Summer Rebuild

[SCIAG]

We still have no cover at right back do we? Surely Keown and Long are not ready?

They're 20 and Keown has played a big role in pre-season (plus starting matches last season). I think it's safe to say he's ready, and Long isn't a bad third choice.

[PistolPete]

We still have no cover at right back do we? Surely Keown and Long are not ready?

They're 20 and Keown has played a big role in pre-season (plus starting matches last season). I think it's safe to say he's ready, and Long isn't a bad third choice.

I haven't paid enough attention to pre season, but has Keown played centre back or right back? I was at Watford last season and he was horribly exposed at right back (in a terrible team against a top team to be fair).

[RoyallyFcuked]

I think it might just be due to our hopeless performance up there last season, which wasn't Championship standard in fairness. I'll let him off this time.

Yeah I think that is why, and in fairness we gave a fair few below Championship standard performances last season.

Hopefully we'll prove him wrong though and do better this season.

[Royal Rother]

With a left back in I'm happy. The business hasn't necessarily been perfect or solved all our problems, but it's been a big step that way.

GK: Bond, Al Habsi, Moore
RB: Gunter, Keown, Griffin
LB: Obita, A Taylor, Long
CB: Hector, Cooper, Keown
CB: Ferdinand, McShane, Sweeney
CM: Quinn, Tshibola, Akpan
CM: Williams, Norwood, J Taylor
RW: McCleary, Blackman, Stacey, J Taylor
LW: HRK, Fosu, Quinn, Obita
ST: Pogrebnyak, Sa, HRK
ST: Samuel, Cox, Novakovich

Another striker wouldn't go amiss and some short term cover for McCleary and HRK, or a short term central midfielder to let us more comfortably use Quinn wide left.

It's a lot better balanced than last year. Another summer window to get rid of Pog, HRK, Akpan, Blackman and maybe Cox and J Taylor and replace them with positive influences who'll contribute their worth and we could be looking back towards the top six. The foundation is definitely there. And I think we've got too much deadwood to shift in attack to really make a huge difference there yet.

My feeling is that that squad, plus Fernandez and Hurtado (if they come) has to be in play off places minimum or Clarke will be out of a job.

No excuses.

The Thais have backed him way beyond anyone's realistic expectations and despite losing some heavy earners off the wage bill you'd have to think the wages can only have gone up. I find that worrying.

[Nameless]

They should be expecting us to challenge for the playoffs, but I hope the realistic plan is that we build in the next 2 windows and the real promotion push is 16-17. The nightmare scenario is we finish 8th this year, Clarke gets the boot and the rebuild starts again.
From what we've seen the Thai's are not looking for miracles, I think there are two seasons in the locker for Clarke as long as we show significant progress this season.

[Hoop Blah]

My feeling is that that squad, plus Fernandez and Hurtado (if they come) has to be in play off places minimum or Clarke will be out of a job.

No excuses.

The Thais have backed him way beyond anyone's realistic expectations and despite losing some heavy earners off the wage bill you'd have to think the wages can only have gone up. I find that worrying.

Only gone up?

We've got rid of Karacan, Pearce, Federici, Guthrie, Drenthe, Anderson, and Kelly, plus Mackie and Chalobah who both would've been costing us a fortune whist on loan.

That's 9 of our top earners who were all (give or take) on silly contracts signed on Zingaravich's watch whilst in or around the Premier League or it's parachute payments.

We've bought in Quinn, McShane, Bond, Al Habsie, and Sa, all would be cheaper contracts than the ones we've let go this summer (apart from the Anderson for Bond/Al Habsie). Then we've got Taylor on loan as well as two more to come in. That's 8 coming in on contracts imagine are a lot more sensible than the 9 going out. I don't think we've shaved millions off the wage bill but I certainly doubt it's gone up because of where these players are coming in from and the way we're likely to have gone about signing them.

I think Clarke has done some good business and I'm still thinking we should be looking at 4-10th as the target.

[Royal Rother]

Hmm, ok then.

I was ignoring Drenthe who'd already gone in effect but I take your point.

However, if we've entered into contracts (of a similar total annual bill) that extend an "overspend" on wages beyond the duration of the parachute payments (which, without researching actual length of contracts is what it feels like) then I do see that as a worrying gamble.

[Libertine]

So now we have Taylor there's only a few positions we need to fill. Even if we sign Hurtado, I still think we need:

Right back cover for Gunter
One more winger (McCleary, HRK, Hurtado)
A ball winning Midfielder
A pacy striker

I'd love us to get De Andre Yedlin on loan as he would be great either at full back or wide right, Anthony Annan would be within our wage bracket, is available on a free and has something to prove. Dwight Gayle still hasn't joined Fulham but it seems he's out our reach...

Perhaps Clarke is waiting to see if he can get one of Chelsea's youngsters again? Nathan Ake or Chalobah again? Even perhaps Oriol Romeu?

I'd love for this to happen. He has speed to burn. And, like you said, he can play right back or right wing. Klinsmann used him at right wing in our two recent friendlies in Europe and he terrorized the Netherlands and German defenses. No way he is going to get playing time at Tottenham, not up to PL standards yet. But having seen him play I think he could do the job at this level. At 22 years-old what he needs most is playing time. A loan here would be a win-win imo...

[Hoop Blah]

Hmm, ok then.

I was ignoring Drenthe who'd already gone in effect but I take your point.

However, if we've entered into contracts (of a similar total annual bill) that extend an "overspend" on wages beyond the duration of the parachute payments (which, without researching actual length of contracts is what it feels like) then I do see that as a worrying gamble.

I doubt they're of a similar total annual bill, but it's a good point about them committing us beyond the end of the parachute payments.

There are a few big contracts still to run out before then too though. Once Pogrebnyak, Robson-Kanu, Williams and even Blackman's contracts have expired we'll be saving another major chunk of the post-Premier League wage bill. It's only really Gunter and McLeary who are left and as both have signed new contract extensions more recently I'm guessing the club see them as good value for their wages.

I don't get the feeling that the Thai's (or those who've had to live through the pain of the Zingaravich effect) are out to cripple us financially by over committing us so I guess there just needs to be a little faith in their ability to plan and support the club financially.

[3points]

We still have no cover at right back do we? Surely Keown and Long are not ready?

I guess we could wait to get an 'emergency loan'?

I think people are forgetting that Hector can play right back. Think he will be the cover

[Ian Royal]

Hmm, ok then.

I was ignoring Drenthe who'd already gone in effect but I take your point.

However, if we've entered into contracts (of a similar total annual bill) that extend an "overspend" on wages beyond the duration of the parachute payments (which, without researching actual length of contracts is what it feels like) then I do see that as a worrying gamble.

I doubt they're of a similar total annual bill, but it's a good point about them committing us beyond the end of the parachute payments.

There are a few big contracts still to run out before then too though. Once Pogrebnyak, Robson-Kanu, Williams and even Blackman's contracts have expired we'll be saving another major chunk of the post-Premier League wage bill. It's only really Gunter and McLeary who are left and as both have signed new contract extensions more recently I'm guessing the club see them as good value for their wages.

I don't get the feeling that the Thai's (or those who've had to live through the pain of the Zingaravich effect) are out to cripple us financially by over committing us so I guess there just needs to be a little faith in their ability to plan and support the club financially.

If the wage budget has stayed a similar amount this season, say dropped a couple of million, that's still a big risk even forgetting how long those contracts last, because the parachute payments have gone down by about £8m this season.

Personally, whilst I think the target should obviously be to aim for the play offs, I think there's still a lot of deadwood and a lack of balance in the squad, so realistically I'd be satisfied as long as we showed improvement on last season. A decent start and I'd expect something like 8th - 13th or a rocky start and I'd want an improvement showing by the end of the season to a finish of about 12th to 16th.

I realise I have lower minimum standards than most, but otherwise I agree with Nameless that this season should be a platform for a big push next season.

[Nameless]

In terms of finances we've got 3 additional sponsors this season , all of whom are connected to our Thai owners and I suspect are providing more than token funds. It would not surprise me if the reduced parachute payments are more than offset by the increased sponsorship and that we see more of these deals done. There is an obvious plan to sell the stadium naming rights at some point....

[Royal Rother]

I struggle to believe that sponsorship of a Championship club could accumulate £8m more one season than the previous when the club finished 19th.

But maybe the FA Cup run really captured the imagination of the Thai nation!

[Ian Royal]

I struggle to believe that sponsorship of a Championship club could accumulate £8m more one season than the previous when the club finished 19th.

But maybe the FA Cup run really captured the imagination of the Thai nation!

I could imagine the sponsorship bringing in £1m between them. Just about.

[Nameless]

On what basis are you imagining that Ian ?
These sponsorship deals won't have come about by our people cold calling a few random companies. These won't be what I think are termed 'rate card' deals.
They are vehicles to get cash into the club. I'd suggest that looking at what revenue we need to replace is a pretty reasonable basis to work out how much our owners have brought in via their network of contacts.

[Ian Royal]

On what basis are you imagining that Ian ?
These sponsorship deals won't have come about by our people cold calling a few random companies. These won't be what I think are termed 'rate card' deals.
They are vehicles to get cash into the club. I'd suggest that looking at what revenue we need to replace is a pretty reasonable basis to work out how much our owners have brought in via their network of contacts.

Because despite many appearances I don't think the authorities are stupid enough to let clubs get away with signing "sponsorship" deals as a way of ploughing in more cash than is allowed by FFP. And I can't see £ms being the going rate for sponsoring a Championship club. £100k - £300k maybe.

I guess we'll know in a couple of years once the accounts for this season are out.

[Hoop Blah]

I said before how I doubt that we've shaved millions off the wage bill but the more I think about it the more I think we probably have.

Federici was rumoured to be on something like £25/30k a week. I can't imagine we're paying Bond more than £10-15k, so that in itself is possibly a £750k saving.

Andersen for Al Habsie, like for like or quite possibly more for the new option.

Taylor in for Kelly/Cummings, a definite saving there, at least £5k a week considering Taylor is on loan and Kelly was a Premier League signing. So another £250k a year perhaps?

Guthrie replaced by Quinn - Another healthy saving I imagine. Yeah Quinn came here over some other options so I'd assume he's on a decent whack but Guthrie was another of those top earners so probably on circa £30k. I'd argue that Quinn is probably on £10k a week less than Guthrie was possibly on, so another £500k saving there.

Pearce out and McShane in? Similar players but Pearce was given that new contract when his agent was looking to take him elsewhere on a freebie whilst Zingaravich was still signing the cheques, that probably means we're saving another £250/500k a year on that change too.

All of a sudden that could be £1.5m-£2m saved and I've not even started on the Drenthe and Karacan out to be replaced by Sa and potentially the loan of Fernandez. That could be another £1m on it's own. We've not replaced Chalobah, who is on a shed load at Chelsea and we'd have been picking up a good proportion of that I'm sure, and replacing Mackie with Hurtado will no doubt shave a fair bit too.

It's not going to add up to the £8m we've lost in parachute payments, but it could be around £4m.

[Nameless]

On what basis are you imagining that Ian ?
These sponsorship deals won't have come about by our people cold calling a few random companies. These won't be what I think are termed 'rate card' deals.
They are vehicles to get cash into the club. I'd suggest that looking at what revenue we need to replace is a pretty reasonable basis to work out how much our owners have brought in via their network of contacts.

Because despite many appearances I don't think the authorities are stupid enough to let clubs get away with signing "sponsorship" deals as a way of ploughing in more cash than is allowed by FFP. And I can't see £ms being the going rate for sponsoring a Championship club. £100k - £300k maybe.

I guess we'll know in a couple of years once the accounts for this season are out.

Looking at what is paid for shirt deals100-300k is obviously wrong ! Seems our previous deals were for 500k per season , which I appreciate would have included a season in the Prem, but the deal was in place before promotion.
We all know there is huge wriggle room in FFP. I don't think it stops you getting top deals from third parties , where there is an issue is if you simply move cash between organisations you own. So Man City using their Ladies team to pay for media rights for the men's team was suspicious, Thai Airlines paying a generous sum would not be.
As you say, eventually the accounts will give us a top level figure of income.

[CountryRoyal]

I don't think that sponsorship goes against ffp as that contributes as legitimate income into the club.

The only reason citeh got in trouble over Etihad stadium naming was because they are wholly owned by Sheikh Mansour.

[RoyallyFcuked]

Still needed -

1 Winger (Looks like it will be Hurtado?)
1 Striker
1 Creative Central Attacking Midfielder (someone in the Sigurdsson mold) (could Fernandez be this player?)