MrBlack

But you're proclaiming that you know which one he'd use if Mings was still fit, and it wouldn't be the one he used the first game of the season? He'd have used variations of all of them throughout the season, and had Pau got injured instead, he'd have just rejigged the backline to accommodate it like he has done with Mings injured. We don't need another Pau, IF Mings comes back fully functional. I feel like you're setting yourself up for disappointment if you think we'll sign Lenglet (or an alternative to him). Obviously, if they have doubts about Mings then that isn't the case, but I'm talking about the situation where he comes back to pre season and looks fine.

It obviously won't compare to a new stand designed to cater for that from the off. But that doesn't mean they should ignore it and can't do anything to improve what is already there.

Unlikely. That kind of information is locked behind regulatory secret walls. PwC are our auditors so not like they'd have got it through their work either, and accidentally revealed it. Maybe some educated guess work on their side Edit: realised you probably already know this so actually wondering now why you think they might have?

I dont think we'll ever know if Purslow could have negotiated a deal with Adidas if the club had been in the champions league spots when he did so. When we signed with Castore, it was seen as a good improvement on our existing contract monetarily, and at the time was probably the best we could expect given similar clubs. It is fair to give Heck some credit for it, but as to whether we couldn't have done the same with Purslow I guess we'll never know. My gut doesn't really give me a good feel about him, but my trust in the owners does, so if he really gets things wrong I've got confidence they'll correct it at the very least.

I think you hit the nail on the head with the last sentence. They know the badge doesnt have the desired impact. So they're going to release it when there is much better news to unveil along with it. The issue they may face is we already know about the Adidas deal (if not the amount), and the badge is already revealed by the trademarks. Unless they can pull a rabbit out the hat (by stating the shirt deal is worth 40m, or unveiling a completely unseen badge that we all love, or a new shirt sponsor) I don't see them being able to generate quite the positive effect from that they may envisage. The playing down of the shirt sponsor thing could well be a way for them to lower expectations and then surprise us though so fingers crossed I guess.

Once again, the notes just sound like a business replying to a customer complaint using a blanket template response. And the tone is one of complete disregard and disrespect of the people asking the question. If the tone of the meeting was positive, it doesnt take a genius to make the tone of the club's response sound less like it was written by a complete arsehole. Overall, some not particularly positive messaging in respect of the badge, and general indication that we're just ploughing blindly ahead with whatever they want to do and ignoring fan input.

You are aware Mings played that role last season?

If Mings comes back we don't need Lenglet or a replacement. We do need a Carlos or his replacement, and if Konsa is to be a right back we probably need another RCB.

I assume you're only ignoring Kamara because he's injured? If so then point taken. Ultimately there's no logic to sell any of them if we don't need to, which I'm sure we all agree on. So assuming we qualify for the champions league, as seems to be about 80% likely, let's focus on who we need to buy, given how much wiggle room selling our non key players would bring.

That's why you make it harsh. 10m - 3 points 20m - 6 points 30m - 12 points 40m - 24 points etc

What logic?

Wouldn't have been safe to bring him on at 5-1 obviously.

I dont understand how we can just arbitrarily say that a month is no longer going to be accounted for in the current cycle? Does that month 3 years ago, where we presumably made a lot of losses, get erased from our FFP calculations now, and give us a free hit of those losses? I assume we've done the maths and checked the extra month we add on to the end of the three year cycle will be substantially better. What's to stop you, in theory, changing your year end every time you get three years on from a particularly expensive month?

I think the issue is just that it took the holtr suite service away from the holte enders, after they'd already paid for their season tickets and been told it was being refurbished for them. As a standalone offering it was a good idea to give fans without a booking history an option to attend the odd game, and for people wanting to splurge a bit for a special occasion to upgrade their experience. But the season ticket holders in the holte have still been shafted. I guess the success on the pitch has helped mask that problem.

From the people I've heard off they aren't confident he'll improve their fortunes at all. He won't spend and will just try and make a profit. No idea who he is but doesn't sound like hes going to take them beyond their current status.

He is, but you don't need to say it every week. It's not like it ever changes.

Yup. Its why they need to set out a scale that clubs know in advance. If clubs know how many points they'll be deducted for a breach of £x million then they can't have any complaints. Obviously there'll be the odd interpretation of a loss being counted or not, but that should also be clear in the rules. Having the points deduction applied in the season that the breaches took place is better than them happening the season after as was previously the case.

It's things like this that just make me feel the career path of decline/overseas is more likely than one where he finds his mojo and works hard at a lower club. He's insanely rich, he's won everything at club level, he's played for and won a final (playoff) with his boyhood club, and he's injury prone. There's far fewer reasons he's likely to drop down in the PL and perform. There's maybe a couple more reasons why he might go overseas though as the press coverage won't be as bad (assuming he doesnt cost the club he moves to 50m). Yes, i'm guessing just like you @Stevo985, but if you find my assessment amusing then I'd love to know why. Seems logical to be. And there's no bias, bitterness or even care in my assessment. He can go and play for whoever he wants, I'll just be amazed if it's a step down in England.

Happy birthday! All the best and I hope Villa deliver a suitable display of grit and determination to get us past Luton this weekend for you to enjoy!

He's very right. For all his faults, he speaks very well and is clearly very intelligent and has exceptional knowledge of the financial aspects and history of football. If he'd not forced his football visions on the club he might still be here and we might still have a new North Stand on the way. When it comes to the longer term benefit of the club and pur ability to overcome thr FFP barriers, I think I trust Puslow's view more than I trust Heck's. But it's in the past and Heck does seem to be making more out of what we already have. Let's hope we got all the information we could out of Purslow while he was here.

Which if we beat them at home, we should be.... Luton seem to be a bit of an enigma at the moment, but we should beat them and they'll be tired after their efforts against Man City in the week.

Would be a good plan if he's fit enough for it.

Assume that was aimed at me? He clearly loves football, like I also said in my post that said I can see him going abroad. Him crying over an injury means nothing in terms of his desire to go earn a pay cheque at a club not winning the PL or a club that he doesn't support. Not to mention, it could be that he's crying about the fact it is ruining his England chances for the summer. I didn't say he'd go abroad for an easy pay day, I just said playing for anyone else in England is going to be pretty meaningless to him. Before you even bring in the fact that most clubs in the league won't be able to afford him. Going abroad is a much more likely outcome for him, lower game pace, less press coverage, new challenge, better weather, not competing for a league spot against the club he supports. I can think of many reasons he'll end up abroad, rather than at Newcastle, Chelsea, or Spurs (assuming us, Arsenal, Liverpool and United won't want him).

Wow, yes, good point. Out of sight out of mind. I'm guessing long term injury?

Valid points. I'm not expecting us to have a run in any cup, but I'm hoping we can if injuries don't destroy our squad. Having seen what Emery has achieved with what we have this season, it's not wrong to expect us to do better with fewer injuries and players that we bring on being better than the placeholders we signed instead of them this season. To bring it back on topic, and to what the OP said, there are teams in the CL that are rubbish. And the players that play for them that claim CL experience, are not necessarily good players. As perfectly demonstrated by Mudryk. Who is definitely one for this thread at this stage of his career, especially with his much Chelsea signed him for.