Yep Old Sky Blue so we had a more than competitive budget (top 6).
TM has overspent our budget and mismanaged it badly in a nutshell!
Exactly the point that seems to be a little lost on Dong.
Yep Old Sky Blue so we had a more than competitive budget (top 6).
TM has overspent our budget and mismanaged it badly in a nutshell!
Exactly the point that seems to be a little lost on Dong.
To be fair Dongle isn't the brightest. He's never likely to appear on University Challenge.
The Ricoh holds circa 35,000 our average attendance is 11,000 - we close behind the goals now to create "atmosphere"
this demonstrates to me that the Ricoh is currently too big for us imo?
Dong how is Andy Thorn doing in management if we are raking up the past seem to remember you were a big fan....
I know based on that I know far more about
football than you based on some of your previous posts on the above
As in a big thank god that Boothroyd had gone and with him that dire football.
Then me questioning the club saying they were responsible for the relegation not AT. That we sack too many managers and he is going to be backed this time.
Then they let him sign 9 players. (Back him as they said they would)
He draws against a team that went up. A draw against the favourites. Then gets a bad result a draw against Bury = sacked. (Not backed)
So yes I questioned all that.
Maybe but Boothroyds style of football was awful, I sometimes used to leave disappointedHe is right though. Anyone with half a brain could see thorn hadn't got any managerial ability at all
Boothroyd was a million times better as a football manager than thorn could ever have dreamt of being.
Anyone arguing against that genuinely hasn't a clue about football.
As in a big thank god that Boothroyd had gone and with him that dire football.
Then me questioning the club saying they were responsible for the relegation not AT. That we sack too many managers and he is going to be backed this time.
Then they let him sign 9 players. (Back him as they said they would)
He draws against a team that went up. A draw against the favourites. Then gets a bad result a draw against Bury = sacked. (Not backed)
So yes I questioned all that.
It wasn't just those 3 results, it was the season before as well wasn't it.
It was quite clear AT wasn't good enough and getting rid was the right thing.
He was backed during the summer of 2012 before he went, he signed loads of players:
He signed Malaga on a 3 year deal
He signed Edge on a 3 year deal
He signed Barton a 3 year deal
He signed Elliott for 1 year
He signed Kilbane for 1 year
He signed Jennings for 2 years
He signed Fleck (was it 2 or 3)
Boothroyd had a much better win % than Thorn.
I am not so sure it wasn't those three draws that did it ............
“There is a general acceptance that mistakes were made,” said Fisher, “and one of those mistakes was letting players in key positions leave and not replacing them with talent. That is recognised by the owner."
Andy is front and centre stage at the moment and we are going to work with him to make sure that he’s got all the resources lined up.
Sky Blues have worked their way through ten managers since they slipped out of the top flight 11 years ago but Fisher stressed: “This is where we need to draw a line in the sand and say enough – enough of firing managers. We need to get out of that habit and, to draw a football analogy, put our foot on the ball, give Andy a chance to reorganise the resources.
3 draws later ..... Sacked
He was shit and should have been shown the door the prior September.
We'd have been relegated again if we had kept him. They were just stupid and believed he'd actually start behaving like a manager and take his duties seriously. Same as the poor sod who'd recruited him at Kidderminster. Having ploughed money into the club he found himself the victim of threats against he and his family and had to quit. Thorn blamed him as he blamed sisu.
Terrible man and terrible manager. The mistake was not sacking him at the start of the championship season - however when you realise you've made a mistake then you have to act. They did that at least. It saved another relegation.
Agree if you are going to sack him you do it after the relegation not after 3 draws.
I honestly believe they expected to win at least two of those first three games and the sacking was as a result of a draw with Bury and Yeovil
No they just realised he'd failed to address his shortcomings in particular regarding the team pre season and preparation for matches. He was sacked because he failed to address shortcomings he promised he would.
Keeping him would have meant relegation. We have to thank god we found robins or that would have been an inevitable outcome. He did an unbelievable job when you look back on it.
It wasn't just those 3 results, it was the season before as well wasn't it.
It was quite clear AT wasn't good enough and getting rid was the right thing.
He was backed during the summer of 2012 before he went, he signed loads of players:
He signed Malaga on a 3 year deal
He signed Edge on a 3 year deal
He signed Barton a 3 year deal
He signed Elliott for 1 year
He signed Kilbane for 1 year
He signed Jennings for 2 years
He signed Fleck (was it 2 or 3)
Boothroyd had a much better win % than Thorn.
Afraid not, just guesswork and supposition as usual.You would need to have inside info from the board to know whether half of what you said is true or not.
Afraid not, just guesswork and supposition as usual.
But it is, I agree Thorn was out of his depth and I'm sure he would need more than the helpNo it's not guesswork. If one certain footballer releases a book of his career when he retires I hope a chapter is reserved for that time. It will be very entertaining.
Who's the player mc sheff , Cody, Keogh?No it's not guesswork. If one certain footballer releases a book of his career when he retires I hope a chapter is reserved for that time. It will be very entertaining.
To be fair Dongle isn't the brightest. He's never likely to appear on University Challenge.
Looks like University Challenge wasn't needed to know we didn't have a top six budget in the end.
This was last season wasn't it?
Yep and this season is supposed to be pretty much the same.
This season it is mid table
So we were not in the top six last season
Certainly was.This was last season wasn't it?
Doesn't mean everyone else's is the same.Yep and this season is supposed to be pretty much the same.
Certainly was.
Doesn't mean everyone else's is the same.
As has been said before, the budget in itself meaningless anyway. If you sell 3/4 of your team including your best players and part replace them with cheap and cheerful- it may look like you have a decent budget. In fact its a significant net reduction, and net decline visavis the opposition if they arent doing the same.
We were 8th - 6th last season (effectively 7th)
For some bizzare reason a couple of people seemed to know more than the people running the club and arrogantly decided it was fact that had a budget far higher than that.
Our budget is pretty similar this season to last and now we are mid table.
So unless like you suggest Dave there are more teams this year with bigger budgets than last year.
Then my gut feeling is last year we were actually 8th in that 8th-6th range and this year it is a bit less putting us in the 10th-12th bracket.
It's nothing to do with a hedge fund but the person doing a calculation.
The probability is we over spent and actually went over budget and had to sell to avoid an embargo which is funny as 8th to 6th probably ended up 5th to 3rd
And we will finish 12th to 11th
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?