+- COYR NOTTINGHAM FOREST FORUM (https://coyrforestforum.co.uk)
+-- Forum: NOTTINGHAM FOREST - A REBEL CLUB IN A REBEL CITY (https://coyrforestforum.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Nottingham Forest Fan Talk - Forest All Over The World (https://coyrforestforum.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: NFFC Financial Talk (/showthread.php?tid=546)
Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Widdow - 19-03-2024
Would be quite ironic if Luton stay up with no parachute payments or spending loads of money, as Forest defence to the commission you need to do that to remain and be competitive in Premier league.
Think need to take 4 points on the chin, and get on with it. If we end up going down we deserve to. Yes we have had bad refs and terrible decisions, but we haven’t been competitive, I mean we haven’t been consistent or string together a run of form and performances. We still cannot defend set pieces which meant lost far more points than the commission took away. The football is now in our court and time to start playing as a team and working even harder. All we need to do is gain more points than Luton for the last 9 games, I know we haven’t been able to beat them, but surely we can do that
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - DeesideRed - 19-03-2024
(18-03-2024, 10:16 PM)ozzyten10 Wrote: The other side of this is we made huge mistakes in recruitment. Hwang, bowler, Richards, Scarpa, Shelvey, obrien, Dennis, lingard. That has been our major issue here.
Hwang - agree made no sense at time either
bowler - agree made no sense at time either
Richards - disagree was going to be first choice left wing back. hindsight job
Scarpa - was free, didnt work out, who cares could have gone either way
Shelvey - absolute solid signing, the 6 we desperately needed to be brave with the ball, our biggest issue in Jan
obrien - the championship player of the year for £8m? come on
Dennis - calculated gamble on his watford performances in PL
lingard - From what ive heard what didnt do on pitch was very good off it.
our other signings weren't exactly splurges - Niakhate, Awoniyi, Mangala - German League signings all for less than £20m, Danilo £16m but on 6.5yr contract - Similar Neco £15-17m.
Likes of Boly (undisc) Serge (free) Toff (£3m) Felipe (free)
thats not heavy spending, its creating a team from scratch and at times being bloody frugal with it.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Sniffer Dog (Admin) - 19-03-2024
(19-03-2024, 11:14 AM)Widdow Wrote: Would be quite ironic if Luton stay up with no parachute payments or spending loads of money, as Forest defence to the commission you need to do that to remain and be competitive in Premier league.
Think need to take 4 points on the chin, and get on with it. If we end up going down we deserve to. Yes we have had bad refs and terrible decisions, but we haven’t been competitive, I mean we haven’t been consistent or string together a run of form and performances. We still cannot defend set pieces which meant lost far more points than the commission took away. The football is now in our court and time to start playing as a team and working even harder. All we need to do is gain more points than Luton for the last 9 games, I know we haven’t been able to beat them, but surely we can do that
I agree widdow.
I would also like to say that I am a bit disappointed with EM, I am not going to try and defend him.
Anyway there is no excuse for not bettering Luton in the final nine games.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - DeesideRed - 19-03-2024
(18-03-2024, 10:44 PM)Trailer Park Tom Wrote: It's all over the report that Atletico Madrid bid 50 mil Euros in June for Jonno and we rejected it.
Playing the absolute victims if that's true we need to move on and keep this trend of whining about refs and the prem away from the pitch.
If that is true then I'm sorry we shouldnt be appealing.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - The reds - 19-03-2024
(19-03-2024, 11:40 AM)DeesideRed Wrote:(18-03-2024, 10:44 PM)Trailer Park Tom Wrote: It's all over the report that Atletico Madrid bid 50 mil Euros in June for Jonno and we rejected it.
Playing the absolute victims if that's true we need to move on and keep this trend of whining about refs and the prem away from the pitch.
If that is true then I'm sorry we shouldnt be appealing.
If you read it properly, the bid was on the 30th June, player still needed to agree to it, have a medical, and be registered by La Liga, which is impossible to do, so can we stop calling our own club victims because we are not, Also the statement we put out was spot on.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - wassy04 - 19-03-2024
(19-03-2024, 11:48 AM)The reds Wrote:(19-03-2024, 11:40 AM)DeesideRed Wrote:(18-03-2024, 10:44 PM)Trailer Park Tom Wrote: It's all over the report that Atletico Madrid bid 50 mil Euros in June for Jonno and we rejected it.
Playing the absolute victims if that's true we need to move on and keep this trend of whining about refs and the prem away from the pitch.
If that is true then I'm sorry we shouldnt be appealing.
If you read it properly, the bid was on the 30th June, player still needed to agree to it, have a medical, and be registered by La Liga, which is impossible to do, so can we stop calling our own club victims because we are not, Also the statement we put out was spot on.
They did heavily imply that if we'd have accepted the bid the mitigation would've held up and we probably wouldn't have a points penalty.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - The reds - 19-03-2024
(19-03-2024, 12:13 PM)wassy04 Wrote:(19-03-2024, 11:48 AM)The reds Wrote:(19-03-2024, 11:40 AM)DeesideRed Wrote:(18-03-2024, 10:44 PM)Trailer Park Tom Wrote: It's all over the report that Atletico Madrid bid 50 mil Euros in June for Jonno and we rejected it.
Playing the absolute victims if that's true we need to move on and keep this trend of whining about refs and the prem away from the pitch.
If that is true then I'm sorry we shouldnt be appealing.
If you read it properly, the bid was on the 30th June, player still needed to agree to it, have a medical, and be registered by La Liga, which is impossible to do, so can we stop calling our own club victims because we are not, Also the statement we put out was spot on.
They did heavily imply that if we'd have accepted the bid the mitigation would've held up and we probably wouldn't have a points penalty.
Well the person who was involved shouldn’t have been involved, that’s the question which needs to be asked.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Paplane - 19-03-2024
I'd imagine you never accept the first offer for a player so my take is that it was probably not unreasonable to reject the Atletico offer and issue a counter offer. The fact that the offer was made on the 30th suggests to me that it was a low ball offer and they were just fishing for a bargain.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - wassy04 - 19-03-2024
(19-03-2024, 12:54 PM)Paplane Wrote: I'd imagine you never accept the first offer for a player so my take is that it was probably not unreasonable to reject the Atletico offer and issue a counter offer. The fact that the offer was made on the 30th suggests to me that it was a low ball offer and they were just fishing for a bargain.
Maybe so but we weren't in the position to negotiate given the deadline. Plus it didn't come in much less than Spurs offer in the end.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Paplane - 19-03-2024
The club said yesterday the transfer market is like no other marketplace. I'm sure we can all see that. Selling Brennan to a direct rival for below market value was never going to float in a true life football sense. Of course the panel are required to deal in pure fact - no we shouldn't have bought the players we did, yes we should've accepted the Atletico and Brentford offers, but the real true-life reality is that the things that have happened, ok maybe in moderation regarding transfers, were fairly rational in a football sense. We just pushed it a little too far. If we can just take these 4 points on the chin and scrape through this season, we're in a much better place medium term. Sell Murillo in the summer for decent cash and we can build on that and become a 'normal small club' which gets by on brining in emerging talent and selling on. At least we now know the clubs coming up will be shackled like we have been.
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - wassy04 - 19-03-2024
(19-03-2024, 01:06 PM)Paplane Wrote: The club said yesterday the transfer market is like no other marketplace. I'm sure we can all see that. Selling Brennan to a direct rival for below market value was never going to float in a true life football sense. Of course the panel are required to deal in pure fact - no we shouldn't have bought the players we did, yes we should've accepted the Atletico and Brentford offers, but the real true-life reality is that the things that have happened, ok maybe in moderation regarding transfers, were fairly rational in a football sense. We just pushed it a little too far. If we can just take these 4 points on the chin and scrape through this season, we're in a much better place medium term. Sell Murillo in the summer for decent cash and we can build on that and become a 'normal small club' which gets by on brining in emerging talent and selling on. At least we now know the clubs coming up will be shackled like we have been.
We really didn't need to play Brennan in those games at the start of the season. I suspect that mitigation is accepted if we didn't play him.
It's not even like he was useful in those games and they were games against Man Utd and Arsenal so was unlikely to have a major impact (I know one was vs Sheff Utd)
RE: NFFC Financial Talk - Paplane - 19-03-2024
(19-03-2024, 01:05 PM)wassy04 Wrote:(19-03-2024, 12:54 PM)Paplane Wrote: I'd imagine you never accept the first offer for a player so my take is that it was probably not unreasonable to reject the Atletico offer and issue a counter offer. The fact that the offer was made on the 30th suggests to me that it was a low ball offer and they were just fishing for a bargain.
Maybe so but we weren't in the position to negotiate given the deadline. Plus it didn't come in much less than Spurs offer in the end.
But it arrived on the final day and when it did, the club were probably thinking they'd missed the psr deadline at that point anyway so why not try to negotiate? And also it was the first real offer to arrive and as such the thinking was probably that Brennan was going to attract a £50m+ bid towards the end of the window. It's very easy to criticise with the 20:20 vision of hindsight. I'm not saying the club acted entirely appropriately, im sure many critisisms can be made, i'm saying just that I can possibly see why decisions were made.
At the end of the day, knowing what we all know now, we can ask why the likes of Richards and the Korean guy were signed but if Navas and Danillo for example hadn't arrived last winter then we'd now be a championship club, not a prem club fighting for it's life.