Spot on Matthew Sent from my iPhone
On 24/02/2012, at 11:49 AM, LEESE Matthew <[email protected]> wrote: > And thats where we need some balance. > > Mick had his 'everyone put in a shift and we'll do alright' policy and > applied this across the park with no recognition of the need for both graft > and guile. It didn't work. > > Morgan/Moxey are pursuing the 'young and hungry' ethos without recognition > for more of a balance between youth and experience. We had the situation > where we wasted alot of money on players coming to the end of their careers > that inspired the famous 'golden tit' outburst and now seem to have the > complete reverse of this. I think we need a balance between youth and > experience and I reckon we got it right for a while when we had the likes of > Ince, Irwin and Rae playing with players like Naylor (seemed erratic at the > time but a dream compared to our current left back situation), Lescott and > Murray. The young and hungry policy suits M&M's 'business' goals and they see > these players as an investment/appreciating asset. Surely an older player can > be seen as a sound investment though if they help bring success on the pitch > which in turn transalates to increassed money off it. > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Steven Millward > Sent: Friday, 24 February 2012 11:34 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [NSWolves] Walter it is Then ! [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] > > I reckon we have the capital to spend but we won't spend the wages. We agree > fees with clubs but then it falls apart on personal terms e.g. Scott Dann. > There must be others > > Albion do the reverse. A lot of their side was bought cheap but they pay > more than us in wages. As transfer fees are amortized over the life of the > contract maybe we should change our approach and spend more of the total > cost on wages than transfers. > > The problem is that you then run up against the young and hungry policy > (which is another Morgan backed idea). Young players cost more. If we want > to do that then we'll have to take a gamble on older players towards the end > of their career. > > On 24 February 2012 11:06, LEESE Matthew <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree Moxey's not entirely accountable and is basically trying to achieve > the aims laid out by the owner but I would imagine these are reasonably high > level and he has control over how he achieves them. I like the fact that we > are financially sound in comparison to many/most other clubs and are not > about to do a Portsmouth but I think there's room to be a little less > cautious. Also, be more realistic about who we try and buy - if we have 5 > million to spend on a player, don't spend time haggling trying to get 10 > million rated players who inevtibly go to someone in the market for an 8 > million pound player. We seem to lose out on so many players through this. > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Steven Millward > Sent: Friday, 24 February 2012 10:35 AM > > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [NSWolves] Walter it is Then ! [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] > > I'm not sure Moxey is to blame, to be fair to him. His instructions come > from the owner and that is to run the club as a business and not make a loss. > > Unfortunately I think success and profit are incompatible in the Prem when > almost everyone else loses money, and most managers will know this. This > might change if we can hold out until FFP but I'm not convinced. > > Agree that they could offer a manager 20k a week for the rest of the season > with a 1m bonus if we stay up. Would be well worthwhile and good money for > anyone. The value to the club would be immense compared to a million quid. > The choice of manager would be very different if we went down to if we stay > up. > > Brighton turned us down on Poyet, so I read. > > > > > On 24 February 2012 10:00, LEESE Matthew <[email protected]> wrote: > It would appear that money is an issue and we're seeing Moxey once again try > to operate on a shoestring. I worked with a Stoke fan back in England who was > delighted when they got rid of Moxey - he felt Moxey was holding them back > and there is no questioning their progression over the last 10 years. > > I look at the current situation and think what value do you put on > Premiership survival? The money its worth has to warrant a sizeable > investment to try and stay up. The way I see it we have 2 realistic options: > > - get someone in on a short term contract who's a real motivator and can get > a bunch of players 'over performing' for a spell - someone in the Ian > Holloway mould. A 13 game contract is obviously not very attractive and so > that has to be compensated for by offering a 'too tempting' > financial incentive. Its no good offering a 13 game contract on bog > standard Premiership wages. The value of staying in the league is > phenomenal - why not offer a huge incentive to someone to keep us up? > > - get someone you think can progress the team long term, regardless of which > league we're in, and offer them a longer term contract. Curbishley (who I > wasn't excited about but now looks a shining light compared to some of the > dross we've been linked with) went down with > Charlton and brought them back up stronger, enjoying a prolonged > period of what undoubtedly had to be viewed as success given their resources. > I wouldn't mind seeing us take a punt on Poyet for this option. > > The situation as is is a farce. Morgan and Moxey are looking like a pair of > clowns and its an embarrassment to the club. They knew this day would come > and obviously knew when that day was fast approaching - why didn't they plan > for it accordingly? > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Steven Millward > Sent: Friday, 24 February 2012 9:37 AM > > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [NSWolves] Walter it is Then ! [SEC=UNCLASSIFIED] > > No it's that there isn't much money to spend on transfers and the wage > structure can't be changed. > > > On 24 February 2012 08:23, Paul Crowe <[email protected]> wrote: > If Clipboard is given the job until the end of the season there will be less > than 10K season ticket holder’s renew next season. > > > > I do not know what this “vision” is that the 2 x M’s are referring to? It > must be pretty radical or scary! > > > > Paul Crowe > > Sales Manager - Asia Pacific > > > > ConTech (Sydney Office) > > > > PO Box 3517 > > Rhodes Waterside > > Rhodes NSW 2138 > > Tel: 02 97396636 Fax: 02 97396542 > > Mob: 0406009562 > > Email: [email protected] > > Website: www.contechengineering.com > > -- Boo! Curbishley out!
