It's not an argument, it's a question, one you've dodged from about 6 different people over the weeks gone by. All you can say is who others have got. Well that's a ludicrous pathetic argument. You're great at spending Shorts money, **** at realising he won't spend it. I didn't want Grayson in the first place but everybody was cumming their pants cause he sound good in an interview. It's not a matter of wanting to keep him, it's a matter of 95% of people knowing you can't spend other people's money when they're clearly not even going to get their wallet out.
What have I dodged? I could list half a dozen out of work coaches whod be better than Grayson. Short has no choice to protect his interest and to do that he will have to change the manager to avoid back to back relegations.
With no explanation of how we're going to fund it from a man who won't fund it. You could try a whip around If he sacks him there's something to actually talk about. In the mean time we're at his peril. Let's hope RAWA can make some head way but they should be looking to form a consortium asap if they had anything about them.
That's pure guess work. We can't say that Short wouldn't fund it. Relegation would cost him far more than firing and hiring a new manager
We can say he wouldn't fund Moyes' sacking and we can say he hasn't funded Grayson's yet. Also just cause you say he'll relegate us doesn't make it so. we're 2 points a drift with 99 yes 99 to play for. From a financial stand point to a team with fine margins like us, what you're proposing is preposterous and I bet exactly why Short hasn't sacked him.
If Short's going to spend any money his best bet would be to sign a forward and a decent keeper. Cheaper and simpler than sacking Grayson.
That’s not how I meant it mate. I agree we’re under achieving. More my point is that these players are perennial under achievers. They’ve had 7 managers and been the same with them all. I didn’t mean on our and out ability. More on what they are showing
Where I grew up 'get' (as in git) was pronounced how it looks but anything referring to size was more 'geet'. Not sure I've ever seen either written down though, always viewed them as different words.
Moyes contract was massive. Grayson will be on peanuts in comparison. There are far better managers out of work so no compensation to pay. 99 to play for but we've got 9 from a possible 39. 1 win in 13 and he can't even get us to win when it's pretty much gift wrapped and tied in a bow with a two goal advantage going in at half time. Brentford's manager made 3 subs went for it and out manoeuvred Grayson. I genuinely couldn't even name their manager without googling it. That's how low the level is to find someone tactically more astute than Simple Simon. He took our best 3 attacking players off and surrendered. I'll let him off with Watmore as he's just coming back.
I get that mate, but how many of them have been here a while? Catts and O’Shea? A lot of these players were brought in and the club is their ceiling in terms of size.
That would cost £5-10m. Paying Grayson off and hiring a better coach who isn't currently in a job would cost far less. The squad is more than capable of surviving comfortably even from this position if it had a competent man in charge
I don't think anyone knows how much it would cost to pay off Grayson but I'm certainly not suggesting we spend 10 mil because that's never going to happen. One of the two on loan and a few million on the other would suffice.
That makes no sense as he team above safety is only on course for 44, that's only a 8 point difference in an extremely flawed system(Which will be wrong and need recalculating every single week) when there's 99 points to play for Your point forecast isn't fit for purpose. That's why nobody uses them. It's radged imo. Sorry.
Simple fact is we are on course for relegation with no sign that Grayson is capable of winning games. A change is needed to avoid the drop.
You don't know what we're on course for, and you say it's a simple fact, it's not even a complicated fact. Cause it's not a fact at all. It's an opinion cause no course is mapped out. It's a league table which changes weekly and can't be forcasted, in one game we could be on course to stay up and that wouldn't be any closer to giving an indication of final league placings either. Your opinion is he'll get us relegated, that's fair dos but cut the false 'facts'. Mine is I wouldn't have hired him in the first place so if it was down to me he would never have been here. But he is. Now my opinion doesn't matter ****(I'd cut my losses, take the tiny hit in my massive empire and let the new owners replace him), but i can try and put myself in Short's mindset given his running off the club and he clearly isn't going to sack him for being 2 points a drift with 99 to play for. Common sense as from a business sense knowing it can lead to new signings being slung on the scrap heap with new managers differing opinions it's could cost milions we don't have and make the situation require more investment than we can, not to mention more wasted wages tied up in contracts. What you're proposing I think both Short and Bain would see as an unnecessary risk at this stage of the season. If we're talking opinion about what Short should do, Sacking grayson comes a distant second to short ****ing off so the new owners can replace him with a good manager, something we clearly can't afford under Short.
You can't straight line forecast points on current form mate. Football and life doesn't work that way. I think we'll eventually finish around 13-15th. Just my opinion though obviously.
