Dean Smith

[TRO]

16 hours ago, Rob182 said:

This is a fair point. They probably all played for a fiver a week and a go in Dr Tony’s mondeo 

I notice you’re happy to use the speculative press figure of £130m for Dean’s spending though. 

Well, maybe I am showing my age....but when debating between fans, we never mentioned wages, it seems a relatively new thing.

What they earn, is really not our business, like what we earn is none of theirs.....Transfer fee's are different they are transactions between club and club.

as I say, years ago we never mentioned wages.

e.g did anyone know Andy Gray's wages, or Peter Withe's wages....but they all knew the T/fee's

Edited January 6, 2020 by TRO

[sne]

Just now, TRO said:

Well, maybe I am showing my age....but when debating between fans, we never mentioned wages, it seems a relatively new thing.

What the earn, is really not our business.....Transfer fee's are different they are transactions between club and club.

as I say, years ago we never mentioned wages.

e.g did anyone know Andy Gray's wages, or Peter Withe's wages....but they all knew the T/fee's

But if the wage bill is around the £75m-£80m mark as it's been for us in recent years than surely it is a factor?

It wasn't the transfer fees alone that was making us go belly up.

 

[TRO]

2 minutes ago, sne said:

But if the wage bill is around the £75m-£80m mark as it's been for us in recent years than surely it is a factor?

It wasn't the transfer fees alone that was making us go belly up.

 

Its not the merits, I am commenting on , more the difference in modern debate.

I guess the astronomical rise in wages has made it more significant.

I but I still say Player T/fee's are easier establish with any accuracy than wages.

[Rob182]

5 minutes ago, TRO said:

Well, maybe I am showing my age....but when debating between fans, we never mentioned wages, it seems a relatively new thing.

What they earn, is really not our business, like what we earn is none of theirs.....Transfer fee's are different they are transactions between club and club.

as I say, years ago we never mentioned wages.

e.g did anyone know Andy Gray's wages, or Peter Withe's wages....but they all knew the T/fee's

It probably is a modern thing, just because wages have astronomically increased all-round, whereas players can still be bought for relatively peanuts.

The point this effects, is that at the start of a season a manager will (presumably) be given their budget, and it's upto them whether they use that budget for wages + fees (standard transfers) or wages and minimal fees (loans/free transfers).

We can't bash Smith with the 'he spent £130m' stick, whilst also not conceding that Bruce spent a large amount (for the championship) on wages that it's widely reported that Tammy, Snodgrass, Terry, Lansbury, Hogan (etc etc etc) received.

[TRO]

3 minutes ago, Rob182 said:

It probably is a modern thing, just because wages have astronomically increased all-round, whereas players can still be bought for relatively peanuts.

The point this effects, is that at the start of a season a manager will (presumably) be given their budget, and it's upto them whether they use that budget for wages + fees (standard transfers) or wages and minimal fees (loans/free transfers).

We can't bash Smith with the 'he spent £130m' stick, whilst also not conceding that Bruce spent a large amount (for the championship) on wages that it's widely reported that Tammy, Snodgrass, Terry, Lansbury, Hogan (etc etc etc) received.

but equally, we don't know, what wages are being paid now ,on top of the T/Fee's.

But I guess the c£ 180 million promotion Bonus/Award changes the landscape somewhat.

[sne]

6 minutes ago, TRO said:

Its not the merits, I am commenting on , more the difference in modern debate.

I guess the astronomical rise in wages has made it more significant.

I but I still say Player T/fee's are easier establish with any accuracy than wages.

These are the wages numbers we've handed in according to our financial reports.

 

[Keener window-cleaner]

10 minutes ago, TRO said:

Well, maybe I am showing my age....but when debating between fans, we never mentioned wages, it seems a relatively new thing.

What they earn, is really not our business, like what we earn is none of theirs.....Transfer fee's are different they are transactions between club and club.

as I say, years ago we never mentioned wages.

e.g did anyone know Andy Gray's wages, or Peter Withe's wages....but they all knew the T/fee's

That's an interesting observation, hadn't thought about it but I think you are right, there was far less focus on wages some time ago. I would guess it was the Bosman ruling that changed it, over night it gave the players much more power and a significant increase in wages, where part of what earlier would have been payed in transfer fee to the club instead went as a signing on fee and to wages to the player. Therefore inevitable that it would be more focus on the wages, the earlier transfer budget became more of a transfer/signing-on/wage-budget, hence of more interest to the fans to speculate how much money there is available for player aquisitions.

TV-revenue, agents etc probably playing it's part as well. Also with the astronomous outrageous wages that are paid today I think it is fair that supporters who contribute to these wages have a bigger interest in how the players are performing, if they deserve the money or not.

[KentVillan]

Just do the maths. £60k a week = £3.1m per year. If you ignore wages you might be ignoring half the cost of the player.

Quote

In the early 1980s, the percentage of clubs’ incomes that was spent on wages was typically around the low 40s. By 2008-09, it was 67 per cent in the Premier League, a sign of growing player power in their ability to demand money, and get it.

from https://www.sportingintelligence.com/2011/01/20/from-20-to-33868-per-week-a-quick-history-of-english-footballs-top-flight-wages-200101/

So that might explain why it was less of an issue for fans in the 70s and 80s.

I personally think people really started getting clued up on wages when you had a whole generation of football fans playing Championship Manager / Football Manager. You realise from playing that how important the club's wage bill is to your transfer and loan policy.

Also, football coverage in the media was a lot less detailed. Fans knew less about what was going on internally at clubs.

[Vive_La_Villa]

8 minutes ago, sne said:

These are the wages numbers we've handed in according to our financial reports.

 

It’s that second year wage bill that nearly destroyed the club. 

[lexicon]

Blues' wage to turnover last season... jesus. 

They're in trouble. What a shame etc. 

[TRO]

33 minutes ago, sne said:

But if the wage bill is around the £75m-£80m mark as it's been for us in recent years than surely it is a factor?

It wasn't the transfer fees alone that was making us go belly up.

 

but those wages were signed off by a fraudulent administration, we are in danger of drifting off the subject.....They were quite extraordinary circumstances.......maybe never to be repeated again....hopefully.

[sne]

3 minutes ago, TRO said:

They were quite extraordinary circumstances.......maybe never to be repeated again....hopefully.

This surely goes for whatever money we spent on transfer fees this season as well?

[TRO]

23 minutes ago, Keener window-cleaner said:

That's an interesting observation, hadn't thought about it but I think you are right, there was far less focus on wages some time ago. I would guess it was the Bosman ruling that changed it, over night it gave the players much more power and a significant increase in wages, where part of what earlier would have been payed in transfer fee to the club instead went as a signing on fee and to wages to the player. Therefore inevitable that it would be more focus on the wages, the earlier transfer budget became more of a transfer/signing-on/wage-budget, hence of more interest to the fans to speculate how much money there is available for player aquisitions.

TV-revenue, agents etc probably playing it's part as well. Also with the astronomous outrageous wages that are paid today I think it is fair that supporters who contribute to these wages have a bigger interest in how the players are performing, if they deserve the money or not.

Maybe, its the reason, I don't mention wages, old habits die hard.

I said to Ron Atkinson once " why don't you pay strikers per goal" Ron Said " Oh we have thought of that, but you would never sign anyone".

[TRO]

4 minutes ago, sne said:

This surely goes for whatever money we spent on transfer fees this season as well?

But we have far more stable and resourceful owners now , as opposed to a charade......plus we are spending the leagues money, I think....the £180 mill

unless someone who knows more about the money side, tells me different.

Edited January 6, 2020 by TRO

[sne]

3 minutes ago, TRO said:

But we have far more stable and resourceful owners now , as opposed to a charade......plus we are spending the leagues money, I think....the £180 mill

Unlike when we were spending the parachute money.

We had to sell the stadium ffs  

But we digress 

Edited January 6, 2020 by sne

[Vive_La_Villa]

Financially speaking I do wonder what the situation will be regarding ffp if we get relegated.  I guess big money sales such as Grealish will probably sort it out. 

[TRO]

31 minutes ago, KentVillan said:

Just do the maths. £60k a week = £3.1m per year. If you ignore wages you might be ignoring half the cost of the player.

from https://www.sportingintelligence.com/2011/01/20/from-20-to-33868-per-week-a-quick-history-of-english-footballs-top-flight-wages-200101/

So that might explain why it was less of an issue for fans in the 70s and 80s.

I personally think people really started getting clued up on wages when you had a whole generation of football fans playing Championship Manager / Football Manager. You realise from playing that how important the club's wage bill is to your transfer and loan policy.

Also, football coverage in the media was a lot less detailed. Fans knew less about what was going on internally at clubs.

yes it was.

I get the Maths.....But whilst I know what we spent in the summer, round about.......I have no idea what we spent on wages.

I guess we are football people, unless a fan is an accountant, who will show an interest in these things.

I just have to rely on the folk that run the club know what they are doing.

I understand That Dean Smith is a Head Coach as opposed to a Manager, so it could be he too, is limited in how much he knows about the finances available.....both for wages or Fee's

[Rob182]

11 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Financially speaking I do wonder what the situation will be regarding ffp if we get relegated.  I guess big money sales such as Grealish will probably sort it out. 

100%

We're in such a healthy position it's unreal, especially compared to the last time we dropped.

Most, if not all, of our summer signings have increased in value.

We would undoubtedly lose Grealish, and probably McGinn and Mings (and who would blame them, they deserve to be playing in the Prem). But they would bring in ridiculous amounts. Grealish £60m minimum? McGinn £40-50m? Mings £35-40m?

I'd hazard a guess that Douglas Luiz would also leave, as I just get the feeling he thinks the second division is beneath him.

Aside from the financial side, we'd have the team and squad to make an immediate promotion attempt. I can't imagine the likes of Targett/ Konsa/ Engels/ Hourihane/ Nakamba/ Trez/ El Ghazi (etc) going anywhere.

[TRO]

11 minutes ago, sne said:

Unlike when we were spending the parachute money.

We had to sell the stadium ffs  

But we digress 

That must have been such a stressful time, for those at the club that knew.

I think the Stadium was an FFP issue, that was addressed.

[markavfc40]

2 hours ago, TRO said:

 

Ps If my memory serves me correctly, Mark, you too at the time was rather balanced in your opinions of Bruce.

I was and still am in terms of acknowledging he stopped the rot and backwards trajectory and set us in the right direction.

In terms of Bruce, RDM, Wyness, Xia I am only wanting to relate back to them in terms of the legacy they left. A legacy which due to short term fixes meant we were unprepared for promotion and needed a huge turnover in playing personnel in the summer.  

As I and others have stated on numerous occasions a turnover of something approaching 30 players with 12 of those incoming always meant it was going to take time to gel and find some consistency as a team and for so many individuals, almost all of them new to this league, time to settle. We have given it 5 months and some are already on the head coaches back even though we sit outside the relegation zone in 17th a position that would be success come the end of the season.

Due to the legacy they inherited, having produced a minor miracle in getting us promoted, it was always going to be a tough ask to make so many changes and keep us up but hopefully with a couple more additions Smith can achieve that goal. If he does it will be up there as just as fine an achievement as getting us promoted.

 

Edited January 6, 2020 by markavfc40