Bayliss to Derby (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter afan4life
- Start date
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It keeps finding the club you idiot
Sick Boy
Well-Known Member
It appears some seem to believe that a wealthy individual should put their money into a club and expect nothing back in return, and when it runs out they simply hand over the reins for someone else to do the same until their's runs out.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
No they just believe after a decade of cost cutting and dropping the club to its lowest ever point we should be able to budget well enough to not rely on unexpected income to survive.
Sick Boy
Well-Known Member
I'd expect that's all well and good if fans have no aspirations but to tread water in the lower leagues. The idiot Ranson persuaded SISU to takeover the club then came out with the add on that we would need to sell 25K+ tickets at the Ricoh to break even, or something like that. Nice to see that he'd done his research properly.
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
What has any of that got to do with where we are now? We have none of the financial commitments we did when Sisu first came. Everything we are is down to choices they made. The time for this kind of whataboutery has well passed. Even if you claim we need our own ground (and I don’t want to open that can of worms) they’ve had a decade to sort that out with no progress. Regardless of what you and Grendel think, they clearly don’t see it as as important as buying players.
As I said, I’d expect us to not have to rely on players being sold by third parties to make ends meet. If not that’s just piss poor budgeting.
Why the hell are we out there spending on the likes of Ogogo and Brown and pushing for promotion if we can’t even keep the lights on?
Are you happy that Sisu seem to be overspending in the hope of success? Wasn’t that the whole problem to start with?
You can’t have your cake and eat it.
dazed&confused
Well-Known Member
He's saying, the decision to sell Maddison for what in hindsight now seems like a giveaway price, will make the current regime very hesitant to risk making the same mistake again. If they don't really really need the money now, Bayliss won't be sold. Wait until Christmas and he might be worth another £4-5m; wait until next June and after a successful campaign he might be worth another £10m.
SISU are financial risk takers/gamblers. And they got the sale of Maddison badly wrong. And that's going to hurt, and it's going to make them act very carefully when it comes to selling Bayliss. They will no longer just take the first seemly 'good' offer that comes along.
At least for now, the financial interests of the SISU investors might well coincide with the football interests of us humble supporters.
Covkid1968#
Well-Known Member
Spoke to his best mate who I cornered for a chat this week because he obvs knows the lad well. And he says Tom loves it at Cov and is back in pre season, but nothing will happen for at least 2 weeks (no idea why) Tom's a Derby fan and he is being told that its going to be shed loads more than he is on - so his mate is of the opinion he will go.........but that's only his opinion of knowing how much Tom would want to play for Derby. We shall see.........he also didn't know if Derby had made any formal approach...so I'm still hoping his head is not turned.
better days
Well-Known Member
I've heard Derby don't have lots of money so maybe that's a factor
We aren't going to let our best players go for peanuts
Apparently Lampard tried to get Dujon Sterling on loan but he came to us instead
Amazing really when you'd expect Lampard's Chelsea connection would have helped but Adi Viveash perhaps trumped that
Captain Dart
Well-Known Member
Are we a Derby feeder club now?
clint van damme
Well-Known Member
we, (and every other club), are a feeder club to any club higher up the food chain who can pay players substantially more wages, it's a fact of life.
The only alternative is to bust the bank trying to compete above our means and we know how that ends up.
larry_david
Well-Known Member
Lampard doesn't have any experience as a coach let alone a manager. I'd think twice before going there as he'll be gone by Feb when they're 12th in the league
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
If McNulty is worth £2m, it’s a reasonable guess that Bayliss is valued at £3-4m minimum. A few posters have said maybe SISU have ‘learned their lesson’ but the context of now, instead of Maddison is that the club is in the ascendency. We’ve balanced the books, just been promoted and are building a solid squad of players for a promotion charge this season. This wasn’t the case in the 2015/16 season as far as I’m aware and it was a decent deal after the sell-on fee was activated. In hindsight, getting relegated to L2 was a good thing for us.
As for Dujon Sterling, I’m surprised he had the ego to go to L1 as opposed to the Championship. The Viveash connection is important, but to me, it shows just how well regard we are when it comes to developing talent. We have numerous players playing in the Prem and Championship, and last season we brought through Bayliss, Jones (to an extent), Shipley and JP. For most young players, you’d think that if we were to come in for them, we’d be near the top of their list because we’ve proven that we’re one of the best clubs in the EFL for developing talent.
robbiekeane
Well-Known Member
They can draw up a budget that doesn't rely on players being sold im sure you lemon, but it would just be a shit budget that everyone would then moan about
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Oh yeah Sisus main concern is how well liked they are, how silly of me.
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
Sisu do draw up a budget for a the season which is " x" amount but when things like Wembley the cup run and the Maddison situation come along surely although most of the money goes to clearing any debts we have . If M R and co don't see any being put into the team considering the hard work they have put in in getting the Maddison's and Bayliss's to be saleable players they will think is it worth the effort and may well move on and who would blame them .We must get a decent balance .
SkyBlueCRJ
Well-Known Member
Assuming what you say is true, even if Bayliss is keen on going to Derby I cannot see them matching our valuation. Firstly, like previous posters have said, Derby's playing budget was "slashed" following their play-off failure last season. The Derby owner himself, Mel Morris, publicly stated that little investment would be made if Derby failed to win promotion this year. As a result of this, Derby's wage bill (currently standing at £35 million) is going to be drastically reduced throughout the summer, so any incoming offer is only likely to happen once they start selling players.
Secondly, their transfer dealings this summer have been non-existent. With only a month left of the window, all Derby have to show for their efforts is extending Curtis Davies' contract and the sale of Andreas Weimann. With further departures expected from Vydra, Martin and Anya, surely their star players will need to be replaced before Derby start throwing money at a player that is (respectively) likely to start out as a fringe player? Leeds is understood to be currently chasing Vydra but talks are still ongoing, but if I have my facts right the fee, which is stated to be in the region of around £7m, is the biggest stumbling block that's halting things from moving forward. So, uncertainty still remains at Derby as time is running out. Saying that, Derby have made progress in this respect however as their fans and journalists report that around 12m has been cut off the wage bill so far with the further departures of Bent, Shackell, Baird, Weimann and Russell. But will the board view these departures as funds saved or funds made readily available for transfers? Personally I think it's the former.
So to expand on this, say Derby do manage to cut costs and sell all their stars. Even with their (potential) incoming transfer revenue they still may be reluctant to meet our valuation given that Bayliss isn't 100% likely to be a first team player for them - as first and foremost they'll need first team quality replacements if their key players are to exit the club. So, unless Bayliss is the top of their agenda I think we'll hold onto him this summer, especially if he signs a new contact with us.
Last edited by a moderator:
Grendel
Well-Known Member
The money doesn’t go into paying any of the debts. It’s used to keep the club funded over future years which is what Anderson said when Maddison was sold.
The club is adequately set up for competent in this league but you only have to look at what other clubs like Bournemouth spent in the championship to see the cost of success there and likewise Aston Villa for the cost of failure if you don’t make it.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Selling players is part of many clubs strategy for budgeting and long term financing
shmmeee
Well-Known Member
Reading comprehension issues still I see.
I said relying on third parties selling players.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
It’s only reading comprehension as what you are saying is incomprehensible gibberish
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
You did not answer the part about getting some of the money raised going to Mark my post said" Decent balance" as for funding the club in future years first we get people saying we cannot spend beyond their means ( I agree) now you want to fund the future we need to fund the present I suppose you want the money from Mac to go to the future carry on and Mark and co will go . Tell us where that should go please?
Nick
Administrator
Wasn't it mark Robins who said he will be using some to get a replacement?
east_midlands_skyblue
Well-Known Member
Derby are currently a bit crowded in the central midfield positions, with lots of players who'll be on high wages and would likely rock the boat if not starting ahead of a lad with half a season in League 2. With their financial position as it is, I can't see this happening unless they can offload a number of those midfield players (Huddlestone, Butterfield etc) but in reality nobody else is going to pay them the whack they're on at Derby so it will probably be a case of waiting until contracts expire before they can realistically afford to invest in that position.
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
In this instance I think he should get the full amount this is a situation that was not planned once again we are in the situation we were in the last relegation season goals go out the club and are not replaced and you and me know if you don't carry a threat the pressure is on.
Grendel
Well-Known Member
Money could translate to wages and a enhanced contract over a period not transfer fees. Also the fee will very likely. E paid over the term of the contract
We signed these two in a free transfer;
McNulty
Clarke
These three cost is around £3.5 million
Eastwood
McKenzie
Kyle
Which were better?
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
Grendal are you saying he should not get the full amount in this instance to spend on either transfer fees or wages to cover the loss of Marc or not?
Grendel
Well-Known Member
I’m saying the full amount is going to be probably around £400k next season so a contract offer of higher wages and agency and signing on fees can well cover it if we sign a player on a free
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
Not necessarily. If the target he wants, for arguments sake, cost £500k, would he need the £700k? Probably not. You don’t want to be reckless and overspending on your transfer budget. That’s how you get into financial trouble just as we’ve got a relatively stable financial footing.
It’s a popular opinion to say he should get all the money from the sale to fund his replacement, but that’s not how Football works. Peterborough, for example, won’t be signing £5m-rated strikers anytime soon just because they sold Marriott for £4.5m.
thekidfromstrettoncamp
Well-Known Member
M M B your saying player cost £500k would you need £700k may be. Your target may require bigger wages ie Mac Goldrick coming from a higher division if your target comes from a lower division ie Christian Diodge maybe you could get away with saving some money . Either way you have to find the goals left by Marc's departure . Surely in this case without overspending this needs to be done.
Mucca Mad Boys
Well-Known Member
I was just pulling a figure from thin air, I’m not entirely sure if you’re agreeing or disagreeing with me.
It’s pretty obvious we need to replace McNulty, Robins wanted another striker regardless of McNulty leaving or not. So another target is needed. Hopefully, we’re ambitious in finding this replacement but let’s not fall into the trap of believing that we’ve got a player who can’t perform well if we don’t spend a lot of money on them.
SkyBlueCRJ
Well-Known Member
If he signs a new contract he'll inevitably stay, but if a club comes in with the right bid then he'll inevitably go. Unfortunately this is a fans forum not a crystal ball so your guess is as good as ours.
mark82
Moderator
Robins said he'd been offered a new contract a couple of weeks back now. The longer we go on before he signs that the less likely that he will. Kind of suggests he's looking at his options (or you can at least bet his agent will be scuttling round like a rat trying to drum up some interest).
