Jordon Thompson Loan Extended

[Liverpool Red]

It will be interesting to see what the total financial cost of the appointment of Bryan Hughes will have been to the club, to take into account his compensation, the cost of all these replacement loan and permanent signings and the lost revenue brought about by our appalling form.

[Wrexham's Patrick Bateman]

Originally Posted by Liverpool Red

It will be interesting to see what the total financial cost of the appointment of Bryan Hughes will have been to the club, to take into account his compensation, the cost of all these replacement loan and permanent signings and the lost revenue brought about by our appalling form.

Not to mention the catastrophic disaster if we get relegated

[Woody]

Originally Posted by Liverpool Red

It will be interesting to see what the total financial cost of the appointment of Bryan Hughes will have been to the club, to take into account his compensation, the cost of all these replacement loan and permanent signings and the lost revenue brought about by our appalling form.

Dread to think, but it'll have a massive impact on next season's war chest

[Haruki]

Originally Posted by Liverpool Red

It will be interesting to see what the total financial cost of the appointment of Bryan Hughes will have been to the club, to take into account his compensation, the cost of all these replacement loan and permanent signings and the lost revenue brought about by our appalling form.

I would guess at over £500k and think that is being conservative.

We know Hughes budget was increased £200k at start of this season.
He brought in a load of dead wood signings back end of last season
Cost of paying him out of his contract plus releasing Bryan Flynn
We have used over 40 players this season

Add whatever we have lost off the gates on top and we could be looking closer to £1million than to £500k which stinks given we thought the Ward money was club changing cash.

[andy buckley]

Originally Posted by Haruki

We have used over 40 players this season

To be fair 9 of the 40 have only played in the Scottish Cup or fa trophy so the figure is somewhat distorted and presumably as they are mainly academy players wouldnt be on big bucks

[Cenotaff]

Originally Posted by andy buckley

To be fair 9 of the 40 have only played in the Scottish Cup or fa trophy so the figure is somewhat distorted and presumably as they are mainly academy players wouldnt be on big bucks

It's still a silly number and not only about money, it's about consistency. A centre-back signed on loan to play at right-back ffs. Nothing against Thompson but loan a RB if that's what we want. We already have 4 CB's signed up and sent one out on loan. Any youth player that may have looked half way promising in the Scottish Cup or FA Trophy games hasn't been seen near a league game pretty much all season. It's not as if they're being used to blood any youngsters, just give the elder failures a rest.

[andy buckley]

Originally Posted by Cenotaff

It's still a silly number and not only about money, it's about consistency.

Changing managers also contributes to a higher player turn over if we had a 3rd manager this season I guess we would be up to 50 players used by seasons end

[Cenotaff]

Originally Posted by andy buckley

Changing managers also contributes to a higher player turn over if we had a 3rd manager this season I guess we would be up to 50 players used by seasons end

Of course, but the need for a new manager and therfore his own players lies with the people who employed the manager/s. I'd rather we spend the money on a top quality manager in the first place so there's no need to sack them and have such a ridiculous turnover of players. 200k increased budget for Hughes and he brings in the likes of Barnum-Bobb.

Maybe £50/75k on top of what Hughes was paid with the other £150/125k going to the transfer budget would have seen us get someone capable in the manager's seat so we don't have to keep bringing in so many new players.

The most important job at the club and more often than not we seem to take the easy or cheaper option and it doesn't get us anywhere.

[NottsRed]

Originally Posted by Cenotaff

Of course, but the need for a new manager and therfore his own players lies with the people who employed the manager/s. I'd rather we spend the money on a top quality manager in the first place so there's no need to sack them and have such a ridiculous turnover of players. 200k increased budget for Hughes and he brings in the likes of Barnum-Bobb.

Maybe £50/75k on top of what Hughes was paid with the other £150/125k going to the transfer budget would have seen us get someone capable in the manager's seat so we don't have to keep bringing in so many new players.

The most important job at the club and more often than not we seem to take the easy or cheaper option and it doesn't get us anywhere.

Has to be a point when the board realise that this is costing us more in the long run with the high turn over or poor performing managers and the players that come with them.