Bring in some High Earners

[smetrov]

Reducing the wage bill , clearing out the deadwood, call it what you will - this 'policy' is only leading us down the divisions - if by some miracle we escape this season - we will be in exactly the same position next season.

 

I know we can't sign anyone now - but long term we don't need to shift the big earners - we need to add some.

[sir_gary_cahill]

Agree with you smetrov we've acted like a championship side for the past 2 years imo

[Mantis]

Wouldn't the best approach be to bring in some quality experienced players (low wages or high) as opposed to just bringing in high earners for the sake of it? Look at how that worked out for QPR.

[smetrov]

Wouldn't the best approach be to bring in some quality experienced players (low wages or high) as opposed to just bringing in high earners for the sake of it? Look at how that worked out for QPR.

 

yes fair point. What I am trying to say is in the long term you get what you pay for. The going rate for a prem player is £40k per week - you will get the odd discrepancy either way - But unless we pay those wages we will slide down the divisions - be it this season or next.

 

As you say it isn't working for QPR - but equally the over prudent approach isn't working for us.

[Mantis]

Well then shouldn't the topic be "bring in some proven quality players"? That's what we really need.

Edited February 23, 2013 by Mantis

[AVFCforever1991]

Wouldn't fancy doing a QPR.

[smetrov]

Well then shouldn't the topic be "bring in some proven quality players"? That's what we really need.

 

Yep. Again fair point. I just think that too many fans have been taken in - by the need to cut costs, 'clear out the deadwood',' get rid of the high earners'  - If you look a little more closely  that isn't what we should be doing at all - and that's whats fundamentally wrong at our club - until it changes we won't see any improvement.  

[Mantis]

We do need to get rid of a lot of players though. We have a back-up goalkeeper on 50k a week, Dunne's been sitting on 50k a week yet he hasn't kicked a ball for us this season. Ireland is on something like 60k a week when he's hardly playing and probably only worth about a tenth of what he's on (he's shit). Bent clearly isn't in the manager's plans so there's no point having your highest earner warming the bench.

 

The problem wasn't that we were trying to shift these players but that we didn't spend big in January. Clearly Lerner wants these players gone before we can get in anymore players who will play for more than peanuts and that's where he's got it wrong.

[Woodytom]

It has nothing to do with how much they earn. High earners or low earners - if the players are awful - you wont be successful.

[Woodytom]

We do need to get rid of a lot of players though. We have a back-up goalkeeper on 50k a week, Dunne's been sitting on 50k a week yet he hasn't kicked a ball for us this season. Ireland is on something like 60k a week when he's hardly playing and probably only worth about a tenth of what he's on (he's shit). Bent clearly isn't in the manager's plans so there's no point having your highest earner warming the bench.

 

The problem wasn't that we were trying to shift these players but that we didn't spend big in January. Clearly Lerner wants these players gone before we can get in anymore players who will play for more than peanuts and that's where he's got it wrong.

 

 

I just dont understand how you can say he has got it wrong in January. Hes got it absolutely bang on. 

 

The biggest mistake Randy lerner made was giving O'Neill the reigns and spending shitloads. He has learnt from that mistake and people jump on his back for doing the opposite.

 

We are not suffering from Randys lack of spending. We are suffering from the mess he and O'Neill made - when ironically (given the nature of this thread) we brought in high earners.

[ryanvilla_1994]

If we bring in high earners they have to be worth the wages. Not like Given, Dunne, Bent and Ireland who are worth no where near their ridiculous salaries

[Mantis]

We do need to get rid of a lot of players though. We have a back-up goalkeeper on 50k a week, Dunne's been sitting on 50k a week yet he hasn't kicked a ball for us this season. Ireland is on something like 60k a week when he's hardly playing and probably only worth about a tenth of what he's on (he's shit). Bent clearly isn't in the manager's plans so there's no point having your highest earner warming the bench.

 

The problem wasn't that we were trying to shift these players but that we didn't spend big in January. Clearly Lerner wants these players gone before we can get in anymore players who will play for more than peanuts and that's where he's got it wrong.

 

 

I just dont understand how you can say he has got it wrong in January. Hes got it absolutely bang on. 

 

The biggest mistake Randy lerner made was giving O'Neill the reigns and spending shitloads. He has learnt from that mistake and people jump on his back for doing the opposite.

 

We are not suffering from Randys lack of spending. We are suffering from the mess he and O'Neill made - when ironically (given the nature of this thread) we brought in high earners.

Because we desperately needed some quality (or at least some semi-decent players) yet clearly we just don't have the wages. Sylla and Dawkins probably aren't even on 25k combined.

 

I agree with you that the biggest mistake he made was giving O'Neill a free-reign, but I never said that Lerner's cost-cutting policy was wrong, just that it was wrong to not spend much money this January.

Edited February 23, 2013 by Mantis

[StefanAVFC]

What a nonsense.

 

We need more experience, not higher earners. Rubbish thread.

[Woodytom]

 

We do need to get rid of a lot of players though. We have a back-up goalkeeper on 50k a week, Dunne's been sitting on 50k a week yet he hasn't kicked a ball for us this season. Ireland is on something like 60k a week when he's hardly playing and probably only worth about a tenth of what he's on (he's shit). Bent clearly isn't in the manager's plans so there's no point having your highest earner warming the bench.

 

The problem wasn't that we were trying to shift these players but that we didn't spend big in January. Clearly Lerner wants these players gone before we can get in anymore players who will play for more than peanuts and that's where he's got it wrong.

 

 

I just dont understand how you can say he has got it wrong in January. Hes got it absolutely bang on. 

 

The biggest mistake Randy lerner made was giving O'Neill the reigns and spending shitloads. He has learnt from that mistake and people jump on his back for doing the opposite.

 

We are not suffering from Randys lack of spending. We are suffering from the mess he and O'Neill made - when ironically (given the nature of this thread) we brought in high earners.

Because we desperately needed some quality (or at least some semi-decent players) yet clearly we just don't have the wages. Sylla and Dawkins probably aren't even on 25k combined.

 

I agree with you that the biggest mistake he gave was giving O'Neill a free-reign, but I never said that Lerner's cost-cutting policy was wrong, just that it was wrong to not spend much money this January.

 

Well surely spending money would go against the cost cutting policy that you agree is right?

 

I genuinely believe some people (Not you btw) still dont fully understand the shocking position we were in financially. When you consider the clubs who have been in similar positions - Leeds/Pompy/West Ham, I think it is a positive that we havent already been relegated. When you consider the necessary cost cutting that was needed/has happened it seems almost impossible to think we could have been any better than we have been - though bad manager/player choices havent helped there either.

 

Is there a club people can think of that have gone under extreme cost cutting policies that havent dropped like a stone? Valencia?

[Mantis]

 

 

We do need to get rid of a lot of players though. We have a back-up goalkeeper on 50k a week, Dunne's been sitting on 50k a week yet he hasn't kicked a ball for us this season. Ireland is on something like 60k a week when he's hardly playing and probably only worth about a tenth of what he's on (he's shit). Bent clearly isn't in the manager's plans so there's no point having your highest earner warming the bench.

 

The problem wasn't that we were trying to shift these players but that we didn't spend big in January. Clearly Lerner wants these players gone before we can get in anymore players who will play for more than peanuts and that's where he's got it wrong.

 

 

I just dont understand how you can say he has got it wrong in January. Hes got it absolutely bang on. 

 

The biggest mistake Randy lerner made was giving O'Neill the reigns and spending shitloads. He has learnt from that mistake and people jump on his back for doing the opposite.

 

We are not suffering from Randys lack of spending. We are suffering from the mess he and O'Neill made - when ironically (given the nature of this thread) we brought in high earners.

Because we desperately needed some quality (or at least some semi-decent players) yet clearly we just don't have the wages. Sylla and Dawkins probably aren't even on 25k combined.

 

I agree with you that the biggest mistake he gave was giving O'Neill a free-reign, but I never said that Lerner's cost-cutting policy was wrong, just that it was wrong to not spend much money this January.

 

Well surely spending money would go against the cost cutting policy that you agree is right?

 

I genuinely believe some people (Not you btw) still dont fully understand the shocking position we were in financially. When you consider the clubs who have been in similar positions - Leeds/Pompy/West Ham, I think it is a positive that we havent already been relegated. When you consider the necessary cost cutting that was needed/has happened it seems almost impossible to think we could have been any better than we have been - though bad manager/player choices havent helped there either.

 

Is there a club people can think of that have gone under extreme cost cutting policies that havent dropped like a stone? Valencia?

Sometimes spending a little more money can save money in the long run. The TV money goes up next year and I'm pretty sure being relegated will cost us big time. We didn't necessarily need to go out and spend like we did two years ago (Bent and Makoun) but we did need some reinforcements and we didn't really get them.

[Woodytom]

 

 

 

We do need to get rid of a lot of players though. We have a back-up goalkeeper on 50k a week, Dunne's been sitting on 50k a week yet he hasn't kicked a ball for us this season. Ireland is on something like 60k a week when he's hardly playing and probably only worth about a tenth of what he's on (he's shit). Bent clearly isn't in the manager's plans so there's no point having your highest earner warming the bench.

 

The problem wasn't that we were trying to shift these players but that we didn't spend big in January. Clearly Lerner wants these players gone before we can get in anymore players who will play for more than peanuts and that's where he's got it wrong.

 

 

I just dont understand how you can say he has got it wrong in January. Hes got it absolutely bang on. 

 

The biggest mistake Randy lerner made was giving O'Neill the reigns and spending shitloads. He has learnt from that mistake and people jump on his back for doing the opposite.

 

We are not suffering from Randys lack of spending. We are suffering from the mess he and O'Neill made - when ironically (given the nature of this thread) we brought in high earners.

Because we desperately needed some quality (or at least some semi-decent players) yet clearly we just don't have the wages. Sylla and Dawkins probably aren't even on 25k combined.

 

I agree with you that the biggest mistake he gave was giving O'Neill a free-reign, but I never said that Lerner's cost-cutting policy was wrong, just that it was wrong to not spend much money this January.

 

Well surely spending money would go against the cost cutting policy that you agree is right?

 

I genuinely believe some people (Not you btw) still dont fully understand the shocking position we were in financially. When you consider the clubs who have been in similar positions - Leeds/Pompy/West Ham, I think it is a positive that we havent already been relegated. When you consider the necessary cost cutting that was needed/has happened it seems almost impossible to think we could have been any better than we have been - though bad manager/player choices havent helped there either.

 

Is there a club people can think of that have gone under extreme cost cutting policies that havent dropped like a stone? Valencia?

Sometimes spending a little more money can save money in the long run. The TV money goes up next year and I'm pretty sure being relegated will cost us big time. We didn't necessarily need to go out and spend like we did two years ago (Bent and Makoun) but we did need some reinforcements and we didn't really get them.

 

No, I cant argue that January was disappointing. I expected a bit more, but think sales (or lack of) was the reason.

 

The Tv money is a bit of a funny one with me. And I say this, with no intention of promoting relegation, as I of course want to stay up......

 

I think the risk was too big for the reward. I really do....

 

Not spend and stay up - we need to spend (but have more/should have more money to play with)

Spend and stay up - we need to spend (less money to spend)

 

Not spend and go down - you would hope that appropriate player sales and keeping the core of the team (incl Lambert for stability) would give us hope.

Spend and go down - We are ****!!!!

 

Now, I really dont think staying in the prem and having to spend a load of money to avoid another scrap is worth the risk of being ****!!!!

[Mantis]

There is an in-between. I wasn't advocating doing what QPR ddid.

[Woodytom]

There is an in-between. I wasn't advocating doing what QPR ddid.

 

 

No I appreciate that, but I was genuinely pleased that having heard Sissoko wanted 70k, we didnt sign him. I think our position is a lot more precarious than QPR's

 

Half of my problem with the spending is that I believe Lamberts biggest weakness is his transfers. 

[smetrov]

 

 

We do need to get rid of a lot of players though. We have a back-up goalkeeper on 50k a week, Dunne's been sitting on 50k a week yet he hasn't kicked a ball for us this season. Ireland is on something like 60k a week when he's hardly playing and probably only worth about a tenth of what he's on (he's shit). Bent clearly isn't in the manager's plans so there's no point having your highest earner warming the bench.

 

The problem wasn't that we were trying to shift these players but that we didn't spend big in January. Clearly Lerner wants these players gone before we can get in anymore players who will play for more than peanuts and that's where he's got it wrong.

 

 

I just dont understand how you can say he has got it wrong in January. Hes got it absolutely bang on. 

 

The biggest mistake Randy lerner made was giving O'Neill the reigns and spending shitloads. He has learnt from that mistake and people jump on his back for doing the opposite.

 

We are not suffering from Randys lack of spending. We are suffering from the mess he and O'Neill made - when ironically (given the nature of this thread) we brought in high earners.

Because we desperately needed some quality (or at least some semi-decent players) yet clearly we just don't have the wages. Sylla and Dawkins probably aren't even on 25k combined.

 

I agree with you that the biggest mistake he gave was giving O'Neill a free-reign, but I never said that Lerner's cost-cutting policy was wrong, just that it was wrong to not spend much money this January.

 

Well surely spending money would go against the cost cutting policy that you agree is right?

 

I genuinely believe some people (Not you btw) still dont fully understand the shocking position we were in financially. When you consider the clubs who have been in similar positions - Leeds/Pompy/West Ham, I think it is a positive that we havent already been relegated. When you consider the necessary cost cutting that was needed/has happened it seems almost impossible to think we could have been any better than we have been - though bad manager/player choices havent helped there either.

 

Is there a club people can think of that have gone under extreme cost cutting policies that havent dropped like a stone? Valencia?

 

But we aren't anywhere near going bankrupt - in relative terms I don't be believe we went on a spending spree ala Leeds or Portsmouth. For all the money wasted on wages, there's players we have sold at a profit.

 

The cost cutting is self defeating, if we get relegated - the cost to getting us back to being an established premiership side, will massively outweigh the savings we made by signing Sylla over Sisokko (for example).

 

Lerner may think he can cut costs, and recoup his losses, relegating us along the way - but the drop in the value of his investment will massively will wipe out his short term gains  

[Mantis]

I guess a lot of this will depend on whether we reinvest the money made from selling Benteke + any others. We could be looking at £20-£30m overall and we should hopefully have the likes of Given, Dunne, Hutton, Bent and Ireland off the wage bill too.