like that[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BobGear[/bold] wrote: What is the point of this article? Who are you arguing with?[/p][/quote]Think they want arguments amongst the posters.[/p][/quote]Oh no they don't....[/p][/quote]Brilliant! It seems players are picking and choosing where they go. They don't seem desperate to get a new club in a hurry any more. A direct result of too much money in the game at our level and above. If we're going to compete on the field we need to compete in the transfer market too. One last point re Leo. What a terrific player he was for us and he goes with our thanks and best wishes. Now can we just move on please. UTA Joel'sGrandad
  • Score: 9

12:01pm Thu 24 Jul 14

ballantrrae says...

seagullsays wrote:
An excellent player for us in the short time he was here, and unusual for the Argus to have such a go at the critics. Not sure why they're bothering, as it won't stop them.

Looking forward is best for all concerned. We need new signings, preferably quickly, in several positions. Debating LU is irrelevant, other than how to spend the £8m we got for him. The stats on this Soriano guy being rumoured about look good. But stats can deceive of course.
Seagullsays you raise the question of why the Argus is bothering' 'to have such a go at the critics'
Given that one or two posters have speculated about a deterioration in the relationship between the Argus and the club, perhaps the paper is trying to build bridges ? Just a thought.
I m sure that both the club and the paper are fully aware of how important the other is to each of them.
The most important thing from the Albion's and fans's perspective is to see the £8million (£7.2 million after 10% for Ulloa, his agent etc) is invested as you point out in new players. We may (sadly) have lost Ulloa but the proceeds should enable us to acquire another 5 or 6 players.
Every cloud has a silver lining. Onwards and Upwards.
[quote][p][bold]seagullsays[/bold] wrote: An excellent player for us in the short time he was here, and unusual for the Argus to have such a go at the critics. Not sure why they're bothering, as it won't stop them. Looking forward is best for all concerned. We need new signings, preferably quickly, in several positions. Debating LU is irrelevant, other than how to spend the £8m we got for him. The stats on this Soriano guy being rumoured about look good. But stats can deceive of course.[/p][/quote]Seagullsays you raise the question of why the Argus is bothering' 'to have such a go at the critics' Given that one or two posters have speculated about a deterioration in the relationship between the Argus and the club, perhaps the paper is trying to build bridges ? Just a thought. I m sure that both the club and the paper are fully aware of how important the other is to each of them. The most important thing from the Albion's and fans's perspective is to see the £8million (£7.2 million after 10% for Ulloa, his agent etc) is invested as you point out in new players. We may (sadly) have lost Ulloa but the proceeds should enable us to acquire another 5 or 6 players. Every cloud has a silver lining. Onwards and Upwards. ballantrrae
  • Score: 6

12:05pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Joel'sGrandad says...

Also let's not be too critical of last night's performance.
I expect it was too hot but more importantly if two players get cut eyebrows it's best not to get any worse injuries. The important games start 9/8. UTA
Also let's not be too critical of last night's performance. I expect it was too hot but more importantly if two players get cut eyebrows it's best not to get any worse injuries. The important games start 9/8. UTA Joel'sGrandad
  • Score: 2

12:05pm Thu 24 Jul 14

BobGear says...

don't wanna do it like that wrote:
BobGear wrote:
What is the point of this article?
Who are you arguing with?
Think they want arguments amongst the posters.
I've got a 13 negative for asking those questions!?
Are The Argus staff just trying to get page views up?
[quote][p][bold]don't wanna do it like that[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BobGear[/bold] wrote: What is the point of this article? Who are you arguing with?[/p][/quote]Think they want arguments amongst the posters.[/p][/quote]I've got a 13 negative for asking those questions!? Are The Argus staff just trying to get page views up? BobGear
  • Score: -10

12:11pm Thu 24 Jul 14

seagullsays says...

SeagullOverSelsey wrote:
seagullsays wrote:
An excellent player for us in the short time he was here, and unusual for the Argus to have such a go at the critics. Not sure why they're bothering, as it won't stop them.

Looking forward is best for all concerned. We need new signings, preferably quickly, in several positions. Debating LU is irrelevant, other than how to spend the £8m we got for him. The stats on this Soriano guy being rumoured about look good. But stats can deceive of course.
Which Soriano? Johnathan,Roberto,Br

uno or Fernando?!
Hi SOS,

Jonathan. But only a rumour.
[quote][p][bold]SeagullOverSelsey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]seagullsays[/bold] wrote: An excellent player for us in the short time he was here, and unusual for the Argus to have such a go at the critics. Not sure why they're bothering, as it won't stop them. Looking forward is best for all concerned. We need new signings, preferably quickly, in several positions. Debating LU is irrelevant, other than how to spend the £8m we got for him. The stats on this Soriano guy being rumoured about look good. But stats can deceive of course.[/p][/quote]Which Soriano? Johnathan,Roberto,Br uno or Fernando?![/p][/quote]Hi SOS, Jonathan. But only a rumour. seagullsays
  • Score: 3

12:31pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Albion In Staffs says...

The point is, this is a "Talking Point" piece based around opinion and in this case, the opinion, including the fact that "some absolute rubbish has been written about Ulloa on social media...." is Andy Naylor's.
Frankly, we, as fans, think some absolute rubbish has been written under the name of Andy Naylor in the past and we've said so.
The internet is a two-way highway and to those who feel slighted by the comment, there's nothing like a bit of your own back now and again and no point bleating.
It does seem a bit of a personal rant to fill space although and I'd sooner there was more of a focus on the actions of the club than those of the fans.
Anyway, enough about the article, I agree the club shouldn't be blamed for accepting the inevitable and a few million quid.
Ulloa did a fantastic job for us while he was here, but in truth, I'm not convinced he'll be a major influence against really top defenders.
For me, it's brilliant business by the club.
The point is, this is a "Talking Point" piece based around opinion and in this case, the opinion, including the fact that "some absolute rubbish has been written about Ulloa on social media...." is Andy Naylor's. Frankly, we, as fans, think some absolute rubbish has been written under the name of Andy Naylor in the past and we've said so. The internet is a two-way highway and to those who feel slighted by the comment, there's nothing like a bit of your own back now and again and no point bleating. It does seem a bit of a personal rant to fill space although and I'd sooner there was more of a focus on the actions of the club than those of the fans. Anyway, enough about the article, I agree the club shouldn't be blamed for accepting the inevitable and a few million quid. Ulloa did a fantastic job for us while he was here, but in truth, I'm not convinced he'll be a major influence against really top defenders. For me, it's brilliant business by the club. Albion In Staffs
  • Score: 3

12:32pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Plutomania says...

Joel'sGrandad wrote:
Also let's not be too critical of last night's performance.
I expect it was too hot but more importantly if two players get cut eyebrows it's best not to get any worse injuries. The important games start 9/8. UTA
Oh! Dear Oh! Dear,too hot and cut eyebrows.From what I saw the opposition came out playing with BALLS, not just the football.Is this how we are going to let teams treat us this seaon.Come on Brighton shape up PLEASE.
[quote][p][bold]Joel'sGrandad[/bold] wrote: Also let's not be too critical of last night's performance. I expect it was too hot but more importantly if two players get cut eyebrows it's best not to get any worse injuries. The important games start 9/8. UTA[/p][/quote]Oh! Dear Oh! Dear,too hot and cut eyebrows.From what I saw the opposition came out playing with BALLS, not just the football.Is this how we are going to let teams treat us this seaon.Come on Brighton shape up PLEASE. Plutomania
  • Score: 0

12:34pm Thu 24 Jul 14

tug509 says...

Completely pointless question .

1/ Leo has gone
2/ The vast majority of us wish him well
3/Again ,the majority understand both his and our reasons for the sale
4/Anyone who doesn`t understand or agree with the above is hardly likely to change their minds now ,so again it is irrelevant
5/Are we going to be discussing past players for the whole season ,or concentrate on the team that matters The Albion
Completely pointless question . 1/ Leo has gone 2/ The vast majority of us wish him well 3/Again ,the majority understand both his and our reasons for the sale 4/Anyone who doesn`t understand or agree with the above is hardly likely to change their minds now ,so again it is irrelevant 5/Are we going to be discussing past players for the whole season ,or concentrate on the team that matters The Albion tug509
  • Score: 14

12:41pm Thu 24 Jul 14

SeagullOverSelsey says...

seagullsays wrote:
SeagullOverSelsey wrote:
seagullsays wrote:
An excellent player for us in the short time he was here, and unusual for the Argus to have such a go at the critics. Not sure why they're bothering, as it won't stop them.

Looking forward is best for all concerned. We need new signings, preferably quickly, in several positions. Debating LU is irrelevant, other than how to spend the £8m we got for him. The stats on this Soriano guy being rumoured about look good. But stats can deceive of course.
Which Soriano? Johnathan,Roberto,Br


uno or Fernando?!
Hi SOS,

Jonathan. But only a rumour.
Thanks Seagullsays.Yes his stats on Wiki look impressive .Wait and see!
[quote][p][bold]seagullsays[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]SeagullOverSelsey[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]seagullsays[/bold] wrote: An excellent player for us in the short time he was here, and unusual for the Argus to have such a go at the critics. Not sure why they're bothering, as it won't stop them. Looking forward is best for all concerned. We need new signings, preferably quickly, in several positions. Debating LU is irrelevant, other than how to spend the £8m we got for him. The stats on this Soriano guy being rumoured about look good. But stats can deceive of course.[/p][/quote]Which Soriano? Johnathan,Roberto,Br uno or Fernando?![/p][/quote]Hi SOS, Jonathan. But only a rumour.[/p][/quote]Thanks Seagullsays.Yes his stats on Wiki look impressive .Wait and see! SeagullOverSelsey
  • Score: 2

12:48pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Max Ripple says...

BobGear wrote:
What is the point of this article?
Who are you arguing with?
Can't understand the thumbs down here. What is the point of this story? Just rehashing old ground. Leo has gone. He wanted Prem football. Can we blame him?
Andy Naylor - can we have some new stories please? And if the Albion won't talk to you - make your peace with them or whatever it takes!
[quote][p][bold]BobGear[/bold] wrote: What is the point of this article? Who are you arguing with?[/p][/quote]Can't understand the thumbs down here. What is the point of this story? Just rehashing old ground. Leo has gone. He wanted Prem football. Can we blame him? Andy Naylor - can we have some new stories please? And if the Albion won't talk to you - make your peace with them or whatever it takes! Max Ripple
  • Score: 4

12:56pm Thu 24 Jul 14

B rian Tawses left foot says...

The curse of 'the ceiling' will hang over this season even more heavily than the last. We have sold most of our best players and not replaced them with real quality.
We are in for our most difficult season since before Poyet took over,.
The curse of 'the ceiling' will hang over this season even more heavily than the last. We have sold most of our best players and not replaced them with real quality. We are in for our most difficult season since before Poyet took over,. B rian Tawses left foot
  • Score: 6

1:00pm Thu 24 Jul 14

gordongull says...

heathgate wrote:
To the posters above, if you dont like the Argus, go read something else.

To the 'Talking Point' - We will mess Ulloa, awesome player at this level, but we cannot continue to move forward if we dont speculate in the trf market, playing it safe is going to result in us becoming a yo yo club. FFP is restricting us, but it applies to many other clubs too, all of who are managing to recruit seemingly at will. Big question is "what is stopping high profile players coming to brighton?"
A yo yo club?
You think we are going to be relegated?
[quote][p][bold]heathgate[/bold] wrote: To the posters above, if you dont like the Argus, go read something else. To the 'Talking Point' - We will mess Ulloa, awesome player at this level, but we cannot continue to move forward if we dont speculate in the trf market, playing it safe is going to result in us becoming a yo yo club. FFP is restricting us, but it applies to many other clubs too, all of who are managing to recruit seemingly at will. Big question is "what is stopping high profile players coming to brighton?"[/p][/quote]A yo yo club? You think we are going to be relegated? gordongull
  • Score: 0

1:17pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Quiterie says...

BobGear wrote:
What is the point of this article?
Who are you arguing with?
I kind of agree. I've seen very little criticism of Ulloa on social media (if any!) It feels like Naylor is simply manufacturing this criticism to justify his article to fill column inches.
[quote][p][bold]BobGear[/bold] wrote: What is the point of this article? Who are you arguing with?[/p][/quote]I kind of agree. I've seen very little criticism of Ulloa on social media (if any!) It feels like Naylor is simply manufacturing this criticism to justify his article to fill column inches. Quiterie
  • Score: 4

1:19pm Thu 24 Jul 14

PressBoxTeaBoy says...

Weird article ?
Weird article ? PressBoxTeaBoy
  • Score: 5

1:22pm Thu 24 Jul 14

gordongull says...

There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo.
This article helps to redress the balance.
There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo. This article helps to redress the balance. gordongull
  • Score: 1

1:29pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Liambhataylor19 says...

AlanDuffy wrote:
Having watched the game last night and the sheer mediocrity of some of the players on show, is it any wonder Leo wanted to move on. Yes, I think we got a very good price for him, and there was no point in standing in his way if he wanted to go. I would now like to see some of the money re-invested in a number of decent players ( we all know the positions we need to fill ) and soon. We've been promised signings for weeks and have known who we would need since the end of last season. Leo's departure was no surprise either and provisions should have been made. If COG can step up to the plate and replace him, then I'd say it was a fantastic bit of business. Only time will tell. But, like a lot of other season ticket holders I have spoken to, I am getting a little frustrated by the club apparently dragging their heels on recruitment, while all around us clubs ( with the exception of maybe Reading and Blackpool ) are strengthening. Our squad is significantly weaker than at the start of last season. TB said that we had targets and that a number of players could be brought in "tomorrow". So who/where are they?
That's what I call a great post thank you very much I agree with everything you wrote. We need at least a gk lb and a st so please tb can you start spending
[quote][p][bold]AlanDuffy[/bold] wrote: Having watched the game last night and the sheer mediocrity of some of the players on show, is it any wonder Leo wanted to move on. Yes, I think we got a very good price for him, and there was no point in standing in his way if he wanted to go. I would now like to see some of the money re-invested in a number of decent players ( we all know the positions we need to fill ) and soon. We've been promised signings for weeks and have known who we would need since the end of last season. Leo's departure was no surprise either and provisions should have been made. If COG can step up to the plate and replace him, then I'd say it was a fantastic bit of business. Only time will tell. But, like a lot of other season ticket holders I have spoken to, I am getting a little frustrated by the club apparently dragging their heels on recruitment, while all around us clubs ( with the exception of maybe Reading and Blackpool ) are strengthening. Our squad is significantly weaker than at the start of last season. TB said that we had targets and that a number of players could be brought in "tomorrow". So who/where are they?[/p][/quote]That's what I call a great post thank you very much I agree with everything you wrote. We need at least a gk lb and a st so please tb can you start spending Liambhataylor19
  • Score: 4

1:30pm Thu 24 Jul 14

tug509 says...

Plutomania wrote:
Joel'sGrandad wrote:
Also let's not be too critical of last night's performance.
I expect it was too hot but more importantly if two players get cut eyebrows it's best not to get any worse injuries. The important games start 9/8. UTA
Oh! Dear Oh! Dear,too hot and cut eyebrows.From what I saw the opposition came out playing with BALLS, not just the football.Is this how we are going to let teams treat us this seaon.Come on Brighton shape up PLEASE.
In case you hadn`t realised it was supposed to be a friendly ,not a free for all with us down to 9 on the pitch while 2 of our lads have treatment . The creepies have always thought they have something to prove ,I remember a televised game years ago ,when they were still in the conference ,all game long all they sang was we are the Brighton haters ,where the heck does that come from ?.
[quote][p][bold]Plutomania[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Joel'sGrandad[/bold] wrote: Also let's not be too critical of last night's performance. I expect it was too hot but more importantly if two players get cut eyebrows it's best not to get any worse injuries. The important games start 9/8. UTA[/p][/quote]Oh! Dear Oh! Dear,too hot and cut eyebrows.From what I saw the opposition came out playing with BALLS, not just the football.Is this how we are going to let teams treat us this seaon.Come on Brighton shape up PLEASE.[/p][/quote]In case you hadn`t realised it was supposed to be a friendly ,not a free for all with us down to 9 on the pitch while 2 of our lads have treatment . The creepies have always thought they have something to prove ,I remember a televised game years ago ,when they were still in the conference ,all game long all they sang was we are the Brighton haters ,where the heck does that come from ?. tug509
  • Score: 4

1:42pm Thu 24 Jul 14

stonegold says...

Surely people should know by now that if they're looking for quality reporting they won't get it from the Argus - strictly journalism by numbers.

You might just get some snippets of information from amongst the hackneyed language and flood of clichés but that's about it - new signings always "put pen to paper"; the next game always "comes too soon" for a player recovering from injury; a match against a team in geographical proximity is always against "local rivals" (since when did Crawley fall into that category!); the transfer window always "slams shut"; etc etc
Surely people should know by now that if they're looking for quality reporting they won't get it from the Argus - strictly journalism by numbers. You might just get some snippets of information from amongst the hackneyed language and flood of clichés but that's about it - new signings always "put pen to paper"; the next game always "comes too soon" for a player recovering from injury; a match against a team in geographical proximity is always against "local rivals" (since when did Crawley fall into that category!); the transfer window always "slams shut"; etc etc stonegold
  • Score: 6

1:46pm Thu 24 Jul 14

AlanDuffy says...

Since last January we have sold or released Bridcutt, Barnes, el-Abd, Orlandi, Ward, Upson, Kuszczak, Andrews, Ulloa, Lopez and a number of fringe and development players to be replaced by Stephens, Toko, Hughes and O'Grady ( all now injured !). Apologies if I've missed any, but you get my point. No wonder there are murmurings of discontent, worryingly from the manager too, it seems.
Since last January we have sold or released Bridcutt, Barnes, el-Abd, Orlandi, Ward, Upson, Kuszczak, Andrews, Ulloa, Lopez and a number of fringe and development players to be replaced by Stephens, Toko, Hughes and O'Grady ( all now injured !). Apologies if I've missed any, but you get my point. No wonder there are murmurings of discontent, worryingly from the manager too, it seems. AlanDuffy
  • Score: 22

2:08pm Thu 24 Jul 14

AburridoEnTrabajo says...

heathgate wrote:
To the posters above, if you dont like the Argus, go read something else.

To the 'Talking Point' - We will mess Ulloa, awesome player at this level, but we cannot continue to move forward if we dont speculate in the trf market, playing it safe is going to result in us becoming a yo yo club. FFP is restricting us, but it applies to many other clubs too, all of who are managing to recruit seemingly at will. Big question is "what is stopping high profile players coming to brighton?"
If you want to have a talking point you need to pose a question, and let people debate it. There was no question posed by the article, no topic of discussion. What you think to be the talking point bears no relation to what has been written in the article. At a stretch I'd suggest that the talking point is more along the lines of "how good was Ulloa for Brighton?" or "is he worth 8 million?". The article doesn't ask for people's opinions on how Ulloa should be replaced, etc - it doesn't ask for people's opinions on anything. Read the article and you will only see the author expressing his opinion, and criticising other opinions he has read somewhere, rather trying to stimulate a debate.
[quote][p][bold]heathgate[/bold] wrote: To the posters above, if you dont like the Argus, go read something else. To the 'Talking Point' - We will mess Ulloa, awesome player at this level, but we cannot continue to move forward if we dont speculate in the trf market, playing it safe is going to result in us becoming a yo yo club. FFP is restricting us, but it applies to many other clubs too, all of who are managing to recruit seemingly at will. Big question is "what is stopping high profile players coming to brighton?"[/p][/quote]If you want to have a talking point you need to pose a question, and let people debate it. There was no question posed by the article, no topic of discussion. What you think to be the talking point bears no relation to what has been written in the article. At a stretch I'd suggest that the talking point is more along the lines of "how good was Ulloa for Brighton?" or "is he worth 8 million?". The article doesn't ask for people's opinions on how Ulloa should be replaced, etc - it doesn't ask for people's opinions on anything. Read the article and you will only see the author expressing his opinion, and criticising other opinions he has read somewhere, rather trying to stimulate a debate. AburridoEnTrabajo
  • Score: 3

2:08pm Thu 24 Jul 14

VegasSeagull says...

The way this article is written it seems that Naylor is having a pop, venting his feelings toward some that indulge in participating in the use of social media. I have always thought that journos were supposed to be independent, report the news and not make it.
Did you wake up with your angry head on today Mr. Naylor, do you feel the need to lash out, and any target will do.
The way this article is written it seems that Naylor is having a pop, venting his feelings toward some that indulge in participating in the use of social media. I have always thought that journos were supposed to be independent, report the news and not make it. Did you wake up with your angry head on today Mr. Naylor, do you feel the need to lash out, and any target will do. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 5

2:23pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Cockwomble says...

Quiterie wrote:
BobGear wrote:
What is the point of this article?
Who are you arguing with?
I kind of agree. I've seen very little criticism of Ulloa on social media (if any!) It feels like Naylor is simply manufacturing this criticism to justify his article to fill column inches.
to be fair to naylor there were loads on nsc and twitter with people saying theyre glad ulloas gone as he was sh!te in the first place.to be fair they were shouted down by the majority.loud minority cockwombles mostly
[quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BobGear[/bold] wrote: What is the point of this article? Who are you arguing with?[/p][/quote]I kind of agree. I've seen very little criticism of Ulloa on social media (if any!) It feels like Naylor is simply manufacturing this criticism to justify his article to fill column inches.[/p][/quote]to be fair to naylor there were loads on nsc and twitter with people saying theyre glad ulloas gone as he was sh!te in the first place.to be fair they were shouted down by the majority.loud minority cockwombles mostly Cockwomble
  • Score: 2

2:34pm Thu 24 Jul 14

brightonup says...

Willie, Willie Irvine wrote:
don't wanna do it like that wrote:
BobGear wrote:
What is the point of this article?
Who are you arguing with?
Think they want arguments amongst the posters.
Oh no they don't....
Oh yes they do!
[quote][p][bold]Willie, Willie Irvine[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]don't wanna do it like that[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BobGear[/bold] wrote: What is the point of this article? Who are you arguing with?[/p][/quote]Think they want arguments amongst the posters.[/p][/quote]Oh no they don't....[/p][/quote]Oh yes they do! brightonup
  • Score: 3

2:34pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Cockwomble says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
The way this article is written it seems that Naylor is having a pop, venting his feelings toward some that indulge in participating in the use of social media. I have always thought that journos were supposed to be independent, report the news and not make it.
Did you wake up with your angry head on today Mr. Naylor, do you feel the need to lash out, and any target will do.
its just an opinion piece.i quite like journos having a go especially one who isnt a dyed in the wool seagull.but them im a cockwomble
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: The way this article is written it seems that Naylor is having a pop, venting his feelings toward some that indulge in participating in the use of social media. I have always thought that journos were supposed to be independent, report the news and not make it. Did you wake up with your angry head on today Mr. Naylor, do you feel the need to lash out, and any target will do.[/p][/quote]its just an opinion piece.i quite like journos having a go especially one who isnt a dyed in the wool seagull.but them im a cockwomble Cockwomble
  • Score: 2

2:35pm Thu 24 Jul 14

heathgate says...

AburridoEnTrabajo wrote:
heathgate wrote: To the posters above, if you dont like the Argus, go read something else. To the 'Talking Point' - We will mess Ulloa, awesome player at this level, but we cannot continue to move forward if we dont speculate in the trf market, playing it safe is going to result in us becoming a yo yo club. FFP is restricting us, but it applies to many other clubs too, all of who are managing to recruit seemingly at will. Big question is "what is stopping high profile players coming to brighton?"
If you want to have a talking point you need to pose a question, and let people debate it. There was no question posed by the article, no topic of discussion. What you think to be the talking point bears no relation to what has been written in the article. At a stretch I'd suggest that the talking point is more along the lines of "how good was Ulloa for Brighton?" or "is he worth 8 million?". The article doesn't ask for people's opinions on how Ulloa should be replaced, etc - it doesn't ask for people's opinions on anything. Read the article and you will only see the author expressing his opinion, and criticising other opinions he has read somewhere, rather trying to stimulate a debate.
There were 4 questions in the article,..........
[quote][p][bold]AburridoEnTrabajo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]heathgate[/bold] wrote: To the posters above, if you dont like the Argus, go read something else. To the 'Talking Point' - We will mess Ulloa, awesome player at this level, but we cannot continue to move forward if we dont speculate in the trf market, playing it safe is going to result in us becoming a yo yo club. FFP is restricting us, but it applies to many other clubs too, all of who are managing to recruit seemingly at will. Big question is "what is stopping high profile players coming to brighton?"[/p][/quote]If you want to have a talking point you need to pose a question, and let people debate it. There was no question posed by the article, no topic of discussion. What you think to be the talking point bears no relation to what has been written in the article. At a stretch I'd suggest that the talking point is more along the lines of "how good was Ulloa for Brighton?" or "is he worth 8 million?". The article doesn't ask for people's opinions on how Ulloa should be replaced, etc - it doesn't ask for people's opinions on anything. Read the article and you will only see the author expressing his opinion, and criticising other opinions he has read somewhere, rather trying to stimulate a debate.[/p][/quote]There were 4 questions in the article,.......... heathgate
  • Score: 2

2:46pm Thu 24 Jul 14

rolivan says...

How about showing us some of these negative quotes that have appeared on Social Media Andy Naylor.
How about showing us some of these negative quotes that have appeared on Social Media Andy Naylor. rolivan
  • Score: -3

2:49pm Thu 24 Jul 14

rolivan says...

BobGear wrote:
don't wanna do it like that wrote:
BobGear wrote:
What is the point of this article?
Who are you arguing with?
Think they want arguments amongst the posters.
I've got a 13 negative for asking those questions!?
Are The Argus staff just trying to get page views up?
It would seem that way . They need to be able to tell prospective Advertisers how many hits they are getting on the website.
[quote][p][bold]BobGear[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]don't wanna do it like that[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]BobGear[/bold] wrote: What is the point of this article? Who are you arguing with?[/p][/quote]Think they want arguments amongst the posters.[/p][/quote]I've got a 13 negative for asking those questions!? Are The Argus staff just trying to get page views up?[/p][/quote]It would seem that way . They need to be able to tell prospective Advertisers how many hits they are getting on the website. rolivan
  • Score: 0

3:00pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Towner83 says...

The headline should have been " We still have no news of potential signings " desperate piece of journalism IMHO
The headline should have been " We still have no news of potential signings " desperate piece of journalism IMHO Towner83
  • Score: 2

3:20pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Plutomania says...

AlanDuffy wrote:
Since last January we have sold or released Bridcutt, Barnes, el-Abd, Orlandi, Ward, Upson, Kuszczak, Andrews, Ulloa, Lopez and a number of fringe and development players to be replaced by Stephens, Toko, Hughes and O'Grady ( all now injured !). Apologies if I've missed any, but you get my point. No wonder there are murmurings of discontent, worryingly from the manager too, it seems.
At this point in time,I think everyone should give you a thumbs up on your comments on our man power loses and the worry. BUT.........Burying ones head in the sand and thinking all the money men are no fit for purpose. not spending, perhaps to some extent your full comment is worrying ,perhaps though we are not flushed with money that everyone thinks we have from the sale of Bridcutt,Barnes,El-A
db,Ullo, We can always spend other peoples money.

.Perhaps money is very very tight,I am sure TB has not got a bucket load of cash to throw around,I think with money he has loaned the Albion in the past and with him being guarantor for I am sure loads more money none of us realised has been spent, perhaps he is tight for big money injection.
These so called suit men, a lot on this site seem to hate,they should realise they are not stupid,they got where they are because they know their job ,they are all business men and Albion is a business ,they know all about the in`s and out`s of money,they do not do things without consulting with accountants financiers, planners ,TB and then make decisions.As the saying goes ,We Cut The Cloth According To It`s Width. We will buy when the price is right and we have the cash to substain the investment.
[quote][p][bold]AlanDuffy[/bold] wrote: Since last January we have sold or released Bridcutt, Barnes, el-Abd, Orlandi, Ward, Upson, Kuszczak, Andrews, Ulloa, Lopez and a number of fringe and development players to be replaced by Stephens, Toko, Hughes and O'Grady ( all now injured !). Apologies if I've missed any, but you get my point. No wonder there are murmurings of discontent, worryingly from the manager too, it seems.[/p][/quote]At this point in time,I think everyone should give you a thumbs up on your comments on our man power loses and the worry. BUT.........Burying ones head in the sand and thinking all the money men are no fit for purpose. not spending, perhaps to some extent your full comment is worrying ,perhaps though we are not flushed with money that everyone thinks we have from the sale of Bridcutt,Barnes,El-A db,Ullo, We can always spend other peoples money. .Perhaps money is very very tight,I am sure TB has not got a bucket load of cash to throw around,I think with money he has loaned the Albion in the past and with him being guarantor for I am sure loads more money none of us realised has been spent, perhaps he is tight for big money injection. These so called suit men, a lot on this site seem to hate,they should realise they are not stupid,they got where they are because they know their job ,they are all business men and Albion is a business ,they know all about the in`s and out`s of money,they do not do things without consulting with accountants financiers, planners ,TB and then make decisions.As the saying goes ,We Cut The Cloth According To It`s Width. We will buy when the price is right and we have the cash to substain the investment. Plutomania
  • Score: 0

3:27pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Mark Dixon says...

What was the point of this article, all it is doing is asking for more negative comments.

Leo has gone and all the best to him, what we should be hearing from TB is how much of this £8m is going to be invested in players. My guess not more than £3m.
What was the point of this article, all it is doing is asking for more negative comments. Leo has gone and all the best to him, what we should be hearing from TB is how much of this £8m is going to be invested in players. My guess not more than £3m. Mark Dixon
  • Score: 2

3:39pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

Mark Dixon wrote:
What was the point of this article, all it is doing is asking for more negative comments.

Leo has gone and all the best to him, what we should be hearing from TB is how much of this £8m is going to be invested in players. My guess not more than £3m.
I would think the amount of money invested in the team will depend largely on which players are suitable, available and willing.
[quote][p][bold]Mark Dixon[/bold] wrote: What was the point of this article, all it is doing is asking for more negative comments. Leo has gone and all the best to him, what we should be hearing from TB is how much of this £8m is going to be invested in players. My guess not more than £3m.[/p][/quote]I would think the amount of money invested in the team will depend largely on which players are suitable, available and willing. Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 0

3:44pm Thu 24 Jul 14

ringtone says...

gordongull wrote:
There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo.
This article helps to redress the balance.
From a previous thread.

Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted

Go on, name them
[quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo. This article helps to redress the balance.[/p][/quote]From a previous thread. Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted Go on, name them ringtone
  • Score: -3

3:49pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Mark Dixon says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
Mark Dixon wrote:
What was the point of this article, all it is doing is asking for more negative comments.

Leo has gone and all the best to him, what we should be hearing from TB is how much of this £8m is going to be invested in players. My guess not more than £3m.
I would think the amount of money invested in the team will depend largely on which players are suitable, available and willing.
Agree, might answer why we don't seem to be signing many
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mark Dixon[/bold] wrote: What was the point of this article, all it is doing is asking for more negative comments. Leo has gone and all the best to him, what we should be hearing from TB is how much of this £8m is going to be invested in players. My guess not more than £3m.[/p][/quote]I would think the amount of money invested in the team will depend largely on which players are suitable, available and willing.[/p][/quote]Agree, might answer why we don't seem to be signing many Mark Dixon
  • Score: 0

3:54pm Thu 24 Jul 14

ringtone says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
Mark Dixon wrote:
What was the point of this article, all it is doing is asking for more negative comments.

Leo has gone and all the best to him, what we should be hearing from TB is how much of this £8m is going to be invested in players. My guess not more than £3m.
I would think the amount of money invested in the team will depend largely on which players are suitable, available and willing.
Absolute garbage.

Ex-pat speaks directly from Barber's rear end.
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mark Dixon[/bold] wrote: What was the point of this article, all it is doing is asking for more negative comments. Leo has gone and all the best to him, what we should be hearing from TB is how much of this £8m is going to be invested in players. My guess not more than £3m.[/p][/quote]I would think the amount of money invested in the team will depend largely on which players are suitable, available and willing.[/p][/quote]Absolute garbage. Ex-pat speaks directly from Barber's rear end. ringtone
  • Score: 0

4:09pm Thu 24 Jul 14

B rian Tawses left foot says...

gordongull says...


heathgate wrote:
To the posters above, if you dont like the Argus, go read something else.

To the 'Talking Point' - We will mess Ulloa, awesome player at this level, but we cannot continue to move forward if we dont speculate in the trf market, playing it safe is going to result in us becoming a yo yo club. FFP is restricting us, but it applies to many other clubs too, all of who are managing to recruit seemingly at will. Big question is "what is stopping high profile players coming to brighton?"
A yo yo club?
You think we are going to be relegated?

It's a real possibility unless some quality players are signed - pronto.
gordongull says... heathgate wrote: To the posters above, if you dont like the Argus, go read something else. To the 'Talking Point' - We will mess Ulloa, awesome player at this level, but we cannot continue to move forward if we dont speculate in the trf market, playing it safe is going to result in us becoming a yo yo club. FFP is restricting us, but it applies to many other clubs too, all of who are managing to recruit seemingly at will. Big question is "what is stopping high profile players coming to brighton?" A yo yo club? You think we are going to be relegated? It's a real possibility unless some quality players are signed - pronto. B rian Tawses left foot
  • Score: -1

4:10pm Thu 24 Jul 14

AlanDuffy says...

Plutomania wrote:
AlanDuffy wrote:
Since last January we have sold or released Bridcutt, Barnes, el-Abd, Orlandi, Ward, Upson, Kuszczak, Andrews, Ulloa, Lopez and a number of fringe and development players to be replaced by Stephens, Toko, Hughes and O'Grady ( all now injured !). Apologies if I've missed any, but you get my point. No wonder there are murmurings of discontent, worryingly from the manager too, it seems.
At this point in time,I think everyone should give you a thumbs up on your comments on our man power loses and the worry. BUT.........Burying ones head in the sand and thinking all the money men are no fit for purpose. not spending, perhaps to some extent your full comment is worrying ,perhaps though we are not flushed with money that everyone thinks we have from the sale of Bridcutt,Barnes,El-A

db,Ullo, We can always spend other peoples money.

.Perhaps money is very very tight,I am sure TB has not got a bucket load of cash to throw around,I think with money he has loaned the Albion in the past and with him being guarantor for I am sure loads more money none of us realised has been spent, perhaps he is tight for big money injection.
These so called suit men, a lot on this site seem to hate,they should realise they are not stupid,they got where they are because they know their job ,they are all business men and Albion is a business ,they know all about the in`s and out`s of money,they do not do things without consulting with accountants financiers, planners ,TB and then make decisions.As the saying goes ,We Cut The Cloth According To It`s Width. We will buy when the price is right and we have the cash to substain the investment.
My point was that, in my view, we are currently about 6-7 players short of a squad capable of challenging for the play-offs, which is our stated aim again for this season. We have had a greater injection of funds from transfers than this club has ever experienced, yet we are well short of where we need to be with only days to go before the new season starts. I'm not suggesting we should spend fortunes, merely that we have known for some time that we would need to replace outgoing players, we have been told repeatedly that we have "targets" but so far, there has been little in the way of incoming players. Maybe this is because we've let scouting staff go, without replacing them. Any players brought in now will need time to settle with new colleagues, manager, system etc. I'm a supporter and season ticket holder and want the best for the club, which includes having a sound financial model. But we also need a squad that can challenge.
[quote][p][bold]Plutomania[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AlanDuffy[/bold] wrote: Since last January we have sold or released Bridcutt, Barnes, el-Abd, Orlandi, Ward, Upson, Kuszczak, Andrews, Ulloa, Lopez and a number of fringe and development players to be replaced by Stephens, Toko, Hughes and O'Grady ( all now injured !). Apologies if I've missed any, but you get my point. No wonder there are murmurings of discontent, worryingly from the manager too, it seems.[/p][/quote]At this point in time,I think everyone should give you a thumbs up on your comments on our man power loses and the worry. BUT.........Burying ones head in the sand and thinking all the money men are no fit for purpose. not spending, perhaps to some extent your full comment is worrying ,perhaps though we are not flushed with money that everyone thinks we have from the sale of Bridcutt,Barnes,El-A db,Ullo, We can always spend other peoples money. .Perhaps money is very very tight,I am sure TB has not got a bucket load of cash to throw around,I think with money he has loaned the Albion in the past and with him being guarantor for I am sure loads more money none of us realised has been spent, perhaps he is tight for big money injection. These so called suit men, a lot on this site seem to hate,they should realise they are not stupid,they got where they are because they know their job ,they are all business men and Albion is a business ,they know all about the in`s and out`s of money,they do not do things without consulting with accountants financiers, planners ,TB and then make decisions.As the saying goes ,We Cut The Cloth According To It`s Width. We will buy when the price is right and we have the cash to substain the investment.[/p][/quote]My point was that, in my view, we are currently about 6-7 players short of a squad capable of challenging for the play-offs, which is our stated aim again for this season. We have had a greater injection of funds from transfers than this club has ever experienced, yet we are well short of where we need to be with only days to go before the new season starts. I'm not suggesting we should spend fortunes, merely that we have known for some time that we would need to replace outgoing players, we have been told repeatedly that we have "targets" but so far, there has been little in the way of incoming players. Maybe this is because we've let scouting staff go, without replacing them. Any players brought in now will need time to settle with new colleagues, manager, system etc. I'm a supporter and season ticket holder and want the best for the club, which includes having a sound financial model. But we also need a squad that can challenge. AlanDuffy
  • Score: 9

4:13pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

ringtone wrote:
Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
Mark Dixon wrote:
What was the point of this article, all it is doing is asking for more negative comments.

Leo has gone and all the best to him, what we should be hearing from TB is how much of this £8m is going to be invested in players. My guess not more than £3m.
I would think the amount of money invested in the team will depend largely on which players are suitable, available and willing.
Absolute garbage.

Ex-pat speaks directly from Barber's rear end.
Disagreement from Ringpiece is nothing more or less than validation for ones point of view. Cheers Ringy.
[quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Mark Dixon[/bold] wrote: What was the point of this article, all it is doing is asking for more negative comments. Leo has gone and all the best to him, what we should be hearing from TB is how much of this £8m is going to be invested in players. My guess not more than £3m.[/p][/quote]I would think the amount of money invested in the team will depend largely on which players are suitable, available and willing.[/p][/quote]Absolute garbage. Ex-pat speaks directly from Barber's rear end.[/p][/quote]Disagreement from Ringpiece is nothing more or less than validation for ones point of view. Cheers Ringy. Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 0

4:27pm Thu 24 Jul 14

tug509 says...

As far as money for players is concerned ,we were told we would have a competitive budget ,we were also told we did not need to sell Leo ,so I`m guessing a budget of at least £3m plus £8m for leo plus Leo`s wages ,I`m guessing £750,000 pa plus what we didn`t use from last year £2.5m ,that makes £14.25m ,even allowing for flippin FFP ,surely we have at least £8m for signings ,after all if we didn`t need to sell ,the money is surely surplus ?.
Don't forget we are (if true) approximately 3,000 STs down on last season ,that's again approximately £1.5m ,if we were to spend some of this money on new signings we might get that £1.5m back plus all the additional money those 3,000 would spend on merchandise ,food and drink etc .
I might be a million miles away from the actual figures ,but I`m not a money man ,but if messrs Barber and Burke cant see that a lack of investment in players ,will ultimately hurt "The bottom line" then neither are they .
It may be that we have a stampede of players come through the door in the next week or so ,I hope that`s the case ,but at the moment we look like one of those cold war Russian supermarkets ,massive ,but nothing on the shelves . UTA
As far as money for players is concerned ,we were told we would have a competitive budget ,we were also told we did not need to sell Leo ,so I`m guessing a budget of at least £3m plus £8m for leo plus Leo`s wages ,I`m guessing £750,000 pa plus what we didn`t use from last year £2.5m ,that makes £14.25m ,even allowing for flippin FFP ,surely we have at least £8m for signings ,after all if we didn`t need to sell ,the money is surely surplus ?. Don't forget we are (if true) approximately 3,000 STs down on last season ,that's again approximately £1.5m ,if we were to spend some of this money on new signings we might get that £1.5m back plus all the additional money those 3,000 would spend on merchandise ,food and drink etc . I might be a million miles away from the actual figures ,but I`m not a money man ,but if messrs Barber and Burke cant see that a lack of investment in players ,will ultimately hurt "The bottom line" then neither are they . It may be that we have a stampede of players come through the door in the next week or so ,I hope that`s the case ,but at the moment we look like one of those cold war Russian supermarkets ,massive ,but nothing on the shelves . UTA tug509
  • Score: 4

4:38pm Thu 24 Jul 14

WisdomSpeaks says...

Watched the game last night. Interesting that there was no sign of the 'Doc'! It was always the new Physio (exGloucester RFC Physio) who came on despite all the injuries we had when it always used to be the German Dr.

Could he have left now? Anyone else see him last night? Argus will no doubt have news.
Watched the game last night. Interesting that there was no sign of the 'Doc'! It was always the new Physio (exGloucester RFC Physio) who came on despite all the injuries we had when it always used to be the German Dr. Could he have left now? Anyone else see him last night? Argus will no doubt have news. WisdomSpeaks
  • Score: 3

5:05pm Thu 24 Jul 14

gordongull says...

ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo.
This article helps to redress the balance.
From a previous thread.

Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted

Go on, name them
Do you think they would have gone back up without the £48m?
[quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo. This article helps to redress the balance.[/p][/quote]From a previous thread. Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted Go on, name them[/p][/quote]Do you think they would have gone back up without the £48m? gordongull
  • Score: 2

5:15pm Thu 24 Jul 14

mikeygit says...

Well nearly another end to the day and no word of any signings that were supposed to be imminent. I thought the word imminent meant today/tomorrow not weeks!!
Well nearly another end to the day and no word of any signings that were supposed to be imminent. I thought the word imminent meant today/tomorrow not weeks!! mikeygit
  • Score: 2

5:21pm Thu 24 Jul 14

VegasSeagull says...

tug509 wrote:
As far as money for players is concerned ,we were told we would have a competitive budget ,we were also told we did not need to sell Leo ,so I`m guessing a budget of at least £3m plus £8m for leo plus Leo`s wages ,I`m guessing £750,000 pa plus what we didn`t use from last year £2.5m ,that makes £14.25m ,even allowing for flippin FFP ,surely we have at least £8m for signings ,after all if we didn`t need to sell ,the money is surely surplus ?.
Don't forget we are (if true) approximately 3,000 STs down on last season ,that's again approximately £1.5m ,if we were to spend some of this money on new signings we might get that £1.5m back plus all the additional money those 3,000 would spend on merchandise ,food and drink etc .
I might be a million miles away from the actual figures ,but I`m not a money man ,but if messrs Barber and Burke cant see that a lack of investment in players ,will ultimately hurt "The bottom line" then neither are they .
It may be that we have a stampede of players come through the door in the next week or so ,I hope that`s the case ,but at the moment we look like one of those cold war Russian supermarkets ,massive ,but nothing on the shelves . UTA
Hi Tug.
What we don't know know is, 'why,' we appear to be finding it hard to attract and then sign new players. Your figures are probably low so can we point to not having the money for new players, nope.
Is it a case of, yes we have some money but the targets, and the clubs we are approaching, are simply asking for stupid money compared to what value we are placing on the target, could be.
Could our location on the south coast have some influence on whether players want to join us, perhaps they don't want to uproot their famillies, possible in some cases.
A left back, goal keeper and at least one more striker, would appear to be our most urgent needs, and if we fill those spots the players coming in are likely to get good playing time, could it be that others that we want are fearful of not being first choice players, maybe.

Tug I doubt anyone contributing to the debate, you and I included, have the sightest idea why players are not arriving. Of course it could be that we are simply not offering enough to get them, but surely Bloom would know that. How many times do you need to get knocked back before you see the problem and then reconsider your planning and thinking.

We have a reported bid in of 1M for a keeper, his club have said they would consider offers if they came in, surely that is a deal we can complete, but as yet we haven't, I have no idea as to why. We pretty much know why Ward isn't in the bag, if we want him that badly, then again this is a deal that should be able to be sorted out.

Are clubs and players alike upping their demands, they all know we have money to spend, is Bloom refusing to be mugged?
[quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: As far as money for players is concerned ,we were told we would have a competitive budget ,we were also told we did not need to sell Leo ,so I`m guessing a budget of at least £3m plus £8m for leo plus Leo`s wages ,I`m guessing £750,000 pa plus what we didn`t use from last year £2.5m ,that makes £14.25m ,even allowing for flippin FFP ,surely we have at least £8m for signings ,after all if we didn`t need to sell ,the money is surely surplus ?. Don't forget we are (if true) approximately 3,000 STs down on last season ,that's again approximately £1.5m ,if we were to spend some of this money on new signings we might get that £1.5m back plus all the additional money those 3,000 would spend on merchandise ,food and drink etc . I might be a million miles away from the actual figures ,but I`m not a money man ,but if messrs Barber and Burke cant see that a lack of investment in players ,will ultimately hurt "The bottom line" then neither are they . It may be that we have a stampede of players come through the door in the next week or so ,I hope that`s the case ,but at the moment we look like one of those cold war Russian supermarkets ,massive ,but nothing on the shelves . UTA[/p][/quote]Hi Tug. What we don't know know is, 'why,' we appear to be finding it hard to attract and then sign new players. Your figures are probably low so can we point to not having the money for new players, nope. Is it a case of, yes we have some money but the targets, and the clubs we are approaching, are simply asking for stupid money compared to what value we are placing on the target, could be. Could our location on the south coast have some influence on whether players want to join us, perhaps they don't want to uproot their famillies, possible in some cases. A left back, goal keeper and at least one more striker, would appear to be our most urgent needs, and if we fill those spots the players coming in are likely to get good playing time, could it be that others that we want are fearful of not being first choice players, maybe. Tug I doubt anyone contributing to the debate, you and I included, have the sightest idea why players are not arriving. Of course it could be that we are simply not offering enough to get them, but surely Bloom would know that. How many times do you need to get knocked back before you see the problem and then reconsider your planning and thinking. We have a reported bid in of 1M for a keeper, his club have said they would consider offers if they came in, surely that is a deal we can complete, but as yet we haven't, I have no idea as to why. We pretty much know why Ward isn't in the bag, if we want him that badly, then again this is a deal that should be able to be sorted out. Are clubs and players alike upping their demands, they all know we have money to spend, is Bloom refusing to be mugged? VegasSeagull
  • Score: 0

5:26pm Thu 24 Jul 14

sussexram40 says...

THE RAM SAYS>>>
I heard there's a bloke who plays for the Dog and Duck 3rd eleven who's a bit disillusioned with his pub side and might consider a move to the Seagulls. Could be our best option.
Can't ever remember such a terrible, off-season. It really says something when even a new manager is expressing frustration and worry before a balls been kicked!!
No wonder Malky McKay and the other big names didn't want the Albion job!
The sooner the money making, tax exile businessman Bloom completes his money making project and sells the club for a big personal profit the better! But he will wait till 2015 for another year of economic recovery to maximise his profits!
THE RAM SAYS>>> I heard there's a bloke who plays for the Dog and Duck 3rd eleven who's a bit disillusioned with his pub side and might consider a move to the Seagulls. Could be our best option. Can't ever remember such a terrible, off-season. It really says something when even a new manager is expressing frustration and worry before a balls been kicked!! No wonder Malky McKay and the other big names didn't want the Albion job! The sooner the money making, tax exile businessman Bloom completes his money making project and sells the club for a big personal profit the better! But he will wait till 2015 for another year of economic recovery to maximise his profits! sussexram40
  • Score: -8

5:39pm Thu 24 Jul 14

WisdomSpeaks says...

tug509 wrote:
As far as money for players is concerned ,we were told we would have a competitive budget ,we were also told we did not need to sell Leo ,so I`m guessing a budget of at least £3m plus £8m for leo plus Leo`s wages ,I`m guessing £750,000 pa plus what we didn`t use from last year £2.5m ,that makes £14.25m ,even allowing for flippin FFP ,surely we have at least £8m for signings ,after all if we didn`t need to sell ,the money is surely surplus ?.
Don't forget we are (if true) approximately 3,000 STs down on last season ,that's again approximately £1.5m ,if we were to spend some of this money on new signings we might get that £1.5m back plus all the additional money those 3,000 would spend on merchandise ,food and drink etc .
I might be a million miles away from the actual figures ,but I`m not a money man ,but if messrs Barber and Burke cant see that a lack of investment in players ,will ultimately hurt "The bottom line" then neither are they .
It may be that we have a stampede of players come through the door in the next week or so ,I hope that`s the case ,but at the moment we look like one of those cold war Russian supermarkets ,massive ,but nothing on the shelves . UTA
Well said. It really isn't rocket science is it tug509?

If Tony owns a casino and business isn't great - does he go and sell his most popular roulette machine which is bringing in most of his income. I don't think so. For some reason, business people seem to ignore this principle when it comes to players!

Reading the Peterborough website - they've taken on a 19 year old 'starlet' from Spurs on a season long loan. We don't even seem able or willing to do that. Interestingly Darren Ferguson was complimenting Spurs on how easy it was to deal with them.

Surely we must be able to match these kind of guys. Something just doesn't 'add up' at our place these days. Have we got a bad name in the game for some reason?
[quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: As far as money for players is concerned ,we were told we would have a competitive budget ,we were also told we did not need to sell Leo ,so I`m guessing a budget of at least £3m plus £8m for leo plus Leo`s wages ,I`m guessing £750,000 pa plus what we didn`t use from last year £2.5m ,that makes £14.25m ,even allowing for flippin FFP ,surely we have at least £8m for signings ,after all if we didn`t need to sell ,the money is surely surplus ?. Don't forget we are (if true) approximately 3,000 STs down on last season ,that's again approximately £1.5m ,if we were to spend some of this money on new signings we might get that £1.5m back plus all the additional money those 3,000 would spend on merchandise ,food and drink etc . I might be a million miles away from the actual figures ,but I`m not a money man ,but if messrs Barber and Burke cant see that a lack of investment in players ,will ultimately hurt "The bottom line" then neither are they . It may be that we have a stampede of players come through the door in the next week or so ,I hope that`s the case ,but at the moment we look like one of those cold war Russian supermarkets ,massive ,but nothing on the shelves . UTA[/p][/quote]Well said. It really isn't rocket science is it tug509? If Tony owns a casino and business isn't great - does he go and sell his most popular roulette machine which is bringing in most of his income. I don't think so. For some reason, business people seem to ignore this principle when it comes to players! Reading the Peterborough website - they've taken on a 19 year old 'starlet' from Spurs on a season long loan. We don't even seem able or willing to do that. Interestingly Darren Ferguson was complimenting Spurs on how easy it was to deal with them. Surely we must be able to match these kind of guys. Something just doesn't 'add up' at our place these days. Have we got a bad name in the game for some reason? WisdomSpeaks
  • Score: 3

5:59pm Thu 24 Jul 14

gordongull says...

Nobody has to do business with Barber and Burke, and it would appear that they are all exercising that option.
Nobody has to do business with Barber and Burke, and it would appear that they are all exercising that option. gordongull
  • Score: 1

6:04pm Thu 24 Jul 14

ringtone says...

gordongull wrote:
ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo.
This article helps to redress the balance.
From a previous thread.

Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted

Go on, name them
Do you think they would have gone back up without the £48m?
You didn't answer the question.

Citing parachute payments is an excuse used by Barber and his resident mouthpiece ex-pat to dumb down expectations without affecting season ticket sales.

If parachute payments are such an advantage why did Wolves get relegated last year?
[quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo. This article helps to redress the balance.[/p][/quote]From a previous thread. Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted Go on, name them[/p][/quote]Do you think they would have gone back up without the £48m?[/p][/quote]You didn't answer the question. Citing parachute payments is an excuse used by Barber and his resident mouthpiece ex-pat to dumb down expectations without affecting season ticket sales. If parachute payments are such an advantage why did Wolves get relegated last year? ringtone
  • Score: 0

6:06pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Claude Back says...

sussexram40 wrote:
THE RAM SAYS>>>
I heard there's a bloke who plays for the Dog and Duck 3rd eleven who's a bit disillusioned with his pub side and might consider a move to the Seagulls. Could be our best option.
Can't ever remember such a terrible, off-season. It really says something when even a new manager is expressing frustration and worry before a balls been kicked!!
No wonder Malky McKay and the other big names didn't want the Albion job!
The sooner the money making, tax exile businessman Bloom completes his money making project and sells the club for a big personal profit the better! But he will wait till 2015 for another year of economic recovery to maximise his profits!
I think the worry is it's Sami's balls that have been kicked . ;-)
[quote][p][bold]sussexram40[/bold] wrote: THE RAM SAYS>>> I heard there's a bloke who plays for the Dog and Duck 3rd eleven who's a bit disillusioned with his pub side and might consider a move to the Seagulls. Could be our best option. Can't ever remember such a terrible, off-season. It really says something when even a new manager is expressing frustration and worry before a balls been kicked!! No wonder Malky McKay and the other big names didn't want the Albion job! The sooner the money making, tax exile businessman Bloom completes his money making project and sells the club for a big personal profit the better! But he will wait till 2015 for another year of economic recovery to maximise his profits![/p][/quote]I think the worry is it's Sami's balls that have been kicked . ;-) Claude Back
  • Score: 3

6:08pm Thu 24 Jul 14

mikeygit says...

Vegas--- you and I and many other Albion fans live many miles away, so I am hoping that those who are able to go to the Fans Forum will be pretty brutal with their questioning to TB and Co. and I hope good answers are given that will let us fans know what really is going on and they are not fobbed off-- and why every season we seem to be starting the playing season half **** and seem to be playing catch up all the time. Seems as if we are the poor relation when trying to get players in to the club. Are we not selling the club well enough, IS IT money or location? Maybe some of those who may be going who post on here will be able to ask some of these types of questions. WHEN is this Forum, by the way??
Vegas--- you and I and many other Albion fans live many miles away, so I am hoping that those who are able to go to the Fans Forum will be pretty brutal with their questioning to TB and Co. and I hope good answers are given that will let us fans know what really is going on and they are not fobbed off-- and why every season we seem to be starting the playing season half **** and seem to be playing catch up all the time. Seems as if we are the poor relation when trying to get players in to the club. Are we not selling the club well enough, IS IT money or location? Maybe some of those who may be going who post on here will be able to ask some of these types of questions. WHEN is this Forum, by the way?? mikeygit
  • Score: 2

6:08pm Thu 24 Jul 14

AburridoEnTrabajo says...

heathgate wrote:
AburridoEnTrabajo wrote:
heathgate wrote: To the posters above, if you dont like the Argus, go read something else. To the 'Talking Point' - We will mess Ulloa, awesome player at this level, but we cannot continue to move forward if we dont speculate in the trf market, playing it safe is going to result in us becoming a yo yo club. FFP is restricting us, but it applies to many other clubs too, all of who are managing to recruit seemingly at will. Big question is "what is stopping high profile players coming to brighton?"
If you want to have a talking point you need to pose a question, and let people debate it. There was no question posed by the article, no topic of discussion. What you think to be the talking point bears no relation to what has been written in the article. At a stretch I'd suggest that the talking point is more along the lines of "how good was Ulloa for Brighton?" or "is he worth 8 million?". The article doesn't ask for people's opinions on how Ulloa should be replaced, etc - it doesn't ask for people's opinions on anything. Read the article and you will only see the author expressing his opinion, and criticising other opinions he has read somewhere, rather trying to stimulate a debate.
There were 4 questions in the article,..........
All of them were rhetorical questions directed at critics of Ulloa. Are we really supposed to be debating these questions:

Have they forgotten the ten goals he scored in his first 20 games against the likes of Arsenal, Cardiff and Crystal Palace?

Or the 16 goals he contributed last season, when his victims included his new table-topping employers, Hull and QPR, despite missing more than two months with a fractured foot bone?

Have they forgotten how he relentlessly led the line alone through the middle, occupying two centre-halves?

And have they forgotten how often he was back inside his own box heading away a corner or free-kick?
[quote][p][bold]heathgate[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]AburridoEnTrabajo[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]heathgate[/bold] wrote: To the posters above, if you dont like the Argus, go read something else. To the 'Talking Point' - We will mess Ulloa, awesome player at this level, but we cannot continue to move forward if we dont speculate in the trf market, playing it safe is going to result in us becoming a yo yo club. FFP is restricting us, but it applies to many other clubs too, all of who are managing to recruit seemingly at will. Big question is "what is stopping high profile players coming to brighton?"[/p][/quote]If you want to have a talking point you need to pose a question, and let people debate it. There was no question posed by the article, no topic of discussion. What you think to be the talking point bears no relation to what has been written in the article. At a stretch I'd suggest that the talking point is more along the lines of "how good was Ulloa for Brighton?" or "is he worth 8 million?". The article doesn't ask for people's opinions on how Ulloa should be replaced, etc - it doesn't ask for people's opinions on anything. Read the article and you will only see the author expressing his opinion, and criticising other opinions he has read somewhere, rather trying to stimulate a debate.[/p][/quote]There were 4 questions in the article,..........[/p][/quote]All of them were rhetorical questions directed at critics of Ulloa. Are we really supposed to be debating these questions: Have they forgotten the ten goals he scored in his first 20 games against the likes of Arsenal, Cardiff and Crystal Palace? Or the 16 goals he contributed last season, when his victims included his new table-topping employers, Hull and QPR, despite missing more than two months with a fractured foot bone? Have they forgotten how he relentlessly led the line alone through the middle, occupying two centre-halves? And have they forgotten how often he was back inside his own box heading away a corner or free-kick? AburridoEnTrabajo
  • Score: 0

6:23pm Thu 24 Jul 14

namgo49 says...

Some good news at last, Keith Andrews has gone to Watford.

We may be trying to sign some more players but we clearly need to try harder. Why the heck has Ward not be tied up with a deal yet??
Some good news at last, Keith Andrews has gone to Watford. We may be trying to sign some more players but we clearly need to try harder. Why the heck has Ward not be tied up with a deal yet?? namgo49
  • Score: 3

6:25pm Thu 24 Jul 14

tug509 says...

Hey Vegas ,
I am the first to admit that I don't have a clue as to our possible total available budget ,but I didn`t include the sales of 4 players ,LB,AB,GB,AEA ,so as you say my figures are probably on the low side .
As you say teams are probably asking too much for their players ,only have to look at McCormack to see that ,but I think we are making most of our own problems ,in the past before we had a DOF ,the manager would have handled the (for instance) Ward transfer ,Sami would speak to the guy and make it clear what we could offer ,he would have charge of his budget ,and if he thought Ward was worth going the extra mile ,he would sign him . As I see it now it`s a case of Burke dealing with Wards slug ,so a man who counts every penny against a man who`s vocabulary consists of few words ,most used being MORE .
I agreed totally with you when you suggested a smaller but higher quality squad (I hope I got that right ) it makes sense to sign for instance 5 high quality players at £1m plus £12,000pw =£8m as apposed to 6 lesser players at £750,000 plus £10,000pw =£7.5m ,of course I am only using figures for effect ,I do not know ,and do not pretend to ,but purely as a point .
I think players in general ,and their families ,because of a players limited career ,must except that they have to move for their "job" ,personally it breaks my heart that I don't live in Brighton (my home) anymore ,maybe again one day . How anyone could find Brighton anything short of an improvement on the rest of England I don't know :0) .
I know we have made this bid for Stockdale ,the rumour was we had lost out ,but it`s up again that he will sign within 48 hours ,I`m sure neither of us will hold our breath till it happens ! . With flippin FFP ,most of us have to tighten our belts ,so I cant see too many clubs trying it on with us because of Leo`s fee ,they just wont get it .
I believe that the good old fashioned way of a manager ,given a budget and choosing his own players ,talking to them personally and coming to an agreement ,balancing his own figures ,what he saves on one player gives him that little extra to cover another ,so long as he stays within his budget he can sign whoever he wants ,and I don't mean 50 years ago ...just 3 !. UTA
Hey Vegas , I am the first to admit that I don't have a clue as to our possible total available budget ,but I didn`t include the sales of 4 players ,LB,AB,GB,AEA ,so as you say my figures are probably on the low side . As you say teams are probably asking too much for their players ,only have to look at McCormack to see that ,but I think we are making most of our own problems ,in the past before we had a DOF ,the manager would have handled the (for instance) Ward transfer ,Sami would speak to the guy and make it clear what we could offer ,he would have charge of his budget ,and if he thought Ward was worth going the extra mile ,he would sign him . As I see it now it`s a case of Burke dealing with Wards slug ,so a man who counts every penny against a man who`s vocabulary consists of few words ,most used being MORE . I agreed totally with you when you suggested a smaller but higher quality squad (I hope I got that right ) it makes sense to sign for instance 5 high quality players at £1m plus £12,000pw =£8m as apposed to 6 lesser players at £750,000 plus £10,000pw =£7.5m ,of course I am only using figures for effect ,I do not know ,and do not pretend to ,but purely as a point . I think players in general ,and their families ,because of a players limited career ,must except that they have to move for their "job" ,personally it breaks my heart that I don't live in Brighton (my home) anymore ,maybe again one day . How anyone could find Brighton anything short of an improvement on the rest of England I don't know :0) . I know we have made this bid for Stockdale ,the rumour was we had lost out ,but it`s up again that he will sign within 48 hours ,I`m sure neither of us will hold our breath till it happens ! . With flippin FFP ,most of us have to tighten our belts ,so I cant see too many clubs trying it on with us because of Leo`s fee ,they just wont get it . I believe that the good old fashioned way of a manager ,given a budget and choosing his own players ,talking to them personally and coming to an agreement ,balancing his own figures ,what he saves on one player gives him that little extra to cover another ,so long as he stays within his budget he can sign whoever he wants ,and I don't mean 50 years ago ...just 3 !. UTA tug509
  • Score: 2

6:26pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Sid East Brighton says...

namgo49 wrote:
Some good news at last, Keith Andrews has gone to Watford.

We may be trying to sign some more players but we clearly need to try harder. Why the heck has Ward not be tied up with a deal yet??
Agree.
[quote][p][bold]namgo49[/bold] wrote: Some good news at last, Keith Andrews has gone to Watford. We may be trying to sign some more players but we clearly need to try harder. Why the heck has Ward not be tied up with a deal yet??[/p][/quote]Agree. Sid East Brighton
  • Score: 1

6:47pm Thu 24 Jul 14

mikeygit says...

I appreciate Bloom is hell bent on keeping to the FFP rules and running the club on strict financial lines but last season I seem to recall that many were naming clubs who had fallen foul of those rules Bolton QPR I believe to name two BUT who has heard of any clubs---other than Man City--who have been fined or penalised in any way?? I along with many others were saying back then it was useless having these rules and Albion abiding by them IF the FA was going to be toothless in penalising clubs who fell foul of the rules. Like many of the laws in this country--get taken to court and the perpetrators get a gentle slap on the wrist and told to be good boys---typical of this nanny state of England!!
Am I right or am I right???
I appreciate Bloom is hell bent on keeping to the FFP rules and running the club on strict financial lines but last season I seem to recall that many were naming clubs who had fallen foul of those rules Bolton QPR I believe to name two BUT who has heard of any clubs---other than Man City--who have been fined or penalised in any way?? I along with many others were saying back then it was useless having these rules and Albion abiding by them IF the FA was going to be toothless in penalising clubs who fell foul of the rules. Like many of the laws in this country--get taken to court and the perpetrators get a gentle slap on the wrist and told to be good boys---typical of this nanny state of England!! Am I right or am I right??? mikeygit
  • Score: 3

6:51pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Jaguar_uk says...

Ulloa gave a lot more to the team than just goals, 9 times out of 10 when the ball was cleared from defence he would win the ball, control it, and lay it off. Was obvious to most tho the frustration he felt when the was never a teammate making a run and he always had to play it backwards.
With the clubs apparent lack of either ambition or ability to sign quality players i. fear this season could be a big let down
It makes sense to get the squad sorted before the first game, not when the tranfer window shuts, this also removes the " it's not his squad" excuse we had last season.
The one thing that Poyet brought to the club was the ability to persuade players to sign that Burke (apt name) and his cronies cannot.
All that said I'm keeping my fingers crossed that hypia will prove to be an inspirational manager that can mould what he's got into an effective team, after all it shouldn't be about who spends the most in order to secure promotion, just as well as long as Burke is still there!
Ulloa gave a lot more to the team than just goals, 9 times out of 10 when the ball was cleared from defence he would win the ball, control it, and lay it off. Was obvious to most tho the frustration he felt when the was never a teammate making a run and he always had to play it backwards. With the clubs apparent lack of either ambition or ability to sign quality players i. fear this season could be a big let down It makes sense to get the squad sorted before the first game, not when the tranfer window shuts, this also removes the " it's not his squad" excuse we had last season. The one thing that Poyet brought to the club was the ability to persuade players to sign that Burke (apt name) and his cronies cannot. All that said I'm keeping my fingers crossed that hypia will prove to be an inspirational manager that can mould what he's got into an effective team, after all it shouldn't be about who spends the most in order to secure promotion, just as well as long as Burke is still there! Jaguar_uk
  • Score: 0

6:52pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Albion In Staffs says...

Off topic but interesting the BBC website is reporting a BBC Sussex interview with Andrew Crofts saying how impressive SH is. "Really enjoying it, can't speak highly enough, lads loving it" etc etc. as happened with Bloom on Garcia, the Argus had no sniff. More selective positioning by the club with the local paper overlooked again?
Off topic but interesting the BBC website is reporting a BBC Sussex interview with Andrew Crofts saying how impressive SH is. "Really enjoying it, can't speak highly enough, lads loving it" etc etc. as happened with Bloom on Garcia, the Argus had no sniff. More selective positioning by the club with the local paper overlooked again? Albion In Staffs
  • Score: 1

6:54pm Thu 24 Jul 14

gordongull says...

ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo.
This article helps to redress the balance.
From a previous thread.

Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted

Go on, name them
Do you think they would have gone back up without the £48m?
You didn't answer the question.

Citing parachute payments is an excuse used by Barber and his resident mouthpiece ex-pat to dumb down expectations without affecting season ticket sales.

If parachute payments are such an advantage why did Wolves get relegated last year?
You found fault with my original comment that unlike Burnley,Tony Bloom was not given £48m to spend over the last four years. The point I was making is that regardless of Premiership quality players, which is largely a matter of opinion, Burnley had the benefit of £48m parachute money with which to facilitate their promotion.
Burnley are constantky being singled out as a shinimg example of what can be achieved on a shoestring. The money they have received from the Premier League is conveniently forgotten.
Your last sentence is basically asking if money is an advantage.
[quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo. This article helps to redress the balance.[/p][/quote]From a previous thread. Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted Go on, name them[/p][/quote]Do you think they would have gone back up without the £48m?[/p][/quote]You didn't answer the question. Citing parachute payments is an excuse used by Barber and his resident mouthpiece ex-pat to dumb down expectations without affecting season ticket sales. If parachute payments are such an advantage why did Wolves get relegated last year?[/p][/quote]You found fault with my original comment that unlike Burnley,Tony Bloom was not given £48m to spend over the last four years. The point I was making is that regardless of Premiership quality players, which is largely a matter of opinion, Burnley had the benefit of £48m parachute money with which to facilitate their promotion. Burnley are constantky being singled out as a shinimg example of what can be achieved on a shoestring. The money they have received from the Premier League is conveniently forgotten. Your last sentence is basically asking if money is an advantage. gordongull
  • Score: 3

6:56pm Thu 24 Jul 14

tug509 says...

WisdomSpeaks wrote:
tug509 wrote:
As far as money for players is concerned ,we were told we would have a competitive budget ,we were also told we did not need to sell Leo ,so I`m guessing a budget of at least £3m plus £8m for leo plus Leo`s wages ,I`m guessing £750,000 pa plus what we didn`t use from last year £2.5m ,that makes £14.25m ,even allowing for flippin FFP ,surely we have at least £8m for signings ,after all if we didn`t need to sell ,the money is surely surplus ?.
Don't forget we are (if true) approximately 3,000 STs down on last season ,that's again approximately £1.5m ,if we were to spend some of this money on new signings we might get that £1.5m back plus all the additional money those 3,000 would spend on merchandise ,food and drink etc .
I might be a million miles away from the actual figures ,but I`m not a money man ,but if messrs Barber and Burke cant see that a lack of investment in players ,will ultimately hurt "The bottom line" then neither are they .
It may be that we have a stampede of players come through the door in the next week or so ,I hope that`s the case ,but at the moment we look like one of those cold war Russian supermarkets ,massive ,but nothing on the shelves . UTA
Well said. It really isn't rocket science is it tug509?

If Tony owns a casino and business isn't great - does he go and sell his most popular roulette machine which is bringing in most of his income. I don't think so. For some reason, business people seem to ignore this principle when it comes to players!

Reading the Peterborough website - they've taken on a 19 year old 'starlet' from Spurs on a season long loan. We don't even seem able or willing to do that. Interestingly Darren Ferguson was complimenting Spurs on how easy it was to deal with them.

Surely we must be able to match these kind of guys. Something just doesn't 'add up' at our place these days. Have we got a bad name in the game for some reason?
Good points Wisdom ,Yeovil had 4 young Spurs lads 3 seasons ago ,and regularly dip into the Spurs pot for loans ,I`m surprised we havn`t seen any movement from Liverpool ,everyone I know in the West Country who follows The "Pool" keeps telling me Sami is a legend ,and quite right he is ,but if they deal with B&B instead of him ,I wont expect anything to come of it . UTA
[quote][p][bold]WisdomSpeaks[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: As far as money for players is concerned ,we were told we would have a competitive budget ,we were also told we did not need to sell Leo ,so I`m guessing a budget of at least £3m plus £8m for leo plus Leo`s wages ,I`m guessing £750,000 pa plus what we didn`t use from last year £2.5m ,that makes £14.25m ,even allowing for flippin FFP ,surely we have at least £8m for signings ,after all if we didn`t need to sell ,the money is surely surplus ?. Don't forget we are (if true) approximately 3,000 STs down on last season ,that's again approximately £1.5m ,if we were to spend some of this money on new signings we might get that £1.5m back plus all the additional money those 3,000 would spend on merchandise ,food and drink etc . I might be a million miles away from the actual figures ,but I`m not a money man ,but if messrs Barber and Burke cant see that a lack of investment in players ,will ultimately hurt "The bottom line" then neither are they . It may be that we have a stampede of players come through the door in the next week or so ,I hope that`s the case ,but at the moment we look like one of those cold war Russian supermarkets ,massive ,but nothing on the shelves . UTA[/p][/quote]Well said. It really isn't rocket science is it tug509? If Tony owns a casino and business isn't great - does he go and sell his most popular roulette machine which is bringing in most of his income. I don't think so. For some reason, business people seem to ignore this principle when it comes to players! Reading the Peterborough website - they've taken on a 19 year old 'starlet' from Spurs on a season long loan. We don't even seem able or willing to do that. Interestingly Darren Ferguson was complimenting Spurs on how easy it was to deal with them. Surely we must be able to match these kind of guys. Something just doesn't 'add up' at our place these days. Have we got a bad name in the game for some reason?[/p][/quote]Good points Wisdom ,Yeovil had 4 young Spurs lads 3 seasons ago ,and regularly dip into the Spurs pot for loans ,I`m surprised we havn`t seen any movement from Liverpool ,everyone I know in the West Country who follows The "Pool" keeps telling me Sami is a legend ,and quite right he is ,but if they deal with B&B instead of him ,I wont expect anything to come of it . UTA tug509
  • Score: 1

7:06pm Thu 24 Jul 14

tug509 says...

Rumours site says TB has had to talk Sami out of quiting due to transfers !.
Anything else and it wouldn`t sound so believable !!!!!.
Rumours site says TB has had to talk Sami out of quiting due to transfers !. Anything else and it wouldn`t sound so believable !!!!!. tug509
  • Score: -6

7:11pm Thu 24 Jul 14

rolivan says...

tug509 wrote:
WisdomSpeaks wrote:
tug509 wrote:
As far as money for players is concerned ,we were told we would have a competitive budget ,we were also told we did not need to sell Leo ,so I`m guessing a budget of at least £3m plus £8m for leo plus Leo`s wages ,I`m guessing £750,000 pa plus what we didn`t use from last year £2.5m ,that makes £14.25m ,even allowing for flippin FFP ,surely we have at least £8m for signings ,after all if we didn`t need to sell ,the money is surely surplus ?.
Don't forget we are (if true) approximately 3,000 STs down on last season ,that's again approximately £1.5m ,if we were to spend some of this money on new signings we might get that £1.5m back plus all the additional money those 3,000 would spend on merchandise ,food and drink etc .
I might be a million miles away from the actual figures ,but I`m not a money man ,but if messrs Barber and Burke cant see that a lack of investment in players ,will ultimately hurt "The bottom line" then neither are they .
It may be that we have a stampede of players come through the door in the next week or so ,I hope that`s the case ,but at the moment we look like one of those cold war Russian supermarkets ,massive ,but nothing on the shelves . UTA
Well said. It really isn't rocket science is it tug509?

If Tony owns a casino and business isn't great - does he go and sell his most popular roulette machine which is bringing in most of his income. I don't think so. For some reason, business people seem to ignore this principle when it comes to players!

Reading the Peterborough website - they've taken on a 19 year old 'starlet' from Spurs on a season long loan. We don't even seem able or willing to do that. Interestingly Darren Ferguson was complimenting Spurs on how easy it was to deal with them.

Surely we must be able to match these kind of guys. Something just doesn't 'add up' at our place these days. Have we got a bad name in the game for some reason?
Good points Wisdom ,Yeovil had 4 young Spurs lads 3 seasons ago ,and regularly dip into the Spurs pot for loans ,I`m surprised we havn`t seen any movement from Liverpool ,everyone I know in the West Country who follows The "Pool" keeps telling me Sami is a legend ,and quite right he is ,but if they deal with B&B instead of him ,I wont expect anything to come of it . UTA
Have you ever stopped to think that some Clubs might see us as a potential danger if we were allowed to get into the Premiership . We have always had a big catchment area to draw fans from . You only have to walk around the City and see Adults and kids wearing Premiership teams kits to see that we really still haven't touched the surface for potential fan base increases.
[quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WisdomSpeaks[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: As far as money for players is concerned ,we were told we would have a competitive budget ,we were also told we did not need to sell Leo ,so I`m guessing a budget of at least £3m plus £8m for leo plus Leo`s wages ,I`m guessing £750,000 pa plus what we didn`t use from last year £2.5m ,that makes £14.25m ,even allowing for flippin FFP ,surely we have at least £8m for signings ,after all if we didn`t need to sell ,the money is surely surplus ?. Don't forget we are (if true) approximately 3,000 STs down on last season ,that's again approximately £1.5m ,if we were to spend some of this money on new signings we might get that £1.5m back plus all the additional money those 3,000 would spend on merchandise ,food and drink etc . I might be a million miles away from the actual figures ,but I`m not a money man ,but if messrs Barber and Burke cant see that a lack of investment in players ,will ultimately hurt "The bottom line" then neither are they . It may be that we have a stampede of players come through the door in the next week or so ,I hope that`s the case ,but at the moment we look like one of those cold war Russian supermarkets ,massive ,but nothing on the shelves . UTA[/p][/quote]Well said. It really isn't rocket science is it tug509? If Tony owns a casino and business isn't great - does he go and sell his most popular roulette machine which is bringing in most of his income. I don't think so. For some reason, business people seem to ignore this principle when it comes to players! Reading the Peterborough website - they've taken on a 19 year old 'starlet' from Spurs on a season long loan. We don't even seem able or willing to do that. Interestingly Darren Ferguson was complimenting Spurs on how easy it was to deal with them. Surely we must be able to match these kind of guys. Something just doesn't 'add up' at our place these days. Have we got a bad name in the game for some reason?[/p][/quote]Good points Wisdom ,Yeovil had 4 young Spurs lads 3 seasons ago ,and regularly dip into the Spurs pot for loans ,I`m surprised we havn`t seen any movement from Liverpool ,everyone I know in the West Country who follows The "Pool" keeps telling me Sami is a legend ,and quite right he is ,but if they deal with B&B instead of him ,I wont expect anything to come of it . UTA[/p][/quote]Have you ever stopped to think that some Clubs might see us as a potential danger if we were allowed to get into the Premiership . We have always had a big catchment area to draw fans from . You only have to walk around the City and see Adults and kids wearing Premiership teams kits to see that we really still haven't touched the surface for potential fan base increases. rolivan
  • Score: -1

7:15pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

tug509 wrote:
Rumours site says TB has had to talk Sami out of quiting due to transfers !.
Anything else and it wouldn`t sound so believable !!!!!.
The same rumours site that said we were signing Wilson Palacios a fortnight ago. Has any rumour on there ever been correct (other than the ones posted after the fact)?
[quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: Rumours site says TB has had to talk Sami out of quiting due to transfers !. Anything else and it wouldn`t sound so believable !!!!!.[/p][/quote]The same rumours site that said we were signing Wilson Palacios a fortnight ago. Has any rumour on there ever been correct (other than the ones posted after the fact)? Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 6

7:16pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Beale32 says...

tug509 wrote:
Rumours site says TB has had to talk Sami out of quiting due to transfers !.
Anything else and it wouldn`t sound so believable !!!!!.
If yo read that on the same site i did then i wouldn't believe it. That site is rubbish. But it could ofcourse be a different site
[quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: Rumours site says TB has had to talk Sami out of quiting due to transfers !. Anything else and it wouldn`t sound so believable !!!!!.[/p][/quote]If yo read that on the same site i did then i wouldn't believe it. That site is rubbish. But it could ofcourse be a different site Beale32
  • Score: -1

7:18pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

mikeygit wrote:
I appreciate Bloom is hell bent on keeping to the FFP rules and running the club on strict financial lines but last season I seem to recall that many were naming clubs who had fallen foul of those rules Bolton QPR I believe to name two BUT who has heard of any clubs---other than Man City--who have been fined or penalised in any way?? I along with many others were saying back then it was useless having these rules and Albion abiding by them IF the FA was going to be toothless in penalising clubs who fell foul of the rules. Like many of the laws in this country--get taken to court and the perpetrators get a gentle slap on the wrist and told to be good boys---typical of this nanny state of England!!
Am I right or am I right???
Who's to say? The first tranche of penalties for the Championship aren't due until what, Christmas? Man City were done under UEFA rules.
[quote][p][bold]mikeygit[/bold] wrote: I appreciate Bloom is hell bent on keeping to the FFP rules and running the club on strict financial lines but last season I seem to recall that many were naming clubs who had fallen foul of those rules Bolton QPR I believe to name two BUT who has heard of any clubs---other than Man City--who have been fined or penalised in any way?? I along with many others were saying back then it was useless having these rules and Albion abiding by them IF the FA was going to be toothless in penalising clubs who fell foul of the rules. Like many of the laws in this country--get taken to court and the perpetrators get a gentle slap on the wrist and told to be good boys---typical of this nanny state of England!! Am I right or am I right???[/p][/quote]Who's to say? The first tranche of penalties for the Championship aren't due until what, Christmas? Man City were done under UEFA rules. Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 1

7:20pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

tug509 wrote:
WisdomSpeaks wrote:
tug509 wrote:
As far as money for players is concerned ,we were told we would have a competitive budget ,we were also told we did not need to sell Leo ,so I`m guessing a budget of at least £3m plus £8m for leo plus Leo`s wages ,I`m guessing £750,000 pa plus what we didn`t use from last year £2.5m ,that makes £14.25m ,even allowing for flippin FFP ,surely we have at least £8m for signings ,after all if we didn`t need to sell ,the money is surely surplus ?.
Don't forget we are (if true) approximately 3,000 STs down on last season ,that's again approximately £1.5m ,if we were to spend some of this money on new signings we might get that £1.5m back plus all the additional money those 3,000 would spend on merchandise ,food and drink etc .
I might be a million miles away from the actual figures ,but I`m not a money man ,but if messrs Barber and Burke cant see that a lack of investment in players ,will ultimately hurt "The bottom line" then neither are they .
It may be that we have a stampede of players come through the door in the next week or so ,I hope that`s the case ,but at the moment we look like one of those cold war Russian supermarkets ,massive ,but nothing on the shelves . UTA
Well said. It really isn't rocket science is it tug509?

If Tony owns a casino and business isn't great - does he go and sell his most popular roulette machine which is bringing in most of his income. I don't think so. For some reason, business people seem to ignore this principle when it comes to players!

Reading the Peterborough website - they've taken on a 19 year old 'starlet' from Spurs on a season long loan. We don't even seem able or willing to do that. Interestingly Darren Ferguson was complimenting Spurs on how easy it was to deal with them.

Surely we must be able to match these kind of guys. Something just doesn't 'add up' at our place these days. Have we got a bad name in the game for some reason?
Good points Wisdom ,Yeovil had 4 young Spurs lads 3 seasons ago ,and regularly dip into the Spurs pot for loans ,I`m surprised we havn`t seen any movement from Liverpool ,everyone I know in the West Country who follows The "Pool" keeps telling me Sami is a legend ,and quite right he is ,but if they deal with B&B instead of him ,I wont expect anything to come of it . UTA
We dipped into the Spurs pot for loans, got Obika, and the club got (rightly) slated for it. Who is to say this lad Peterborough have got is any better?
[quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WisdomSpeaks[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: As far as money for players is concerned ,we were told we would have a competitive budget ,we were also told we did not need to sell Leo ,so I`m guessing a budget of at least £3m plus £8m for leo plus Leo`s wages ,I`m guessing £750,000 pa plus what we didn`t use from last year £2.5m ,that makes £14.25m ,even allowing for flippin FFP ,surely we have at least £8m for signings ,after all if we didn`t need to sell ,the money is surely surplus ?. Don't forget we are (if true) approximately 3,000 STs down on last season ,that's again approximately £1.5m ,if we were to spend some of this money on new signings we might get that £1.5m back plus all the additional money those 3,000 would spend on merchandise ,food and drink etc . I might be a million miles away from the actual figures ,but I`m not a money man ,but if messrs Barber and Burke cant see that a lack of investment in players ,will ultimately hurt "The bottom line" then neither are they . It may be that we have a stampede of players come through the door in the next week or so ,I hope that`s the case ,but at the moment we look like one of those cold war Russian supermarkets ,massive ,but nothing on the shelves . UTA[/p][/quote]Well said. It really isn't rocket science is it tug509? If Tony owns a casino and business isn't great - does he go and sell his most popular roulette machine which is bringing in most of his income. I don't think so. For some reason, business people seem to ignore this principle when it comes to players! Reading the Peterborough website - they've taken on a 19 year old 'starlet' from Spurs on a season long loan. We don't even seem able or willing to do that. Interestingly Darren Ferguson was complimenting Spurs on how easy it was to deal with them. Surely we must be able to match these kind of guys. Something just doesn't 'add up' at our place these days. Have we got a bad name in the game for some reason?[/p][/quote]Good points Wisdom ,Yeovil had 4 young Spurs lads 3 seasons ago ,and regularly dip into the Spurs pot for loans ,I`m surprised we havn`t seen any movement from Liverpool ,everyone I know in the West Country who follows The "Pool" keeps telling me Sami is a legend ,and quite right he is ,but if they deal with B&B instead of him ,I wont expect anything to come of it . UTA[/p][/quote]We dipped into the Spurs pot for loans, got Obika, and the club got (rightly) slated for it. Who is to say this lad Peterborough have got is any better? Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 0

7:24pm Thu 24 Jul 14

VegasSeagull says...

mikeygit wrote:
I appreciate Bloom is hell bent on keeping to the FFP rules and running the club on strict financial lines but last season I seem to recall that many were naming clubs who had fallen foul of those rules Bolton QPR I believe to name two BUT who has heard of any clubs---other than Man City--who have been fined or penalised in any way?? I along with many others were saying back then it was useless having these rules and Albion abiding by them IF the FA was going to be toothless in penalising clubs who fell foul of the rules. Like many of the laws in this country--get taken to court and the perpetrators get a gentle slap on the wrist and told to be good boys---typical of this nanny state of England!!
Am I right or am I right???
The official trading figures for last season will not be announced until later this season, only then will any possible punishments be handed down as the full implication of the FFP only took effect for last season.
At a recent Chairman's meeting to discuss the FFP rules as they stand, and to suggest acceptable modifications, a motion to have closer to, 'real time,' declaration was voted down, presumable because 'real time,' punishments could have been handed out. I believe Bloom voted in favor of such a change.
[quote][p][bold]mikeygit[/bold] wrote: I appreciate Bloom is hell bent on keeping to the FFP rules and running the club on strict financial lines but last season I seem to recall that many were naming clubs who had fallen foul of those rules Bolton QPR I believe to name two BUT who has heard of any clubs---other than Man City--who have been fined or penalised in any way?? I along with many others were saying back then it was useless having these rules and Albion abiding by them IF the FA was going to be toothless in penalising clubs who fell foul of the rules. Like many of the laws in this country--get taken to court and the perpetrators get a gentle slap on the wrist and told to be good boys---typical of this nanny state of England!! Am I right or am I right???[/p][/quote]The official trading figures for last season will not be announced until later this season, only then will any possible punishments be handed down as the full implication of the FFP only took effect for last season. At a recent Chairman's meeting to discuss the FFP rules as they stand, and to suggest acceptable modifications, a motion to have closer to, 'real time,' declaration was voted down, presumable because 'real time,' punishments could have been handed out. I believe Bloom voted in favor of such a change. VegasSeagull
  • Score: 1

7:26pm Thu 24 Jul 14

tug509 says...

Arnie ,Beale32 ,
normally it`s a load of pony ,but with B&B dealing with transfers ,that makes me very worried ,I like Sami, if we were to loose him ,B&B would have to go .
Arnie ,Beale32 , normally it`s a load of pony ,but with B&B dealing with transfers ,that makes me very worried ,I like Sami, if we were to loose him ,B&B would have to go . tug509
  • Score: -1

7:27pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Major Bloodboil says...

Off topic but I see that Watford have signed Andrews on a season long lone. Can't say that he was my favourite player last year and I'm not surprised we have not tried to re-sign him, at least I don't think we tried to re-sign him.
Off topic but I see that Watford have signed Andrews on a season long lone. Can't say that he was my favourite player last year and I'm not surprised we have not tried to re-sign him, at least I don't think we tried to re-sign him. Major Bloodboil
  • Score: 2

7:32pm Thu 24 Jul 14

Ex-pat Arnie says...

tug509 wrote:
Arnie ,Beale32 ,
normally it`s a load of pony ,but with B&B dealing with transfers ,that makes me very worried ,I like Sami, if we were to loose him ,B&B would have to go .
I can see an argument for letting Burke go in that circumstance (although I would strongly disagree with it) but Barber too? He is doing Bloom's bidding and is under instruction to make sure the club is both complying with FFP regulations and becoming self-sustaining.

I don't think there's a shred of truth in that rumour, TBH. It sounds good because it echoes concerns on here, but Hyypia will have a much better idea of what is happening in the club than do any of us, and I doubt it's quite so bad as we fear :-)
[quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: Arnie ,Beale32 , normally it`s a load of pony ,but with B&B dealing with transfers ,that makes me very worried ,I like Sami, if we were to loose him ,B&B would have to go .[/p][/quote]I can see an argument for letting Burke go in that circumstance (although I would strongly disagree with it) but Barber too? He is doing Bloom's bidding and is under instruction to make sure the club is both complying with FFP regulations and becoming self-sustaining. I don't think there's a shred of truth in that rumour, TBH. It sounds good because it echoes concerns on here, but Hyypia will have a much better idea of what is happening in the club than do any of us, and I doubt it's quite so bad as we fear :-) Ex-pat Arnie
  • Score: 2

7:42pm Thu 24 Jul 14

ringtone says...

gordongull wrote:
ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo.
This article helps to redress the balance.
From a previous thread.

Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted

Go on, name them
Do you think they would have gone back up without the £48m?
You didn't answer the question.

Citing parachute payments is an excuse used by Barber and his resident mouthpiece ex-pat to dumb down expectations without affecting season ticket sales.

If parachute payments are such an advantage why did Wolves get relegated last year?
You found fault with my original comment that unlike Burnley,Tony Bloom was not given £48m to spend over the last four years. The point I was making is that regardless of Premiership quality players, which is largely a matter of opinion, Burnley had the benefit of £48m parachute money with which to facilitate their promotion.
Burnley are constantky being singled out as a shinimg example of what can be achieved on a shoestring. The money they have received from the Premier League is conveniently forgotten.
Your last sentence is basically asking if money is an advantage.
The parachute payments are staggered over the 4 years and are meant to facilate a "soft landing" as opposed to a spending spree.

The money is normally used to pay premiership wages which are contractual usually over 3 or 4 years.

And remember the average wage bill in the premiership is over well 50 million a season.
[quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo. This article helps to redress the balance.[/p][/quote]From a previous thread. Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted Go on, name them[/p][/quote]Do you think they would have gone back up without the £48m?[/p][/quote]You didn't answer the question. Citing parachute payments is an excuse used by Barber and his resident mouthpiece ex-pat to dumb down expectations without affecting season ticket sales. If parachute payments are such an advantage why did Wolves get relegated last year?[/p][/quote]You found fault with my original comment that unlike Burnley,Tony Bloom was not given £48m to spend over the last four years. The point I was making is that regardless of Premiership quality players, which is largely a matter of opinion, Burnley had the benefit of £48m parachute money with which to facilitate their promotion. Burnley are constantky being singled out as a shinimg example of what can be achieved on a shoestring. The money they have received from the Premier League is conveniently forgotten. Your last sentence is basically asking if money is an advantage.[/p][/quote]The parachute payments are staggered over the 4 years and are meant to facilate a "soft landing" as opposed to a spending spree. The money is normally used to pay premiership wages which are contractual usually over 3 or 4 years. And remember the average wage bill in the premiership is over well 50 million a season. ringtone
  • Score: -3

7:49pm Thu 24 Jul 14

ringtone says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
mikeygit wrote:
I appreciate Bloom is hell bent on keeping to the FFP rules and running the club on strict financial lines but last season I seem to recall that many were naming clubs who had fallen foul of those rules Bolton QPR I believe to name two BUT who has heard of any clubs---other than Man City--who have been fined or penalised in any way?? I along with many others were saying back then it was useless having these rules and Albion abiding by them IF the FA was going to be toothless in penalising clubs who fell foul of the rules. Like many of the laws in this country--get taken to court and the perpetrators get a gentle slap on the wrist and told to be good boys---typical of this nanny state of England!!
Am I right or am I right???
The official trading figures for last season will not be announced until later this season, only then will any possible punishments be handed down as the full implication of the FFP only took effect for last season.
At a recent Chairman's meeting to discuss the FFP rules as they stand, and to suggest acceptable modifications, a motion to have closer to, 'real time,' declaration was voted down, presumable because 'real time,' punishments could have been handed out. I believe Bloom voted in favor of such a change.
This is the Vegas i fell in love with.

Hard edged, informative and having a dig at all those who deserve it.

Welcome back
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mikeygit[/bold] wrote: I appreciate Bloom is hell bent on keeping to the FFP rules and running the club on strict financial lines but last season I seem to recall that many were naming clubs who had fallen foul of those rules Bolton QPR I believe to name two BUT who has heard of any clubs---other than Man City--who have been fined or penalised in any way?? I along with many others were saying back then it was useless having these rules and Albion abiding by them IF the FA was going to be toothless in penalising clubs who fell foul of the rules. Like many of the laws in this country--get taken to court and the perpetrators get a gentle slap on the wrist and told to be good boys---typical of this nanny state of England!! Am I right or am I right???[/p][/quote]The official trading figures for last season will not be announced until later this season, only then will any possible punishments be handed down as the full implication of the FFP only took effect for last season. At a recent Chairman's meeting to discuss the FFP rules as they stand, and to suggest acceptable modifications, a motion to have closer to, 'real time,' declaration was voted down, presumable because 'real time,' punishments could have been handed out. I believe Bloom voted in favor of such a change.[/p][/quote]This is the Vegas i fell in love with. Hard edged, informative and having a dig at all those who deserve it. Welcome back ringtone
  • Score: -6

8:02pm Thu 24 Jul 14

mikeygit says...

Vegas/ex pat arnie---thanks for your replies--you are better informed than me---what this site is all about. It is good we have guys like you on here who are more level headed than some. Any date on the Fans Forum??
Vegas/ex pat arnie---thanks for your replies--you are better informed than me---what this site is all about. It is good we have guys like you on here who are more level headed than some. Any date on the Fans Forum?? mikeygit
  • Score: 1

8:14pm Thu 24 Jul 14

London Dave says...

It's not related to 'Talking Point' raised. But, does anyone seriously believe that a player with short term ambitions to play in the Premiership is going to pick Brighton at the moment as new club ahead of numerous other clubs in the Championship?

There is a disconnect between the long term vision and financial prudence of the club's hierarchy and the short term ambitions of good quality players (and the short term hopes of fans).

Personally I'm trying really hard to keep reminding myself of how far the club has come in a fairly short space of time to try to help compensate for the likely frustration and disappointment of not being quite good enough again this season.
It's not related to 'Talking Point' raised. But, does anyone seriously believe that a player with short term ambitions to play in the Premiership is going to pick Brighton at the moment as new club ahead of numerous other clubs in the Championship? There is a disconnect between the long term vision and financial prudence of the club's hierarchy and the short term ambitions of good quality players (and the short term hopes of fans). Personally I'm trying really hard to keep reminding myself of how far the club has come in a fairly short space of time to try to help compensate for the likely frustration and disappointment of not being quite good enough again this season. London Dave
  • Score: 5

8:14pm Thu 24 Jul 14

WisdomSpeaks says...

Ex-pat Arnie wrote:
tug509 wrote:
WisdomSpeaks wrote:
tug509 wrote:
As far as money for players is concerned ,we were told we would have a competitive budget ,we were also told we did not need to sell Leo ,so I`m guessing a budget of at least £3m plus £8m for leo plus Leo`s wages ,I`m guessing £750,000 pa plus what we didn`t use from last year £2.5m ,that makes £14.25m ,even allowing for flippin FFP ,surely we have at least £8m for signings ,after all if we didn`t need to sell ,the money is surely surplus ?.
Don't forget we are (if true) approximately 3,000 STs down on last season ,that's again approximately £1.5m ,if we were to spend some of this money on new signings we might get that £1.5m back plus all the additional money those 3,000 would spend on merchandise ,food and drink etc .
I might be a million miles away from the actual figures ,but I`m not a money man ,but if messrs Barber and Burke cant see that a lack of investment in players ,will ultimately hurt "The bottom line" then neither are they .
It may be that we have a stampede of players come through the door in the next week or so ,I hope that`s the case ,but at the moment we look like one of those cold war Russian supermarkets ,massive ,but nothing on the shelves . UTA
Well said. It really isn't rocket science is it tug509?

If Tony owns a casino and business isn't great - does he go and sell his most popular roulette machine which is bringing in most of his income. I don't think so. For some reason, business people seem to ignore this principle when it comes to players!

Reading the Peterborough website - they've taken on a 19 year old 'starlet' from Spurs on a season long loan. We don't even seem able or willing to do that. Interestingly Darren Ferguson was complimenting Spurs on how easy it was to deal with them.

Surely we must be able to match these kind of guys. Something just doesn't 'add up' at our place these days. Have we got a bad name in the game for some reason?
Good points Wisdom ,Yeovil had 4 young Spurs lads 3 seasons ago ,and regularly dip into the Spurs pot for loans ,I`m surprised we havn`t seen any movement from Liverpool ,everyone I know in the West Country who follows The "Pool" keeps telling me Sami is a legend ,and quite right he is ,but if they deal with B&B instead of him ,I wont expect anything to come of it . UTA
We dipped into the Spurs pot for loans, got Obika, and the club got (rightly) slated for it. Who is to say this lad Peterborough have got is any better?
Precisely - and who chose Obika? I bet it wasn't Oscar. Maybe Jones since he had first hand knowledge of him. I thought it stuck out a mile that he was not exactly upto scratch.
[quote][p][bold]Ex-pat Arnie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]WisdomSpeaks[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tug509[/bold] wrote: As far as money for players is concerned ,we were told we would have a competitive budget ,we were also told we did not need to sell Leo ,so I`m guessing a budget of at least £3m plus £8m for leo plus Leo`s wages ,I`m guessing £750,000 pa plus what we didn`t use from last year £2.5m ,that makes £14.25m ,even allowing for flippin FFP ,surely we have at least £8m for signings ,after all if we didn`t need to sell ,the money is surely surplus ?. Don't forget we are (if true) approximately 3,000 STs down on last season ,that's again approximately £1.5m ,if we were to spend some of this money on new signings we might get that £1.5m back plus all the additional money those 3,000 would spend on merchandise ,food and drink etc . I might be a million miles away from the actual figures ,but I`m not a money man ,but if messrs Barber and Burke cant see that a lack of investment in players ,will ultimately hurt "The bottom line" then neither are they . It may be that we have a stampede of players come through the door in the next week or so ,I hope that`s the case ,but at the moment we look like one of those cold war Russian supermarkets ,massive ,but nothing on the shelves . UTA[/p][/quote]Well said. It really isn't rocket science is it tug509? If Tony owns a casino and business isn't great - does he go and sell his most popular roulette machine which is bringing in most of his income. I don't think so. For some reason, business people seem to ignore this principle when it comes to players! Reading the Peterborough website - they've taken on a 19 year old 'starlet' from Spurs on a season long loan. We don't even seem able or willing to do that. Interestingly Darren Ferguson was complimenting Spurs on how easy it was to deal with them. Surely we must be able to match these kind of guys. Something just doesn't 'add up' at our place these days. Have we got a bad name in the game for some reason?[/p][/quote]Good points Wisdom ,Yeovil had 4 young Spurs lads 3 seasons ago ,and regularly dip into the Spurs pot for loans ,I`m surprised we havn`t seen any movement from Liverpool ,everyone I know in the West Country who follows The "Pool" keeps telling me Sami is a legend ,and quite right he is ,but if they deal with B&B instead of him ,I wont expect anything to come of it . UTA[/p][/quote]We dipped into the Spurs pot for loans, got Obika, and the club got (rightly) slated for it. Who is to say this lad Peterborough have got is any better?[/p][/quote]Precisely - and who chose Obika? I bet it wasn't Oscar. Maybe Jones since he had first hand knowledge of him. I thought it stuck out a mile that he was not exactly upto scratch. WisdomSpeaks
  • Score: 0

9:03pm Thu 24 Jul 14

gordongull says...

ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo.
This article helps to redress the balance.
From a previous thread.

Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted

Go on, name them
Do you think they would have gone back up without the £48m?
You didn't answer the question.

Citing parachute payments is an excuse used by Barber and his resident mouthpiece ex-pat to dumb down expectations without affecting season ticket sales.

If parachute payments are such an advantage why did Wolves get relegated last year?
You found fault with my original comment that unlike Burnley,Tony Bloom was not given £48m to spend over the last four years. The point I was making is that regardless of Premiership quality players, which is largely a matter of opinion, Burnley had the benefit of £48m parachute money with which to facilitate their promotion.
Burnley are constantky being singled out as a shinimg example of what can be achieved on a shoestring. The money they have received from the Premier League is conveniently forgotten.
Your last sentence is basically asking if money is an advantage.
The parachute payments are staggered over the 4 years and are meant to facilate a "soft landing" as opposed to a spending spree.

The money is normally used to pay premiership wages which are contractual usually over 3 or 4 years.

And remember the average wage bill in the premiership is over well 50 million a season.
I can see the point you are making about parachute payments being spread over four seasons and used to maintain Premier League contracts, Ringtone.
But you would have a very hard job convincing me that Burnley would be starting the new season in the Premier League if they had not received the money.
[quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo. This article helps to redress the balance.[/p][/quote]From a previous thread. Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted Go on, name them[/p][/quote]Do you think they would have gone back up without the £48m?[/p][/quote]You didn't answer the question. Citing parachute payments is an excuse used by Barber and his resident mouthpiece ex-pat to dumb down expectations without affecting season ticket sales. If parachute payments are such an advantage why did Wolves get relegated last year?[/p][/quote]You found fault with my original comment that unlike Burnley,Tony Bloom was not given £48m to spend over the last four years. The point I was making is that regardless of Premiership quality players, which is largely a matter of opinion, Burnley had the benefit of £48m parachute money with which to facilitate their promotion. Burnley are constantky being singled out as a shinimg example of what can be achieved on a shoestring. The money they have received from the Premier League is conveniently forgotten. Your last sentence is basically asking if money is an advantage.[/p][/quote]The parachute payments are staggered over the 4 years and are meant to facilate a "soft landing" as opposed to a spending spree. The money is normally used to pay premiership wages which are contractual usually over 3 or 4 years. And remember the average wage bill in the premiership is over well 50 million a season.[/p][/quote]I can see the point you are making about parachute payments being spread over four seasons and used to maintain Premier League contracts, Ringtone. But you would have a very hard job convincing me that Burnley would be starting the new season in the Premier League if they had not received the money. gordongull
  • Score: 1

9:07pm Thu 24 Jul 14

ringtone says...

gordongull wrote:
ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo.
This article helps to redress the balance.
From a previous thread.

Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted

Go on, name them
Do you think they would have gone back up without the £48m?
You didn't answer the question.

Citing parachute payments is an excuse used by Barber and his resident mouthpiece ex-pat to dumb down expectations without affecting season ticket sales.

If parachute payments are such an advantage why did Wolves get relegated last year?
You found fault with my original comment that unlike Burnley,Tony Bloom was not given £48m to spend over the last four years. The point I was making is that regardless of Premiership quality players, which is largely a matter of opinion, Burnley had the benefit of £48m parachute money with which to facilitate their promotion.
Burnley are constantky being singled out as a shinimg example of what can be achieved on a shoestring. The money they have received from the Premier League is conveniently forgotten.
Your last sentence is basically asking if money is an advantage.
The parachute payments are staggered over the 4 years and are meant to facilate a "soft landing" as opposed to a spending spree.

The money is normally used to pay premiership wages which are contractual usually over 3 or 4 years.

And remember the average wage bill in the premiership is over well 50 million a season.
I can see the point you are making about parachute payments being spread over four seasons and used to maintain Premier League contracts, Ringtone.
But you would have a very hard job convincing me that Burnley would be starting the new season in the Premier League if they had not received the money.
Okay mate.

I have enjoyed the debate.

I think the answer lies somewhere in the middle

I agree, maybe it did give them an advantage in the end.
[quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo. This article helps to redress the balance.[/p][/quote]From a previous thread. Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted Go on, name them[/p][/quote]Do you think they would have gone back up without the £48m?[/p][/quote]You didn't answer the question. Citing parachute payments is an excuse used by Barber and his resident mouthpiece ex-pat to dumb down expectations without affecting season ticket sales. If parachute payments are such an advantage why did Wolves get relegated last year?[/p][/quote]You found fault with my original comment that unlike Burnley,Tony Bloom was not given £48m to spend over the last four years. The point I was making is that regardless of Premiership quality players, which is largely a matter of opinion, Burnley had the benefit of £48m parachute money with which to facilitate their promotion. Burnley are constantky being singled out as a shinimg example of what can be achieved on a shoestring. The money they have received from the Premier League is conveniently forgotten. Your last sentence is basically asking if money is an advantage.[/p][/quote]The parachute payments are staggered over the 4 years and are meant to facilate a "soft landing" as opposed to a spending spree. The money is normally used to pay premiership wages which are contractual usually over 3 or 4 years. And remember the average wage bill in the premiership is over well 50 million a season.[/p][/quote]I can see the point you are making about parachute payments being spread over four seasons and used to maintain Premier League contracts, Ringtone. But you would have a very hard job convincing me that Burnley would be starting the new season in the Premier League if they had not received the money.[/p][/quote]Okay mate. I have enjoyed the debate. I think the answer lies somewhere in the middle I agree, maybe it did give them an advantage in the end. ringtone
  • Score: 2

9:23pm Thu 24 Jul 14

gordongull says...

ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
ringtone wrote:
gordongull wrote:
There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo.
This article helps to redress the balance.
From a previous thread.

Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted

Go on, name them
Do you think they would have gone back up without the £48m?
You didn't answer the question.

Citing parachute payments is an excuse used by Barber and his resident mouthpiece ex-pat to dumb down expectations without affecting season ticket sales.

If parachute payments are such an advantage why did Wolves get relegated last year?
You found fault with my original comment that unlike Burnley,Tony Bloom was not given £48m to spend over the last four years. The point I was making is that regardless of Premiership quality players, which is largely a matter of opinion, Burnley had the benefit of £48m parachute money with which to facilitate their promotion.
Burnley are constantky being singled out as a shinimg example of what can be achieved on a shoestring. The money they have received from the Premier League is conveniently forgotten.
Your last sentence is basically asking if money is an advantage.
The parachute payments are staggered over the 4 years and are meant to facilate a "soft landing" as opposed to a spending spree.

The money is normally used to pay premiership wages which are contractual usually over 3 or 4 years.

And remember the average wage bill in the premiership is over well 50 million a season.
I can see the point you are making about parachute payments being spread over four seasons and used to maintain Premier League contracts, Ringtone.
But you would have a very hard job convincing me that Burnley would be starting the new season in the Premier League if they had not received the money.
Okay mate.

I have enjoyed the debate.

I think the answer lies somewhere in the middle

I agree, maybe it did give them an advantage in the end.
Likewise.
And maybe not as great an advantage as have been suggesting.
[quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ringtone[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]gordongull[/bold] wrote: There have been a lot of unfairly harsh comments regarding Leo. This article helps to redress the balance.[/p][/quote]From a previous thread. Name the premiership quality players that got Burnley relegated and were still in the team that got them promoted Go on, name them[/p][/quote]Do you think they would have gone back up without the £48m?[/p][/quote]You didn't answer the question. Citing parachute payments is an excuse used by Barber and his resident mouthpiece ex-pat to dumb down expectations without affecting season ticket sales. If parachute payments are such an advantage why did Wolves get relegated last year?[/p][/quote]You found fault with my original comment that unlike Burnley,Tony Bloom was not given £48m to spend over the last four years. The point I was making is that regardless of Premiership quality players, which is largely a matter of opinion, Burnley had the benefit of £48m parachute money with which to facilitate their promotion. Burnley are constantky being singled out as a shinimg example of what can be achieved on a shoestring. The money they have received from the Premier League is conveniently forgotten. Your last sentence is basically asking if money is an advantage.[/p][/quote]The parachute payments are staggered over the 4 years and are meant to facilate a "soft landing" as opposed to a spending spree. The money is normally used to pay premiership wages which are contractual usually over 3 or 4 years. And remember the average wage bill in the premiership is over well 50 million a season.[/p][/quote]I can see the point you are making about parachute payments being spread over four seasons and used to maintain Premier League contracts, Ringtone. But you would have a very hard job convincing me that Burnley would be starting the new season in the Premier League if they had not received the money.[/p][/quote]Okay mate. I have enjoyed the debate. I think the answer lies somewhere in the middle I agree, maybe it did give them an advantage in the end.[/p][/quote]Likewise. And maybe not as great an advantage as have been suggesting. gordongull
  • Score: 2

11:10pm Thu 24 Jul 14

WisdomSpeaks says...

https://m.youtube.co
m/watch?v=5hLO0cGvSs
0
What might have been! Look at the happy face at about 2 mins 50 seconds !!!
https://m.youtube.co m/watch?v=5hLO0cGvSs 0 What might have been! Look at the happy face at about 2 mins 50 seconds !!! WisdomSpeaks
  • Score: 0

12:20am Fri 25 Jul 14

Mayfield sweeper says...

VegasSeagull wrote:
mikeygit wrote:
I appreciate Bloom is hell bent on keeping to the FFP rules and running the club on strict financial lines but last season I seem to recall that many were naming clubs who had fallen foul of those rules Bolton QPR I believe to name two BUT who has heard of any clubs---other than Man City--who have been fined or penalised in any way?? I along with many others were saying back then it was useless having these rules and Albion abiding by them IF the FA was going to be toothless in penalising clubs who fell foul of the rules. Like many of the laws in this country--get taken to court and the perpetrators get a gentle slap on the wrist and told to be good boys---typical of this nanny state of England!!
Am I right or am I right???
The official trading figures for last season will not be announced until later this season, only then will any possible punishments be handed down as the full implication of the FFP only took effect for last season.
At a recent Chairman's meeting to discuss the FFP rules as they stand, and to suggest acceptable modifications, a motion to have closer to, 'real time,' declaration was voted down, presumable because 'real time,' punishments could have been handed out. I believe Bloom voted in favor of such a change.
Vegas seagull, aka Tony Bloom.
[quote][p][bold]VegasSeagull[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mikeygit[/bold] wrote: I appreciate Bloom is hell bent on keeping to the FFP rules and running the club on strict financial lines but last season I seem to recall that many were naming clubs who had fallen foul of those rules Bolton QPR I believe to name two BUT who has heard of any clubs---other than Man City--who have been fined or penalised in any way?? I along with many others were saying back then it was useless having these rules and Albion abiding by them IF the FA was going to be toothless in penalising clubs who fell foul of the rules. Like many of the laws in this country--get taken to court and the perpetrators get a gentle slap on the wrist and told to be good boys---typical of this nanny state of England!! Am I right or am I right???[/p][/quote]The official trading figures for last season will not be announced until later this season, only then will any possible punishments be handed down as the full implication of the FFP only took effect for last season. At a recent Chairman's meeting to discuss the FFP rules as they stand, and to suggest acceptable modifications, a motion to have closer to, 'real time,' declaration was voted down, presumable because 'real time,' punishments could have been handed out. I believe Bloom voted in favor of such a change.[/p][/quote]Vegas seagull, aka Tony Bloom. Mayfield sweeper
  • Score: -4

1:52am Fri 25 Jul 14

Captain Haddock says...

stonegold wrote:
Surely people should know by now that if they're looking for quality reporting they won't get it from the Argus - strictly journalism by numbers.

You might just get some snippets of information from amongst the hackneyed language and flood of clichés but that's about it - new signings always "put pen to paper"; the next game always "comes too soon" for a player recovering from injury; a match against a team in geographical proximity is always against "local rivals" (since when did Crawley fall into that category!); the transfer window always "slams shut"; etc etc
I LOVE it when that transfer window slams shut! ;0)
[quote][p][bold]stonegold[/bold] wrote: Surely people should know by now that if they're looking for quality reporting they won't get it from the Argus - strictly journalism by numbers. You might just get some snippets of information from amongst the hackneyed language and flood of clichés but that's about it - new signings always "put pen to paper"; the next game always "comes too soon" for a player recovering from injury; a match against a team in geographical proximity is always against "local rivals" (since when did Crawley fall into that category!); the transfer window always "slams shut"; etc etc[/p][/quote]I LOVE it when that transfer window slams shut! ;0) Captain Haddock
  • Score: 3

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree