IMO,Short isnt the problem, he has just been badly advised since Quinn left. Di Fanti was a complete screw up. Cognerton was a step in the right direction, but Sam doesnt want to work under the DoF model. Short needs to bring in another football knowledgeable person on the board to advise him, even if Maggie stays to advise on the business side of things. I wish big sam had been bought in at the end of last season, and DA left to his retirement. That additional transfer window under Sam would have meant us being in a much better position now. But he wasnt, and we cant change that now so I just have my fingers crossed that we can bring in a couple more players this window and we get enough points to survive by the end of the season.
From what I gather, Premier League rules state that wages can be increased by PL funds (including Sky Money) by £12m this season, providing you stay under the loss threshold for a three season period. This applies to clubs with a wage budget in excess of £60m, so maybe ES is trying to get below that figure? The loss threshold for a three season period is £105m for PL clubs but anything between £15m and £105m MUST be guaranteed by the club's owner. There's your club's issue. Your owner is probably having to guarantee every penny you spend now as you consistently post losses, so I'd imagine, he's guaranteeing any future club spends until you're back in the black. I'd imagine you're somewhere deep into the bracket £15-105m... I don't know your losses per season for the past three years, but I'd imagine they're pretty bleak to look at. Therefore, your owner has to guarantee these losses, as part of the rules... it's common sense that unless he wants to throw money down the drain he's not gonna keep pumping his own cash into the club. That tells you two things, A) Sam Allardyce's comment on the generosity of your owner is probably based around that and B) Anybody who thinks the players are to blame and the board is not, haven't a leg to stand on, the club has been mismanaged financially for too long and now you're in a position where it would appear your hands are tied. It's no good saying 'the loss is far greater if we go down'... it's also far, far greater if you continue to spend and go down. Spending won't guarantee safety.
And by Quinn. Imo it's the reckless spending under Bruce while Quinn was Chairman and Short was just owner which has season on season effected our budget. Coupled with bad business since this is the mess that is left.
That's the annoying thing. He hasn't often been badly advised. How many would have said O'Neill was no good? And when you look at Poyet's successes at Brighton he didn't look a bad choice either. Advocaat wowed the whole place, from players to board to admin to cleaners and had an excellent footballing pedigree. If you look at the overall structure, the under-21s are top, the under-18s are third, the ladies are 4th. Everything looks hunky-dory, and yet not even managers with records like Advocaat and O'Neill can make head nor tail of it at first team level! I think there has to be a consistent long-term problem in that first team dressing room. Not because I have a clue what it is, but simply because there's nowhere else to look.
All managers looked good on paper, all managers said the playing squad is the fundamental problem, All managers pleaded for funds. Has it been addressed? No. Ellis is listening to somebody I don't know about in regards to football matters because the very public advice from the football men he's hired has blatantly been ignored. I suspect his main advisers aren't football savy in the slightest. It's his fault alright...imo, It's his company. Buck always stops with him as it would with an owner of any company.
Whoever is 'advising him' whether it be good/bad advice, he must have put them their in the first place, so yes it's ultimately his fault. If the MD of a company employs someone who does a **** job, the buck stops with them as they're in charge of the whole organisation. It's then their job to employ someone competent. We've taken one step in the right direction in Big Sam IMO, it's time to back him.
Correct he hasnt brought in the wrong managers (at the time) hindsight is a wonderful thing. DA came back. He knew what the squad was weak as piss and said **** it. Obviously the funds were not forth coming. Now we have SA. Sam i want to do my transfer business early. 25 days later we are no better of. One week to go. But over three wasted so far. Something is amiss.
That's the thing though. the funds must have been available for Advocaat - Fer, Lombaerts, Coates and Simpson were all at the AOL in the first couple of weeks, so their clubs must have accepted our offer to get them here. The problem hasn't been the lack of funds available - between 2003 and 2014 we were the seventh biggest PL net-spenders! The cash has been there, consistently for years. It's been badly spent - or so it looks. But that doesn't hold water either. Since 2011, we've had Bruce/Quinn, O'Neill, Di Canio/Di Fanti, Poyet/di Fanti, Poyet/Congerton, Advocaat/Congerton. A lot of those guys have damn good records. Are we saying they ALL spent badly? Either that or a good signing turned bad when it got here. And if it's turned bad when it got here, what's the common denominator? That's what we need to figure out.
Well there's 3 players who have played under all those managers. O'Shea, Brown and Cattermole. I'm not saying there is a rotten core, but if there is then these 3 have to be at the heart of it.
Ellis Short has been here over all those managers. The investment has been **** and got progressively worse imo. To many squad players not enough players who improve the starting lineup, too many players on first team wages out of the first team picture. We've been fighting the wage bill problems since Bruce left. I think it's simply the case that season on season the wage bill has servery debilitated us in improving the first team. This has led to risks on injury prone players, and the recruitment of unwanted players who aren't playing, or loans. We can't compete with our rivals because of this so we're instantly out of the running for in demand players. Short thinks his precious wage structure is more important than Premier League survival which is why year on year we face this scrap and our squad becomes weaker than our rival. Short let Quinn and Bruce go radged, got bitten and gone from one extreme to the other. The wage structure and Short are the common denominator imo. Just my opinion like, and I'm not saying we should let the wage bill get out of hand, just better judgement in how and when to invest in the squad. Take this Summer for example, it was the Summer to gamble and break the wage structure. But for me the biggest gamble was not to invest heavily. We'll likely go down because we didn't. Mags half had the right idea. Mike knew he needed to invest. Problem is he's stuck with a failing transfer policy
Agreed mate and also take into account the fact that the so called bigger players don't want to come to Sunderland and that increases the problem IMO the squad needs a full restructure. Get rid of the crocks, the aged, the not good enough and start again. (if we go down) Also IMO, it was the Bruce era that started all this and subsequent managers tried and failed to pick up the pieces.
Another element is player contracts, long term planning equals four year contract at a suitable wage. Player does not work out but can't or won't move on because no-one else will match is contractual wage. Sign them for free but you can bet that there will be a signing on fee, probably payable over the length of contract, and the player therefore holds all the cards. Club cannot win unless the team is a success or the player is totally happy. Even the richer clubs suffer as they change the better quality of player for inflated prices. We are between a rock and a hard place whichever way we go, and if the likes of Real Madrid and Barcelona can fall foul of FFP, how long befor PSG or ManC fall foul.Finally there is player banking as done by Chelsea, who develop or buy a player so nobody else can, then loan him out. We pick up what's is left.
