http://www.dailystar.co.uk/sport/fo...ece-striker-Samaras-to-replace-Rickie-Lambert I wonder if Crook has been reading this forum......
http://redsloscf.blogspot.co.uk/ Piece from Saintsweb about advantages of loan deals to a club like Southampton with FPP problems. Didn't understand it fully, but does show problems experienced by our board (or the board of any club) that we fans are unaware of. We'd just go and buy players and be unaware of consequences. Does explain Kreuger's emphasis on the fact that our transfer income must also cover player wages etc and the need for increased commercial income (an area that he said Nicola overlooked). Is it just possible that the board is not so much incompetent as struggling to handle a very complicated situation. Also possible this a load of tosh (but having no accountancy experience I couldn't say).
He starts from the presupposition that we were right at the quasi-cap last year, based upon the fact that "total group wages" (the words in our released financial statement) totaled 47.1m in '12/'13, and we saw further rises. There's only one problem: those total group wages include more than just player wages, whereas the PL's FFP regs are restricted to the playing staff. Given that Cortese was making a fair bit and we had a large coaching and scouting staff, all of whom I believe would fall under the "total group wages", that shaves quite a bit of money off that figure. The Guardian had us 18th in total wage bill in '12/'13, for what it's worth. Consequently, we were likely nowhere near the cap, which makes sense when you think about it. We were working under the same wage cap as, say, West Ham, a club with more players on the books, many of whom were making much more than anyone in our squad. And while they barely squeezed under, squeeze under they did...yet somehow we were spending the same total? There may be many reasons we have done this, but profligacy in wages ain't one of them...we have been, if anything, one of the stingier teams in the PL in that regard.
Yeah was an interesting read, seems a lot of research went into it despite the wages being from football manager (which i'm not sure how accurate that is)
The only clear thing to me is that you buy before you sell. All we have done is allowed other clubs to enjoy settled pre seasons with the players they wanted in place while we are floundering around searching ever more desperately for replacements. Incompetent.
But when we lost the first three we had no manager / only just signed Ron. They then got speedy replacements for Lallana and Lambert. They didn't feel too anxious about Shaw because of Targett. We already have a Chambers replacement. We seem to know who we want instead of Lovren - but they aren't available until Wednesday. I am not sure there is anything incompetent there. The big problem is that we have started our pre-season late because a certain manager left us hanging for ages before ****ing off to North London.
Better to under promise? Oh come one, most people at moaning that they are 't telling us anything; can't quite see where they've over promised. Too many people are struggling to hold their water.
Oh FFS. I am getting pissed off with the bed wetting now. Show me the rule book that says you buy before you sell. Spuds did it last year yet everyone knew why. We had some bad player situations and the board decided to move them on quickly before they behaved even worse. We also had the situation where the manager left and we had to appoint a new one. All this put timings backs little while and so we have to ignore this "rule book" It is not ideal, but it is where we are. If we don't sign anyone by 2nd September then the board can be called incompetent and we can moan. Too many people just being sheep, reading some posters saying the sigungings aren't good and then moaning. The manager has signed two, one or two about to be announced on loan from Inter and more to follow. Just allow the manager and board the given time to get things done. Now come on, moan about me instead, because this post is arrogant, smug, and I must allow other people their opinion. Well this is my opinion! For the record it has taken us 2.5 years to sign Saint Davide and he still isn't here!
I would love every rumoured signing to be greeted with universal approval, because that would suggest the player was promising but not going to get depressed by negative views. Some may know about the players, but suspect others just pick up on the general view. How many can really be experts on European football and seen enough games including the target player to really have an expert view? I'm willing to accept that the club may know more than us, but, also bear in mind that even with a detailed investigation, clubs get it wrong as well. #sittingfirmlyonfence
I wouldn't say I have an "expert view" on anyone except Southampton players who I see play pretty much 38 times a season. Everything else is based on only a few games, but also reading the opinions of his current team's fans, which is a better way to do it than most. Tadic, for example, I can only remember seeing play a full game once, but I'm excited about him because of the glowing reviews he gets from Twente fans and Eredivisie fans in general.
European football (and even non-European football) is very accessible now as you can find a stream for just about anything. Bit bored? There's a football match on somewhere. I got excited about the Mayuka signing after streaming a bunch of Zambia games. Turns out I was wrong about that one (probably due to mentality more than ability), but still, I had a decent idea about his ability even though you had to watch Zambia or the Swiss league to have any clue about him.
That's not a bad way to judge, but even then it can be dangerous. Take our fans on this forum only; there is a huge disparity in the views on some of our own players. You only have to read a 'wrong' opinion (no opinion is really wrong - but you get my gist) *cough* Lyon fans *cough*
