• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

ENIC

Bishop said:
If I said they were bad decisions at the time and virtually every single one I did, its not hindsight.

I'm not even claiming to be some footballing savant, most of them were bleeding fudging obvious at the time.
Click to expand...
Just as most of us can criticise the decisions of many businesses when not under the constraints they are and risking our own .only on it.
 
billyiddo said:
This is what i was getting at in my post - in 15 seasons, 30 of the available 45 domestic trophies were 'won' by 2 state/oligarch backed clubs. That leaves 15 trophies on the table over 15 years - with a fair portion of that time being pre stadium revenue era, about 10 years? So that's 10 years of competing against a far richer group of Utd Liverpool & Arsenal for effectively one trophy a season. This isn't an ownership caused problem (outside of them not being an oligarch or nation state) - it's caused by the change in football landscape post Sky & CL TV money
Click to expand...

Yes, true, and there is also a 'but'... we had several opportunities to potentially make relatively low risk moves to support a manager who had us knocking hard on a door at a few specific moments. Despite all the dominance of a few pointed out, there we were, regular top 4, most points in the Prem across two seasons, so so close yet we
refused to see the moment to speculate. It was possible to break that cycle IMO, we were right there. We've discussed it many times. If you want to go back to '92, it's well worth asking how one of the architects of the Premier League TV age managed to fudge it up for us so much.
 
thfcsteff said:
Yes, true, and there is also a 'but'... we had several opportunities to potentially make relatively low risk moves to support a manager who had us knocking hard on a door at a few specific moments. Despite all the dominance of a few pointed out, there we were, regular top 4, most points in the Prem across two seasons, so so close yet we
refused to see the moment to speculate. It was possible to break that cycle IMO, we were right there. We've discussed it many times. If you want to go back to '92, it's well worth asking how one of the architects of the Premier League TV age managed to fudge it up for us so much.
Click to expand...

I think the successful clubs we are trying to compete with have all likely had points at which similar mistakes made at higher levels have cost them success - the difference between them and us is that their financial advantage has allowed them to come back again and again until it they got it right - we don't/didn't have that luxury.
 
billyiddo said:
I think the successful clubs we are trying to compete with have all likely had points at which similar mistakes made at higher levels have cost them success - the difference between them and us is that their financial advantage has allowed them to come back again and again until it they got it right - we don't/didn't have that luxury.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. I'm hoping we are that club now. Match day revenues, NFL, F1 karting, pop concerts, business conventions etc all add up to the new formula that we should be that club that don't go into crisis just because we spent £60m on Tanguy and it didn't work out.

Saying that, I'd be shocked if we have any more than £50m net spending this summer if we don't win the EL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back