Same old broken record........ I am still not sure about Bendtner to be honest, his goal return has hardly been fantastic. Bruce outs will always spin any situation so its Bruce's fault, Bruce ins will do the opposite. I don't think there is much to be gained from it at the moment so I just hope we win every game and Bruce proves us wrong. If he goes I will put my support behind the new guy. I think we will see Shorts intentions in January.
Never heard Cest speak so much sense, Cyprusmackem, how can you defend Bruce over this? He constantly buys short term fixes. If he invested in a player who can play now and in 5 years time a la Long/Graham, you get the best of both worlds. No brainer.
Football is so easy when you put it like that.. Lets say we buy a Long or a Graham, they have a blinding six months and get offered three times the pay at Liverpool in the summer. Off they go without so much as a goodbye. I think we may get people on here complaining of "Bruce and his short term fixes".
Do you know what the wage limit is at SAFC at the moment? If we did manage to buy one player after another that played so well that this led to Liverpool et al putting in an offer to triple his wages, then its fair to say that we would at the very least double our initial investment and this would therefore allow us to pay higher wages and keep 'better players' longer. We would also be likely to having an enjoyable season by watching us scoring goals. The alternative is to forever rely on loans, loans which may or may not be successful. A policy that leads to a continuous state of squad 'rebuilding' and zero income. Which is the better philosophy?
You know very well the club don't give out info on transfer monies. That said Quinny said we couldn't match Bent's pay at Villa or Gyan's in the heat. We only have one on lone don't we? Good thing about loans is you can give them back if they are ****e. Any good try to buy but our wage cap is limiting us somewhat. I wish elmo was on loan...
Well your argueing why it is no different to buy players with the intention to keep them for the long-term and then selling them on for double the money if they are excellent (assuming we choose to sell) as being inferior to paying a loan fee for a player which is returned for nada. I'm afraid I just cannot see what it is your trying to explain to me improves stability or brings in more capital. Oh, I wish Bruce was on loan.
This, surely a permanent signing who you sell for more 2 years down the line, is better than bringing in a loan every year?
Not at all. I'm saying there is a place for both. We couldn't afford to buy Bendy so we tried the next best thing. In the long run we Either raise our wage cap or stay average at best. That reality wont change, no matter who the manager is.
Nope, the next best thing would have been to BUY SOMEBODY else, there you go again claiming that a short term loan is better than buying someone who will have a greater sell on value.
Martin O'Neill guided Leicester City to two league cup victories and a losing appearance in the final all within 4 years. A club that hasn't won anything and were also relegated from the premier league after O'Neill departed. He also broke a 10 year stangleghold that Rangers had over Celtic and won the Scottish league for 3 from 5 years immediately after he was appointed. I'd suggest to you that it does make a difference who the manager is. If your arguement is to state that it doesn't matter who the manager is then what you are saying is that its ok to get rid of Bruce and I tend to agree.
I agree a manager does make a big difference, under Keane we were relegation fodder, under McCarthy we had the lowest ever points total in the EPL, under Wilkinson we were probably the worst side the EPL has ever seen. Bruce comes along and takes us to 10th signing quality players and everyone wants him sacked. I remember when everyone wanted Reid sacked, it happened and we went into free fall.
To be fair, Bruce has spent absolutely loads of money for little progress from Keane to be honest. It's only the sale of 2 players who cost way over the odds that makes his balance sheet look good. And at least you won a derby with Keane.
Keane spent a fortune too, 10 million for Ferdinand, 10 million for Gordon are just 2 off the top of my head, then there was the likes of McCartney etc.... Keaneprobably spent more than Bruce.
Any team in the Premiership could win a cup. We did it from a division down. Only 2 maybe 3 can win the Premiership. Is it because they have the best managers? Maybe. Or could it be they have the best players earning the best wages? Personally I don't care if Bruce stays or goes. I just don't think it will make that much difference to our fortunes apart from having to pay a huge settlement fee.
Got to agree, Vegas, I cannot see how many supporters are viewing the current situation as being so bad. We have been through much worse runs in recent years, especially at home. In most games, this season, we've had a fighting chance. But, at the end of each match, the general opinion has been that we were rubbish. We have had some decent performances but I feel many are loathe to acknowledge the fact - if only we had the good old days of the McCarthy & Keane years
Its either short memories or people new to supporting the club, lets face it before Reid we were poor for a long time, after Reid we were poor for a long time, Keane spent a fortune and gave us hope, maybe Bruce did well too quickly and now he is paying for it. I am in my early 30's and apart from 2 seasons under Reid I can't remember us ever looking like we would be an established top division side.
We have had some decent performances and I'm not loath to say that at all. But how many decent performances must we watch before we begin to question why we are only winning 1/6 of our games? Perhaps Bruce is just an unlucky man? Unlucky to have won nothing and relegated Birmingham too? Some of us can see the disaster that is looming and others are unable to see what is coming. Allocated enough time, Bruce WILL relegate Sunderland.
Nah. We won't go down. Whether Bruce can improve our position without major funding...That's a different question. But then again. Who could?
Martin O'Neill. I wouldn't trust Bruce with £20 to buy a decent roast for a Sunday dinner nevermind a multi-million pound operation.
