I wonder what Burke would have done with all this dosh?

[durrington gull]

Didn't BERK have the money but spunked it away on rubbish ? O'Grady, Augustien, Dobbie, Obika, etc

This - and we can add Colunga plus the jury is very much on Baldock for 2m imo

 

[Stat Brother]

All of a sudden - nope. We spent heavily last season. Let's hope these players this year deliver. But bloom hasn't suddenly coughed up.
Decent signings - let's hope so. But not necessarily related to free transfers or loans.
They still cost a fortune . And anyway we also bought Baldock, stockdale, colunga, cog and Holla on long permanent contracts/fees for millions.

Arrrggghh, they replaced Barnes, Koosh, Buckley, Ulloa, Bridcutt all on permanent contracts.

You can't have it both ways, esp in a rising economy.

Those players were bought in probably for more money than the ones they replaced, therefore the budget has risen.
But the quality didn't rise with the (inflated) economy so it ended with a net loss.

Now it would appear the club is paying for the quality, up front, but it still has to cover the wages.


So why didn't it dig a little deeper last season, give Sami a fighting chance, and more importantly give us something to watch.

 

[chaileyjem]

When you compare it to the £14m received for players sold, spending around £3/4m will always appear to be a little lacking.

If the only cost of a player is their transfer fee .
The other measure is the overall cost of the squad in fees and wages.
Or wages/turnover or position in the league.

But transfer budget profit/loss tells you only so much.
Most clubs (20 in 13/14) in champ make a profit on player sales.

Or why not base it on Bloom's funding of losses. They admittedly did go down between 13/14 and 12/13 by £5m but the playing budget still went up.

 

[durrington gull]

Was the millions spent on Baldock, stockdale, Holla, COG, Kayal, colunga "pitiful" ?

Basically yes - only Kayal and possibly Stockdale are worthwhile, Cog n Colunga have both been poor signings, Holla hasnt got going and will hardly feature now and Baldock isn't worth anything like 2m based on his performances last season

 

[chaileyjem]

Arrrggghh, they replaced Barnes, Koosh, Buckley, Ulloa, Bridcutt all on permanent contracts.

You can't have it both ways, esp in a rising economy.

Those players were bought in probably for more money than the ones they replaced, therefore the budget has risen.
But the quality didn't rise with the (inflated) economy so it ended with a net loss

Costs are going up but sadly income isn't. TV revenue in the championship is falling. And Albion's match day revenue is likely to be falling due to the decrease in attendance/STs
I'm not trying to say anything other than playing budgets have increased substantially year on year. Cos they have.
I think you're trying to say otherwise.

 

[chaileyjem]

Basically yes - only Kayal and possibly Stockdale are worthwhile, Cog n Colunga have both been poor signings, Holla hasnt got going and will hardly feature now and Baldock isn't worth anything like 2m based on his performances last season

Poor they might be. Fair enough. As signings. Expensive they definitely were. OP was arguing Sami had "pitiful " budget. He didn't.

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

If the only cost of a player is their transfer fee .
The other measure is the overall cost of the squad in fees and wages.
Or wages/turnover or position in the league.

But transfer budget profit/loss tells you only so much.
Most clubs (20 in 13/14) in champ make a profit on player sales.

Or why not base it on Bloom's funding of losses. They admittedly did go down between 13/14 and 12/13 by £5m but the playing budget still went up.

We all know wages have to be taken into account, the point I was making is that when you make a black and white comparison of transfer fees received and transfer fees spent it's easy to understand why some people take a dim view of last years dealings.

 

[chaileyjem]

t's not a sign of Bloom going for broke every season, it's just how it goes. I'd imagine every single club still in this division has larger outgoings this year than they did last year, and the year before that. Also worth remembering the club isn't trying to exist on a shoe string playing in a shit hole, the club has progressed, it's evolving into something far larger and all consuming than it's ever been, so guess what...the expenses will increase.

Agreed. He increases the playing budget "substantially"every season. And is happy to fund the losses that that entails despite the big increases in commercial /match day revenue and the flat/declining TV revenue.
And that has meant a top ten budget in 12/13, 13/14 according to the accounts of clubs and what looks like on public statements by the club to be likewise in 14/15 and 15/16. But not a top 5 budget. Agreed ?

 

[Stat Brother]

Costs are going up but sadly income isn't. TV revenue in the championship is falling.
I'm not trying to say anything other than playing budgets have increased substantially year on year. Cos they have.
I think you're trying to say otherwise.

The budget increased because it has to, just to stand still.

I'm saying the budget wasn't increased to a level to maintain a competitive team.

That came home to roost last season, with a junior manager and a very poor squad of cheaper replacements.

It's great to see a squad coming together with purpose and all very exciting times ahead.
Begging the question, why was a year wasted?

The club has gone from shopping in Lidl's to Waitrose's (I never want us to shop in Harrods on a Forest style credit card) when it could have just stayed in Sainsburys.

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

Poor they might be. Fair enough. As signings. Expensive they definitely were. OP was arguing Sami had "pitiful " budget. He didn't.

I think you've thoroughly misunderstood where SB was going with this thread.

 

[y2dave]

Burke was way out of his depth and had shocking rapport with all the managers he worked with. Expensive loan signings swallowed up a big chunk of the budget and the majority of his permanent signings were inferior to outgoing players. Hughton and the new recruitment team look to have done very well to make us competitive again in just 2 windows while also taking a longer term view with some exciting prospects. It will be hard to shift some of the remaining duds due to contract terms so further progress may be slower but we're heading in the right direction again.

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

Agreed. He increases the playing budget "substantially"every season. And is happy to fund the losses that that entails despite the big increases in commercial /match day revenue and the flat/declining TV revenue.
And that has meant a top ten budget in 12/13, 13/14 according to the accounts of clubs and what looks like on public statements by the club to be likewise in 14/15 and 15/16. But not a top 5 budget. Agreed ?

Yes, of course agreed, you've basically added dates and detail to the point I was making originally, which in brief is that it costs money to operate a football team, it costs even more if you want to sit at the top table. We shouldn't be surprised that the costs increase.

 

[chaileyjem]

The budget increased because it has to, just to stand still.

I'm saying the budget wasn't increased to a level to maintain a competitive team.

That came home to roost last season, with a junior manager and a very poor squad of cheaper replacements.

It's great to see a squad coming together with purpose and all very exciting times ahead.
Begging the question, why was a year wasted?

The club has gone from shopping in Lidl's to Waitrose's (I never want us to shop in Harrods on a Forest style credit card) when it could have just stayed in Sainsburys.

Last year we probably had a top ten budget but finished 20th. The year before we had a top ten budget but finished 6th.
The year before on the same budget relatively we finished 4th.This year we have I guess (relatively to your Derby or Boro's or parachute clubs) a top ten budget. Again. But "substantially more" in cash terms.
I'm arguing the budget hasn't changed (as far as we can tell) relative to other clubs. The recruitment, loans/permanent strategy/, manager, etc clearly have. Why the insistence that Oscar/Sami had their financial hands tied. ?

 

[DarrenFreemansPerm]

Last year we probably had a top ten budget but finished 20th. The year before we had a top ten budget but finished 6th.
The year before on the same budget relatively we finished 4th.This year we have I guess (relatively to your Derby or Boro's or parachute clubs) a top ten budget. Again. But "substantially more" in cash terms.
I'm arguing the budget hasn't changed (as far as we can tell) relative to other clubs. The recruitment, loans/permanent strategy/, manager, etc clearly have. Why the insistence that Oscar/Sami had their financial hands tied. ?

Be honest, are you really saying that you don't see an obvious difference between last seasons spending compared to this summers(so far) and the 2 seasons before last?

 

[durrington gull]

Poor they might be. Fair enough. As signings. Expensive they definitely were. OP was arguing Sami had "pitiful " budget. He didn't.

Agree - with your sentiment in that we had a budget but basically blew it

 

[Discodoktor]

My perception is that the we have had a greater investment in this transfer window to the previous two. We sold ulloa and never attempted to replace that quality. Either directly with like for like or spread around the first team.

At the end of the transfer window Sami's team looked like a team that would be fighting relegation.

Oscars team actually looked worse than Gus's I thought league position wise Oscar over achieved.

Gus's team was the best in the division (we didn't buy that success though compared to others, we created it) we then sold it off.

It was always the case Gus said good mangers get you plus points but transfer budget was the key successful factor. He felt he couldn't do better without financial support and things would get worse as parachute payments continued.

Gus leftand explained why.

I felt we had a FFP plan devised by Barber and Bloom that we could pick off players from the penalised clubs.

FFP failed and Brighton backed a failed plan. The question is what is our plan now knowing this?

 

[Justice]

His predecessor and now his replacement spend money like it's going out of fashion.
While he had to trawl around the bargain basement, loan list, and youth set ups to try a put a team together.

Obviously all the sheep will instantly start bleating on about how shitehouse Burker was, but it's clear he was doing an impossible job with no backing.
Unfortunately for DB he did the job so well, the money he made is going to make his replacement look like a genius.

It's obvious Burker, and by association Who-pier, were sold short by the club.


Gotta feel sorry for the fella.

All Oscar would have needed to do was employ one player on a £1 contract to have a bigger budget.

It's clear DB wasn't allowed to bring in £5 - £10m worth of quality in for Oscar and Sami.

The initial outlay was pitiful and that ended up showing on the pitch.

Sami's team wasn't let down by quality players, it was let down by a mounting lack of investment.

Hypia was just a shite manager. He wasn't sold short or whatever conspiracy theory you want to make up. His tactics at Derby summed up his management skills.

 

[spanish flair]

Well no he has a team of scouts . As does Paul Winstanley.
But he closed the deal. He oversaw some good signings and some bad signings and in the end was sacked. Too many bad ones .
But Why no credit, at all, for the good ones. ?

I know football is a game where opinions can be divided, but I really struggle with the good ones he was supposed to have brought in. This includes Baldock, Stockdale and Stephens, all three in my opinion were poor replacement's for the players sold or let go and have not won me over yet.

 

[Dick Knights Mumm]

I know football is a game where opinions can be divided, but I really struggle with the good ones he was supposed to have brought in. This includes Baldock, Stockdale and Stephens, all three in my opinion were poor replacement's for the players sold or let go and have not won me over yet.

No credit for Baldock. Good player we hope, but we had CMS and Colunga and needed something different. Stephens I am happy with. Stockdale could be a success - but up to now ? Don't think so.

 

[chaileyjem]

Be honest, are you really saying that you don't see an obvious difference between last seasons spending compared to this summers(so far) and the 2 seasons before last?

No. In terms of spend. Nope.

What we spent it on. Yes.