http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2012/feb/23/wolves-manager-walter-smith
On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Paul Hart <[email protected]> wrote: > 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! > -- Boo! Curbishley out!
