Budget - Speculate To Accumulate?

[Salvatore Matrecano]

How much were Brentford willing to pay for Worrall approx?

4m for Johnson is clearly too low and we're never getting close to 10m so not worth that one.

Anyone else got any value? Samba? Yates? McKenna? Lolley?.......Bong?!

Samba and Carvalho might bring in a bit between them. Offloading Carvalho would save £3m this year for a start. Whether doing that strengthens or weakens the squad Im not sure. I wondered about McKenna too but doubt we would get back more than we paid and hid deal will be structured anyway, would seem a short sighted option

Selling Carvalho only works if we get at least 3m otherwise we'd actually lose money on this years accounts! 

Without sale:
21/22 - -3m amortisation
22/23 - -3m amortisation

With sale for 2m eg:
21/22 - 6m remaining amortisation minus player sale of 2m = -4m on accounts.
22/23 - 0

So this year's accounts would be slightly worse but the next year would be better.

So it would only be worth selling for 5m+ really otherwise you're getting nothing in terms of FFP and losing a player that would then need replacing.

Thanks, I said you understand it better than me!

[wassy04]

How much were Brentford willing to pay for Worrall approx?

4m for Johnson is clearly too low and we're never getting close to 10m so not worth that one.

Anyone else got any value? Samba? Yates? McKenna? Lolley?.......Bong?!

Samba and Carvalho might bring in a bit between them. Offloading Carvalho would save £3m this year for a start. Whether doing that strengthens or weakens the squad Im not sure. I wondered about McKenna too but doubt we would get back more than we paid and hid deal will be structured anyway, would seem a short sighted option

Selling Carvalho only works if we get at least 3m otherwise we'd actually lose money on this years accounts! 

Without sale:
21/22 - -3m amortisation
22/23 - -3m amortisation

With sale for 2m eg:
21/22 - 6m remaining amortisation minus player sale of 2m = -4m on accounts.
22/23 - 0

So this year's accounts would be slightly worse but the next year would be better.

So it would only be worth selling for 5m+ really otherwise you're getting nothing in terms of FFP and losing a player that would then need replacing.

Thanks, I said you understand it better than me!

No worries, it's good to spell it out as it isn't particularly obvious. I only know as I'm sad and read blogs about football clubs accounts (Swiss Ramble)  :D

[Username]

Can we have a 'don't sell player's but get deals over the line that were arranged and set up by Gary Brazil and his team in the summer' option please?

That is my vote.

Maybe Dane has looked at the record of the players these chaps have brought in historically and questioned whether that’s the right use of the funds available?

These chaps don’t exactly have a good hit rate of signing quality and also overpaying, whether it be wages, signing on fees or transfer fees?

Perhaps he thinks that those lined up wouldn’t improve even what we have now and are akin to the likes of Lam, Traore, Ariyibi, Jenkinson, Diallo, Hefele, etc?

[keep the faith]

surely Gary Brazils player list and proposed deals would be totally different to a list that Dane Murphy has ran through his algorythim
and spreadsheet ie age and statistics, also now we see Hughton struggling he keeps talking of experienced players needed that know
the championship so i feel there is a lot of arguments going on behind the scenes pulling in different directions

[Strawberry Avenger]

How much were Brentford willing to pay for Worrall approx?

4m for Johnson is clearly too low and we're never getting close to 10m so not worth that one.

Anyone else got any value? Samba? Yates? McKenna? Lolley?.......Bong?!

Samba and Carvalho might bring in a bit between them. Offloading Carvalho would save £3m this year for a start. Whether doing that strengthens or weakens the squad Im not sure. I wondered about McKenna too but doubt we would get back more than we paid and hid deal will be structured anyway, would seem a short sighted option

Couldn't Oly' take him on loan?

SA.

How would that help? We'd have one less player for no money!

An ineffectual player freeing up wages for one who is?

SA.

[Strawberry Avenger]

surely Gary Brazils player list and proposed deals would be totally different to a list that Dane Murphy has ran through his algorythim
and spreadsheet ie age and statistics, also now we see Hughton struggling he keeps talking of experienced players needed that know
the championship so i feel there is a lot of arguments going on behind the scenes pulling in different directions

Could be the case.

The CEO has no doubt come in with his own ideas.  And they, in time, may turn out to be good ideas long term.  But being 12 points down already and the manager diplomatically asking for recruitment in post match for the 4th game in a row tells us where we're at right now.

One of which was starting the season without a LB.  Competency test right there.

SA.

[Strawberry Avenger]

Can we have a 'don't sell player's but get deals over the line that were arranged and set up by Gary Brazil and his team in the summer' option please?

That is my vote.

Maybe Dane has looked at the record of the players these chaps have brought in historically and questioned whether that’s the right use of the funds available?

These chaps don’t exactly have a good hit rate of signing quality and also overpaying, whether it be wages, signing on fees or transfer fees?

Perhaps he thinks that those lined up wouldn’t improve even what we have now and are akin to the likes of Lam, Traore, Ariyibi, Jenkinson, Diallo, Hefele, etc?

Fair points.  Forest's history in recruitment has been patchy.  

He may well disagree with the targets prepared and think we can do it cheaper/better.  And he may turn out to be a hot shot CEO long term.  Currently?  He isn't.  The start to the season he owns.  He's the CEO of Forest.

Telling that we're primarily doing loans.  Is this to buy time for quality permanent recruitment later or to save the funds for 'that' striker in closing days of this window?

And that's fine if you secure the recruitment targets to back up your convictions.

Which he hasn't.

His current record has hung Hughton out to dry.

SA.

[Marinakis Red]

Where is the money coming from for him to back it up? Danes back pocket? You could argue Dane may well of been hung out to dry too.

[Sausage Roll]

Where is the money coming from for him to back it up? Danes back pocket? You could argue Dane may well of been hung out to dry too.

I'm finding it absolutely ludicrous that there's some finger pointing at Murphy for what's going on this transfer window. The only scenario in which that would be justified is - in my opinion - if we had a decent budget to play with and we'd not landed the signings that were apparently identified earlier in the summer. The types of player we've been linked with lately doesn't seem to back that up.

As others have suggested, I think - and I don't know, it's just an opinion - we were banking on a big sale to fund incomings. It looks like Worrall to Brentford was the one, and for whatever reason that didn't happen. Now we can't afford the fees the clubs are asking for the players we identified earlier so we're having to cut our cloth accordingly.

This is all supposition but the logic behind it is sound.

[Marinakis Red]

Where is the money coming from for him to back it up? Danes back pocket? You could argue Dane may well of been hung out to dry too.

I'm finding it absolutely ludicrous that there's some finger pointing at Murphy for what's going on this transfer window. The only scenario in which that would be justified is - in my opinion - if we had a decent budget to play with and we'd not landed the signings that were apparently identified earlier in the summer. The types of player we've been linked with lately doesn't seem to back that up.

As others have suggested, I think - and I don't know, it's just an opinion - we were banking on a big sale to fund incomings. It looks like Worrall to Brentford was the one, and for whatever reason that didn't happen. Now we can't afford the fees the clubs are asking for the players we identified earlier so we're having to cut our cloth accordingly.

This is all supposition but the logic behind it is sound.

Totally mate, nail and head spring to mind, exactly the reason I find any criticism of Murphy ludicrous. You have said what I have said for a little while now in that post.

[Paplane]

Where is the money coming from for him to back it up? Danes back pocket? You could argue Dane may well of been hung out to dry too.

I'm finding it absolutely ludicrous that there's some finger pointing at Murphy for what's going on this transfer window. The only scenario in which that would be justified is - in my opinion - if we had a decent budget to play with and we'd not landed the signings that were apparently identified earlier in the summer. The types of player we've been linked with lately doesn't seem to back that up.

As others have suggested, I think - and I don't know, it's just an opinion - we were banking on a big sale to fund incomings. It looks like Worrall to Brentford was the one, and for whatever reason that didn't happen. Now we can't afford the fees the clubs are asking for the players we identified earlier so we're having to cut our cloth accordingly.

This is all supposition but the logic behind it is sound.

Totally mate, nail and head spring to mind, exactly the reason I find any criticism of Murphy ludicrous. You have said what I have said for a little while now in that post.

My critisim of Murphy relates to 1) the lashing the manager has received and 2) the way the transition has happened. 

Firstly, I seem to be ne of only a few fans who realises that this side CH is putting out is not the one he would wish to and even without the injuries its poorer this season that the one that ended last. He's having to play Colback and Yates (which he didn't do at all last year) and front up to the media and defend it when he knows himself it's kack. He says after every game that he is limited and that he needs players and needs them quick. It's Dane's job to make it happen and he's not done it. Maybe CH needs to learn how to beat his chest like Billy Davies used to.

Secondly, Dane's sold this algorism type approach to transfers to the club. That's fair enough and we can all see the benefits I'm sure. But he's the top man in all this. It's he that's implementing the change. No-one else. What he hasn't done is manage the transition to the new way properly. He's sanctioned the release of players and elected not to renew loans without bringing in replacements and now we're woefully under resourced on the pitch. Also, and I appreciate this is subjective, he appears to have underestimated the cost of players his computer says he should buy, or not appreciated what our budget is and how far it needs to be stretched to be able to implement his approach. 

Those are two very fair criticisms in my book. They're not ludicrous.

[Marinakis Red]

Where is the money coming from for him to back it up? Danes back pocket? You could argue Dane may well of been hung out to dry too.

I'm finding it absolutely ludicrous that there's some finger pointing at Murphy for what's going on this transfer window. The only scenario in which that would be justified is - in my opinion - if we had a decent budget to play with and we'd not landed the signings that were apparently identified earlier in the summer. The types of player we've been linked with lately doesn't seem to back that up.

As others have suggested, I think - and I don't know, it's just an opinion - we were banking on a big sale to fund incomings. It looks like Worrall to Brentford was the one, and for whatever reason that didn't happen. Now we can't afford the fees the clubs are asking for the players we identified earlier so we're having to cut our cloth accordingly.

This is all supposition but the logic behind it is sound.

Totally mate, nail and head spring to mind, exactly the reason I find any criticism of Murphy ludicrous. You have said what I have said for a little while now in that post.

My critisim of Murphy relates to 1) the lashing the manager has received and 2) the way the transition has happened. 

Firstly, I seem to be ne of only a few fans who realises that this side CH is putting out is not the one he would wish to and even without the injuries its poorer this season that the one that ended last. He's having to play Colback and Yates (which he didn't do at all last year) and front up to the media and defend it when he knows himself it's kack. He says after every game that he is limited and that he needs players and needs them quick. It's Dane's job to make it happen and he's not done it. Maybe CH needs to learn how to beat his chest like Billy Davies used to.

Secondly, Dane's sold this algorism type approach to transfers to the club. That's fair enough and we can all see the benefits I'm sure. But he's the top man in all this. It's he that's implementing the change. No-one else. What he hasn't done is manage the transition to the new way properly. He's sanctioned the release of players and elected not to renew loans without bringing in replacements and now we're woefully under resourced on the pitch. Also, and I appreciate this is subjective, he appears to have underestimated the cost of players his computer says he should buy, or not appreciated what our budget is and how far it needs to be stretched to be able to implement his approach. 

Those are two very fair criticisms in my book. They're not ludicrous.

They are both ludicrous if the money is not available which seems to be the case mate. We put our eggs in the worrall leaving basket. 

Who is Danes boss to step in and pull him up on his poor performance? Danes boss is Vrentzos.

I am a 100% certain if we sold Worrall today you would see the desired incomings by the end of the week.