Most of this is the same stuff we have been hearing for the last few weeks, but the point at the bottom regarding our net spend over the last two years actually surprised me: http://www.sunderlandecho.com/sport...and_boss_bruce_holds_transfer_talks_1_3408724 Can't copy and paste so can someone do the honors? I had no idea we had only spent ã20m over the course of the last two years. As the article reads, I think ã20m to transfer a club that barely survived relegation to a side finishing in the top half is a decent result to be fair. Admittedly, the gross use of loan signings has left us in a weakened position overall, but given those figures I think we could expect to see a fairly hefty investment this summer
I have been saying this for weeks on here, just no one listens lol 2009/2010 -21.846.000 ã Loss 2010/2011 12.210.000 ã Profit So its actually closer to spending 9 million than the 20.
Just hope Mr Ellis Short does dig deep. Can't think why he should but ã40 m would be nice. Think thats enough to kick on, peeps?
I think somewhere in that region would be exactly what we need, and not out of the question. ES is obviously an extremely switched on investor, and in the long run he will see the club as being worth more now than when he took over. I would imagine the purchase of new, higher quality players would be seen by someone with his business acumen as an investment rather can a cost, so I am quietly confident of seeing some big changes in the near future.
That's a tough one for me. Personally, I think he would be a good buy. He's young, strong, fit, quick, and has loads of potential. But I would want to see him playing in CB rather than at RB. For the money they are talking about for him, I would probably rather see Roger Johnson from Brum to be honest. As for LB, I say stick with Hamish. It is no secret there is a right load of **** out there at the moment, and if we can focus on bringing in a top quality LW then I don't see Bardsley being a problem at the back
I may be wrong, but last I heard it was about ã8-9m I would think we would get Johnson for a fair bit less than that
Decent link, Aussie. Thanks. Nobody outside the club knows for sure what the net total outlay has been. Like Steve Walton alluded to, loan transfers apparently can be very costly. But you make a good point about ES's possible take on his asset value in light of 10th rather than relegation survivors. 16th, 13th, 10th . . . 7th does not seem unrealistic for next season. He might argue that we would have been 7th or 8th this year if SB had managed to keep the bulk of his troops fit. We shall see what targets SB goes for over the next three (long) months. Here is where we part company I fear. We are losing maybe 15% of our attacking capability because we don't have a left footed LB who can swing in crosses from the bye line. I think this is a priority TBH.
Think the price was closer to ã6m but not 100% sure, he's worth that easily, just for his versatility across the back.
It all depends how the club wants to play it really, this 3 years and you must be in profit thing, pretty sure that comes into force the season after next, so 3 years previous from 2 years time, so it includes the season just gone. 75% of our turnover goes on wages, but then we did have Bent, Heally, Murphy etc when those figures were done, so that may be a little bit less now. But if we do get 8-9 players, that could very well mean 75% + next year of our turnover is wages. we made 12 million this year, if Short puts in ã40 million and we dont sell anyone, then thats a 28 million shortfall, but if we make Europe, we can play in it, the season after, if we dont make that 28 million back, and we get into Europe, we will get kicked out, as we havnt made a profit. But then the Club may have a new revised 5 year plan, Short spends this seasn and next (looking for improvements) then hang around the top 10 for the next 3 years, dont spend much = profit for the past 3 years, = Europe (i think thats how it works anyway lol)
Good read and nice to have something to poke the mags with when they tell us we've spent loads and should be higher.
Up here we can get the Football Echo on a Saturday but no Sunderland Echo at all. Have to go on line to read it
For while he has spent around ã55m in his time on Wearside, he has recouped approximately ã35m in transfers the other way. is that the bit you were on about?
Well that artical is wrong anyway, only made 35 million profit in 2 years. Bent = 24 Jones = 8 Cana = 3.5-5 Murphy = 1.5 Waghorn = 3 there is 40 and thats just from this season, last season we had Collins = 3 Chopra = 5 Whitehead = 3 leadbitter = 2.5 Mcshane = 2 Edwards = 1.5 halford = 2 there is another 18 million, they havnt even added the Bent sale onto that story.
I don't understand why we are thinking about centre backs all the time. The partnership of Turner and Bramble is the preferred choice. It was working well until one and then both got injured. Mensah is a lame duck; always injured. Onouha provides cover but can play at RB. The issue for me is about the full back situation. Now that Bardsley has made the LB position his own and doing well, would it not make sense to sign a proper left back and reduce the number of players who are out of position? We've had a huge part of the season when you would consider both FBs to be out of their natural position.
Agree with the full backs just think Turner not good enough. Good squad player but believe we can get better. eg R.Johnson, Brum.
