Stefan Rupp

And yet under Parky the only money paid was for a token gesture for James Hanson and yet we had better players. If we are paying transfer fees around £100,000 it means no one else rates them. Would be far better putting the paltry transfer fees towards better wages.

 

Whilst this is indeed true, the owners won’t look at it like that. They’ll be looking at the likes of Shrewsbury who are still in the top3 with players that cost them nothing and wages far less than we’re paying.

Additionally, when we signed the likes of Mezza, Marshall, Clarke, McArdle, Darby et al, they cost us nothing and weren’t necessarily big earners. Admittedly, they got renewed contracts on better terms, but they were still ‘cheap options’ at that time

 

I know for a fact a lot of teams were interested in McCarten. Wyke as well and Reeves was well rated. We also payed a fee for McGowan who in the short time we have seen him looks like he will be decent

 

@Rogered Tart, it wasn’t Parkinson that signed Hanson, it was McCall.

But, you are spot on in relation to spending money on transfer fees against better wages. As an example, I’d rather we saved £200k (plus wages) on McCartan and used that money to sign a player with a proven track record.

The problem is, the club will always look at it in the same view as someone buying a house. Buy cheap, put work in to improve and sell for a profit later or rent at a higher cost but have no asset of your own.

 

Don’t forget the fee paid for Aaron McLean while PP was in charge. Alledgedly our third highest fee after
Wyke and Mark Stewart

 

I think a lot of this criticism is harsh.

We have signed players under Rupp/Rahic for sums of money that in previous seasons we would have thought (correctly) beyond us. It's easy for us now to look back and judge the money/players but at the time I believe most of us were quite excited about seeing our new captures. When the new chairmen arrived they said they would not throw money at the club in and hope for instant success. They wanted steady progression, as did we. Most agreed that we preferred the less risky, steady progression that Parky, Lawn and Rhodes had managed to pull off.

The new owners have invested in our infrastructure and continue to do so (pitch) I don't think they have run out of money, I think their ambition to sign Grayson proves they still want promotion and Grayson is a manager that won't work with peanuts for a budget.

I'm not saying everything is fine and dandy, we still need to improve our squad but what club doesn't? We don't have infinite funds and we cant fix everything at once.

 

McLean was a free transfer. No fee.

 

Paying big wages doesn’t always pay we seem to be always paying players of to leave McLean Anderson and others. We need a better mix. But paying silly wages can lead to financial disaster

 

My concern is, that we couldn't get the players we wanted in the Jan window, so what's to say we're going to get the ones we want in the summer? Who is out there - no one really. The targets that we were looking at, have now moved onto new clubs.
It's going to be a frustrating pre season methinks.

 

Given the fact that the transfer kitty is going to be way down due to poor ticket sales in my opinion it’s going to have to be the loan route which means we will be waiting until just before the season starts.

 

Undisclosed fee, which means we paid something

 

Very true Park, but for me that was down to poor scouting/judgement. We spent so much on Mclean’s wages without seeing what he could do at this level. It was always risky and proved to be silly and not thought out.

You see players like Oztumer and Leon Clarke doing the business at this level every season. They’re the players I’d want to be signing instead of the McCartan’s and Poleon’s of this world

 

If it was ‘undisclosed’, how can it be allegedly our 3rd highest fee? Surely nobody knows this or it wasn’t undisclosed?

I know the Beeb reported it as ‘undisclosed’ and picked up by other sites, but have City ever confirmed a fee was paid?

 

He had 6 months left on his contract. If we did pay a fee (Which is debatable), it can't have been much.

 

Unless I missed it, neither City or T&A confirmed that.

 

I suppose if he managed to get us to the premier league with a net spend of a few million (not likelyI know) then he would make a return on his investment.

Sadly, this season has proven that even to get to the championship you need to invest, let alone the premier league. So I suppose he needs to decide what the plan is. Sack it off or put a bit more cash in and see where we end up.

 

The season hasn’t yet finished, so your comment that “this season has proven that even to get to the Championship you need to invest” is a bit premature.

Now, if (as expected), Wigan and Blackburn finish top2 and then Charlton, Scunny or Rotherham win the PO final, fair enough.

But what if Shrewsbury finish 2nd (unlikely, I know) and Plymouth or Pompey go up via Wembley, it would prove you don’t have to invest- you just have to improve your squad and have a good coaching staff.

 

Your right with good coaching. Togetherness team spirit and clever recruitment a lot can be achieved

 

Exactly and that is what we are going to have to do. Let’s see if we have the right contacts to get the right players.a bit like Cullen Burke and Pickford