Stefan Rupp

So when they bought the club instead of trying to turn it around over night to serve their new model maybe they would have been better leaving things as they were and introduce change as and when they could (not saying that would have been easy with Parky) but why the upheaval from the minute they came in, it made no sense.

 

I agree they should have backed Parky for a year and we might have gone up. However I believe Parky would have been freed from contract even if Lawn and Rhodes had stayed as a reward for not talking to Sheffield

 

We didn't improve the squad. We made the squad with less quality and less depth.

 

I'm not sure that would have been the case, both parties say they had sat down and discussed transfer targets going forward, so you can only assume from that Phil Parkinson was under the impression he was working under similar terms to what he had done previously under Julian & Mark.
Then when he was told there would be a different way of doing transfer business he refused and told his agent to put his name about for interested clubs, I don't believe for one minute he was interested in any other managers job at Bolton or anywhere else, although some disagree.
He was happy at Valley Parade building not just a team but a club that we as fans had a great bond with and I honestly believe left alone with an improved player budget he would have got us into another play off place at the end of last season, for me he could have built a club with an improving fan base (with the help of the new owners) much in the same way as Don Revie did at Leeds United obviously on a smaller scale, bit alas our owners wanted to implement their ideas from the off.

 

Nobody knows for a fact that PP left because of the owners. He mentioned in an interview how he wanted a fresh challenge and that was it. You might choose not to believe it but unless Parkinson comes out and states otherwise, all the theories surrounding his departure are conjecture.

 

That is why I said allegedly. Apparently the way that the deal was formulated was that we paid a substantial fee to Hull who used it to pay off McLean to compensate him for the reduced income he got from us. The alternative was to have offered him a higher basic wage at City but the owners didn’t want to do that so that other players didn’t ask for more money. At the time it was claimed that a player in the squad had a term in his deal that he would be the highest paid player during his contract so if anyone came in on more then his money would go up.

 

Looks like he got lucky eh?

 

Hardly an ITK fact about McCartan, Abbott mentioned it at the fans forum. Who rated Reeves? If he was that highly rated then other clubs would have been sniffing, especially with such a low transfer fee. In this day and age of football £150,000 does not get you a highly rated league 1 player.

 

Why do I think we paid 250k for McClean?
I'm sure I read that figure somewhere.

 

Was £200k
Reeves £150k

 

Agreed - as I said in a different post, we have gone down the route of buying a product of less quality in the hope of improving it to a higher standard of that being replaced.

My opinion is this only works if you improve your 1st team also. Look at the Liverpool model of the 80s. Always had a very strong squad, but brought their youth in as and when ready and not because they had nobody else. And until they were ready, they’d be shipped out on loan.

 

Dave can you check yout messenger account.

 

Sent you a PM mate.

 

Simplistic way of looking at it. Was Poleon really a direct replacement for Clarke? I thought it was Taylor

I also think Reeves was doing fine, before his groin troubles, and a fairly good replacement for Cullen who I greatly admired

Fact is the so called mediocre signings got us to 3rd, before a horrendous injury situation caught up with us. I mean how many times were three of the first team back five unavailable in previous years

Not saying we'd had stayed 3rd, but it isn't as though we're way behind the likes of Plymouth. And McCardle, Clarke and Marshall have not been anywhere near favourites at their new, who's to say they would have repeated last season - maybe Marshall would have gone back to 2015/16 form. Maybe Rory would have the same injury luck as Chicksen, Reeves or McGowan

 

In terms of getting out of this division, it's a model succesfully used by Huddersfield, Barnsley, Brentford and Millwall

I don't get what the great alternative is. Spend more on older players who's value is decreasing each minute they're on the pitch, so you have fewer assets to make money with and reinvest?

 

Taylor > Clarke

 

Stuart bought Hanson

 

A model success only with a budget to match. The teams you mention above have had far bigger budgets in league 1 than we currently do. Both Huddersfield and Barnsley financially backed by Den Hoyle and Patrick Cryne. Matthew Benham at Brentford has of this point last year invested £89 million into Brentford including stadium investment. We are nowhere near the model used by the clubs mentioned. Our model is more akin to Burton Albion in terms of finance.

 

Wages wise I beg to differ compared to the current crop.