An interesting argument Westy, but I firmly believe that if you have a strong, competitive transfer and wage budget, then you can only increase your chances of promotion, especially if you have the right manager. Firstly, you rightly look at clubs that have spent money this season, but failed to make the cut. Some of the wages being shelled out to players mentioned is nothing short of disgraceful at this level, but most of those sides listed had recent Premier League exposure, so it's going to be difficult to shift your high earners if nobody else wants them, from a club perspective. You're also correct in stating that both Roy Keane and Paul Jewell (to an extent) shelled out millions but failed. However, I think that point offers more of a reflection on Keane and Jewell's managerial failings overall rather than an inherent flaw with a high-spending transfer policy. Sure, they didn't spend money well, and that's a factor for their failure. Yet, in short, spending money does not necessarily make you a bad side. After all, we should look at the clubs that have been promoted over the past five or six years, for the sake of a balanced argument. You'll notice that they all spent money and, in most cases, quite a lot of it. Last season, Bournemouth broke the FFP ruling to get promoted, Watford benefited from a board that owns sides in both Italy and Spain, and of course our feathered friends from across the border have spent millions both last summer and back in their promotion campaign of 2010, to build the squad that they have today. Among the previous few seasons, Leicester City finished champions after a couple years of heavy spending and QPR infamously spent well above their means to achieve promotion twice. There are also the likes of West Ham, Southampton, Reading, Cardiff City and Hull City; all big-spenders in their promotion-winning campaigns, with Hull blowing £2.5m on one striker! Even clubs that are perceived to have gone up on a 'shoestring budget' have spent money. Crystal Palace spent over a million quid just a few years ago to win the play-offs and plucky Burnley, as the media liked to portray them, benefited from spending a reported half a million on Ashley Barnes. It's not a lot, granted, but allied with their deep wage budgets to fund several free signings, they invested in promotion. Now I would never condone a transfer policy where we spend more than our means. After all, like many professional clubs in Europe, we are in debt and that cannot be a sustainable economic model for the future. We also don't have a strong revenue, so we cannot make money like city-based clubs. There is FFP, although I'd argue with its recent amendment, it comes across more like a defanged grass snake than an intimidating cobra, especially if QPR avoid paying that massive fine. I don't think a majority of us are saying we should spend millions for the sake of it. After all, McCarthy makes the transfers. However, I feel our main concern is that with a depleted budget, Mick will not be able to bring in some of his targets. Now, you'll argue that's part of working under a budget, and he has done well under the confines thus far. I feel, and I'm sure others will agree, that we overachieved last season by sealing a play-off place. That's to be applauded of course, but should we make money on potential Murphy or Mings deals, then I feel it's only fair and realistic to expect that McCarthy should see a few million reinvested in the transfer budget. After all, when he got Wolves promoted as champions, he spent millions doing it.
" An interesting argument Westy, but I firmly believe that if you have a strong, competitive transfer and wage budget, then you can only increase your chances of promotion, especially if you have the right manager. " Essentially this in a nutshell - I guess that goes with any industry. I suppose unlike Jewell/Keane/Magilton I would trust Mick, as I would with Royle with ££££ to get the right signings. 04.05 with some investment Royle would have got us up - 05/06 I think we'd have made play offs had we had the ££££ for Fuller/ could have signed another striker on loan when Parkin/ Forster wasn't going down. We'll have to see. The good thing about Mick, is while I'm not adverse to us spending ££££, I know that should we not spend much this summer, we'll be top 9 somewhere and fully competitive. Should there be no transfer budget, he'll get 2/3 absolute gems on frees. So I look forward to this season with every hope we'll be there or there abouts.
It's not about the cost of the player its about the talent of the player..........would people be happier if we had paid 2m for Berra 3m for Goldy 1m for Mings 1m for Sears 17.5m for Skuse........... I hope we bring one or two first team regulars in before the new season but I don't care how much they cost as long as they make the team better.
My main concern this summer isn't "we must spend millions to achieve promotion" but "we must provide a competitive transfer budget". Obviously we don't know McCarthy's transfer plans for this window, but I would think, realistically, he'd prefer money to spend (should the right target be identified) rather than hunt around the released players pile for the third consecutive year (Sears aside). As it stands, demanding millions for a budget is overly hopeful, considering our recovering finances from the Keane/Jewell years. However, should we sell a first-team regular, or two, for millions, then most of that money should be reinvested into the squad if we're serious about promotion as, recent history suggests, replacing talent with freebies is not the way to win promotion at this level. We had a brilliant season, but we evidently overachieved. I feel we risk going backwards if we sell good players and fail to replace them with proven quality. More often than not, that requires spending cash.
I think when you take into account our minimal spending, the lack of strength in-depth, and the quality of our squad (on paper), then play-offs was a massive achievement. Not to mention, the media had us at mid-table and our predictions on here last summer mostly acknowledged that play-offs would make for a good season.
We exactly achieved promotion the year we didn't spend anything! Under Sven we spent £15M and finished 9th, Pearson spent around £5M and we finished 6th. And the next season we signed free agents and signed Dean Hammond and Riyad Mahrez for less then 500K using money from player sales with still over £1M to spare Money makes things easier but doesnt guarantee success. Mick's doing a good job for you lot but it might take another year or 2 for him to get you up but thats better then what you had before
Point taken Proud Fox. I don't mean to sound pedantic, but you technically still bought players that window, even if it was offset by player sales. Also, how far did that investment from Sven and Pearson go towards improving the quality and depth of your squad? The point I was making, in relation to our club, is that from a financial perspective, we have not had any real investment for two/three years now. I'm not saying that spending money will guarantee promotion, but that all promoted clubs have spent some kind of money to get there. Thankfully, the sale of Mings and the promise that the money will be reinvested does allay my concerns. Relying on loanees and freebies, in this division, only gets you so far.
Most of Sven's signings was shown the door by Pearson. Of Sven's signings Pearson along kept Nugent, Schmeichel and Konchesky and he sold the rest so the actually team that did get us promoted didn't cost nowhere near as the media like people to believe or you would imagine
Fair enough, I'll admit I was harsh suggesting you 'spent heavily'. I agree that Mick is doing a good job, I'm often a vocal supporter of our manager on these boards. How do you reckon you'll do next season?
The media labelled us as big spending and its stuck even when we don't spend money I would take a comfortable season finishing around 12th. So far we have signed 3 established players in Christian Fuchs, Robert Huth and Shinji Okazaki which is different to taking some gambles from the championship. They still come with risks of course but they are proven internationals with Fuchs has champions league experience. Huth was massive for us last season and were still after another 3 or 4 more players The big rumour today is Cambiasso has agreed to stay and Schlupp signed a new contract this morning so things are looking up I hope you lot go the extra step this year and make it to the Prem, I have always liked Mick and I think he is more then capable of getting you up without spending, just takes time. All the best for the new season lads
" I think when you take into account our minimal spending, the lack of strength in-depth, and the quality of our squad (on paper), then play-offs was a massive achievement. " We did have a top 6 wage bill last season!
