That's unkind of you, you really should give him the credit he deserves, as he appears to try very hard to be stupid ...
Steve Bruce
- Thread starter Chazz Rheinhold
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
That's unkind of you, you really should give him the credit he deserves, as he appears to try very hard to be stupid ...
You've not counted? So you count less time on the millions special t than someone that has.
This season we had the most expensive squad and highest wage bill in the Championship, that simply wasn't the case in 2007-08, there were several teams with much more expensive squads. West Brom alone signed 14 players that season, Brunt £3m, Barnett £2.5m, Morrison £1.5m, Pele £1m, they were trading at a whole different level.
You've not counted? So you count less time on the millions special t than someone that has.
I actually dont know what this sentence means.
That i can count? And who is "we"?
Australian comedy has reached new depths since Paul Hogan hung up his cork hat.
did that detract from the fact that Brown still spent the most money for a Hull City manager at the time then ?????
No, obviously not. But your post suggested that Brownie had been in the same situation as Bruce and that inflation was the responsible for the difference in the level of spending, I was just pointing out that wasn't the case.
How does that work then, the response i made was in relation to people suggesting that Bruce had spent the most on players in the clubs history, at the time so did Brown, so what is your point ?
Not at all, I was pointing out that Brown at that time had spent the most, now it`s Bruce, and I`m fairly certain that when Bruce is replaced then the incoming manager will again spend more then Bruce, its the way football has evolved into a financial spiral upwards
My point being no one is singing from the rooftops about brown. At varying points a number of managers held that record, so I'd ask what your point is?
You're implying the only reason Bruce has spent more is inflation when that's simply not true. In browns two seasons I'd wager we spent similar or less than most of our immediate competitors. Bruce spent a lot more relatively speaking.
The other salient point that people are skirting over is that we earned more money during Bruce's reign than at any other time in our history. Surely the best comparison would be who spent the most in terms of percentage of club income?
Of course working that out is nigh on impossible. The figures must be countless.