Not good enough

[GodalmingYellow]

[quote=&quotSnake&quot]An odd title to this thread. “Not good enough

[Kernow Yellow]

Play-offs? We’re almost there now.

I assume you're just being provocative, but that really is a ridiculous statement. Port Vale are 3 points behind us with a game in hand, and there's almost a third of the season left to go. Almost anything could still happen (although I think we're probably safe from relegation).

[Baboo]

Play-offs? We’re almost there now.

I assume you're just being provocative, but that really is a ridiculous statement. Port Vale are 3 points behind us with a game in hand, and there's almost a third of the season left to go. Almost anything could still happen (although I think we're probably safe from relegation).

And we have to go to Vale for the last of the 46 matches. It was bad enough there last time but I dread to think what it will be like if I there is something important resting on the game for either or both teams.

My view on whether we are good enough or not is here of course:
http&#58//www&#46rageonline&#46co&#46uk ... ws_id=3081

[Paul Cooper]

From rumours over a very long period, Swinetown and Crawley are speniding significantly more than the FL rules allow.

Kelvin also seems to have been consistyent in suggesting that we have around the 7th bigegst budget in the league (I thought that he had fixed the budget based on trying to break even rather than the FL maximum so maybe there is a difference there?).

IF our budget is the 7th/8th highest in the league, then finishing in the pay offs would be pretty much a par score and I would be a little surprised if people would necessarily blame CW for that?

I believe that finishing 7th ths season would be accaptable. The Play offs is what many were hopinmg for and this will represent progress (so every one of CW's years in charge will have seen the club finish higher- soem record).

Then assuming that we can strengthen the squad further and don't have to offload the likes of Leven etc, then we should eb challenging for top 3 next season.

[slappy]

If our budget is 7th largest, I count that as saying that Wilder and the team's performance is 'average' - neither under or over achieving. It could be argued that injuries to Capaldi, Duberry, Craddock, Franks, Chapman etc have hindered our progress, but we have had plenty of moves in the loan market.

As for Port Vale, they are on a transfer embargo and I feel that off the pitch financial issues may affect them as the end of the season approaches.

[GodalmingYellow]

From rumours over a very long period, Swinetown and Crawley are speniding significantly more than the FL rules allow.

Kelvin also seems to have been consistyent in suggesting that we have around the 7th bigegst budget in the league (I thought that he had fixed the budget based on trying to break even rather than the FL maximum so maybe there is a difference there?).

IF our budget is the 7th/8th highest in the league, then finishing in the pay offs would be pretty much a par score and I would be a little surprised if people would necessarily blame CW for that?

I believe that finishing 7th ths season would be accaptable. The Play offs is what many were hopinmg for and this will represent progress (so every one of CW's years in charge will have seen the club finish higher- soem record).

Then assuming that we can strengthen the squad further and don't have to offload the likes of Leven etc, then we should eb challenging for top 3 next season.

Sorry, but this is just incorrect.

All FL clubs have to report regularly to the Football League to prove they are staying within the limits.

It is no use saying that there is a rumour of Crawley spending more than they should and basing an entire argument on it. As we've already discussed, Crawley sold their best player for a lot of money in order to stay within the FL rules. Evans has picked up a lot of very good players for next to nothing and hence they stay within the rules. That just makes Evans better at signing players than Wilder (as if we didn't already know this and how much would we wish to have retained Bulman?). Their budget is less than ours but they've used it better.

Swinedown have a bigger budget than us because they get bigger crowds than us, and Di Crapio appears to annoyingly have spent it better than we would like.

Kelvin has not repeatedly said our budget is 7th or 8th biggest. He apparently said it once in relation to one question from OxVox, although we don't know the precise context of wording of the question or the reply, so we can't be sure of the relevance, and we can't be sure how much Kelvin knew of other budgets at that time, or if he was using that statement in order to stop club's putting up their prices when we try to sign players. It is a statement that we have to take into account but we cannot put that much weight on it.

Kelvin has said that we are up to the max that we can spend on players, that to sign new players we have to release some and that the club will run a loss this season.

Our budget is 3rd biggest for the division (possibly 2nd biggest if as has been reported that Bradford's gates are only based on hugely discounted ticket prices). The only people who don't want to accept that are those who don't want to accept that Wilder hasn't done a good a job this season and appears to be only a mediocre manager at this level.

And I really hope I am proved wrong.

[slappy]

GY - How do you know that Crawley's budget is less than ours? Rubbishing someone else's argument, then putting up your own stating we have the 3rd largest budget in the league without any back up is just as rubbish.

I suspect that Crawley were able to attract the players for their project promotion from BSP by offering them better salaries than they could get anywhere else, and the low transfer fees paid were offset by higher wages.

Southend are losing 100K per month, almost all of our opponents (except perhaps Bradford and Crewe) have significantly lower rent or stadium costs. Shrewsbury have also historically been big spenders in this league.

[Isaac]

GY, I think you have some misplaced faith in the FL wage cap. Namely

1) That they implement it correctly
2) That it can't be worked around somehow.

I think, but I'm not sure (anyone got any links?), that it's based on the previous seasons turnover. Does it include transfer fees, signing on fees and bonuses? I'd be sceptical to be honest, knowing how the FL works. I think assuming that if you're 3rd highest in the attendance list you'll be 3rd highest turnover is simplistic.

For example, last season Crawley had a cup game at Man U, generating approx £1m apparently. I presume this is added into last seasons turnover. I suspect the sale of their strikers is to help cover this massive gap in funding this year. Didn't they also get taken over by some unnamed rich investors? Which may have impacted club turnover.

Have Crawley even released their accounts from last season?

[Isaac]

Sorry, posted too eagerly.
My general point is this - no-one knows really where we are in the budget league table. KT didn't know when he said 7th, GY doesn't know when he says 3rd. It's speculation. Unless the FL make the whole thing more transparent it just looks like good intentions and nothing else to me.

[GodalmingYellow]

GY - How do you know that Crawley's budget is less than ours? Rubbishing someone else's argument, then putting up your own stating we have the 3rd largest budget in the league without any back up is just as rubbish.

I suspect that Crawley were able to attract the players for their project promotion from BSP by offering them better salaries than they could get anywhere else, and the low transfer fees paid were offset by higher wages.

Southend are losing 100K per month, almost all of our opponents (except perhaps Bradford and Crewe) have significantly lower rent or stadium costs. Shrewsbury have also historically been big spenders in this league.

Calm down Slappy.

Have you read the rest of this thread? If so you will see the evidence has been posted.

You then go on to say &quotI suspect...&quot making your argument no better than any of the other rumour/speculative points.

[Paul Cooper]

From rumours over a very long period, Swinetown and Crawley are speniding significantly more than the FL rules allow.

Kelvin also seems to have been consistyent in suggesting that we have around the 7th bigegst budget in the league (I thought that he had fixed the budget based on trying to break even rather than the FL maximum so maybe there is a difference there?).

IF our budget is the 7th/8th highest in the league, then finishing in the pay offs would be pretty much a par score and I would be a little surprised if people would necessarily blame CW for that?

I believe that finishing 7th ths season would be accaptable. The Play offs is what many were hopinmg for and this will represent progress (so every one of CW's years in charge will have seen the club finish higher- soem record).

Then assuming that we can strengthen the squad further and don't have to offload the likes of Leven etc, then we should eb challenging for top 3 next season.

Sorry, but this is just incorrect.

All FL clubs have to report regularly to the Football League to prove they are staying within the limits.

It is no use saying that there is a rumour of Crawley spending more than they should and basing an entire argument on it. As we've already discussed, Crawley sold their best player for a lot of money in order to stay within the FL rules. Evans has picked up a lot of very good players for next to nothing and hence they stay within the rules. That just makes Evans better at signing players than Wilder (as if we didn't already know this and how much would we wish to have retained Bulman?). Their budget is less than ours but they've used it better.

Swinedown have a bigger budget than us because they get bigger crowds than us, and Di Crapio appears to annoyingly have spent it better than we would like.

Kelvin has not repeatedly said our budget is 7th or 8th biggest. He apparently said it once in relation to one question from OxVox, although we don't know the precise context of wording of the question or the reply, so we can't be sure of the relevance, and we can't be sure how much Kelvin knew of other budgets at that time, or if he was using that statement in order to stop club's putting up their prices when we try to sign players. It is a statement that we have to take into account but we cannot put that much weight on it.

Kelvin has said that we are up to the max that we can spend on players, that to sign new players we have to release some and that the club will run a loss this season.

Our budget is 3rd biggest for the division (possibly 2nd biggest if as has been reported that Bradford's gates are only based on hugely discounted ticket prices). The only people who don't want to accept that are those who don't want to accept that Wilder hasn't done a good a job this season and appears to be only a mediocre manager at this level.

And I really hope I am proved wrong.

Simplistic in the extreme to suggest that we have the 3rd biggest crowds and so are the third biggest spenders.

KT told Oxvox that he believed we were the 7th/8th highest spenders in the Division. I believe that he said it earlier in th season in his Q&ampA sessions with the local papers or on the OUFC website as well. Why would he bend the truth? I am sure that he is much closer to it than either you or I.

Sorry but to suggest that the only people who suggest this are those who want to suggest CW has done a good job this season is also nonsense.

IF we are the 7th/8th higfhest spenders in the Division then to me 7th, as stated is a par performance. If however we were to be the second highest spenders then not.

[GodalmingYellow]

GY, I think you have some misplaced faith in the FL wage cap. Namely

1) That they implement it correctly
2) That it can't be worked around somehow.

I think, but I'm not sure (anyone got any links?), that it's based on the previous seasons turnover. Does it include transfer fees, signing on fees and bonuses? I'd be sceptical to be honest, knowing how the FL works. I think assuming that if you're 3rd highest in the attendance list you'll be 3rd highest turnover is simplistic.

For example, last season Crawley had a cup game at Man U, generating approx £1m apparently. I presume this is added into last seasons turnover. I suspect the sale of their strikers is to help cover this massive gap in funding this year. Didn't they also get taken over by some unnamed rich investors? Which may have impacted club turnover.

Have Crawley even released their accounts from last season?

Isaac, you are casting aspersions ont he FL's ability to enforce their own rules. I think you need to show why you believe this, without recourse to unsubstantiated rhetoric.

The old &quotsome way to get around the rules&quot argument is always wheeled out by those who don't like the natural conclusion to the argument, that Oxford United are not a God like team unable to do no wrong. It never ceases to amaze me that people can't simply accept that everyone has played by the rules and Oxford United, and Wilder in particular, has underperformed compared to others?

You're wrong on the wage cap. My understanding is that it is based on current year turnover.

Investment in a football club does not affect turnover or the wage cap.

[GodalmingYellow]

From rumours over a very long period, Swinetown and Crawley are speniding significantly more than the FL rules allow.

Kelvin also seems to have been consistyent in suggesting that we have around the 7th bigegst budget in the league (I thought that he had fixed the budget based on trying to break even rather than the FL maximum so maybe there is a difference there?).

IF our budget is the 7th/8th highest in the league, then finishing in the pay offs would be pretty much a par score and I would be a little surprised if people would necessarily blame CW for that?

I believe that finishing 7th ths season would be accaptable. The Play offs is what many were hopinmg for and this will represent progress (so every one of CW's years in charge will have seen the club finish higher- soem record).

Then assuming that we can strengthen the squad further and don't have to offload the likes of Leven etc, then we should eb challenging for top 3 next season.

Sorry, but this is just incorrect.

All FL clubs have to report regularly to the Football League to prove they are staying within the limits.

It is no use saying that there is a rumour of Crawley spending more than they should and basing an entire argument on it. As we've already discussed, Crawley sold their best player for a lot of money in order to stay within the FL rules. Evans has picked up a lot of very good players for next to nothing and hence they stay within the rules. That just makes Evans better at signing players than Wilder (as if we didn't already know this and how much would we wish to have retained Bulman?). Their budget is less than ours but they've used it better.

Swinedown have a bigger budget than us because they get bigger crowds than us, and Di Crapio appears to annoyingly have spent it better than we would like.

Kelvin has not repeatedly said our budget is 7th or 8th biggest. He apparently said it once in relation to one question from OxVox, although we don't know the precise context of wording of the question or the reply, so we can't be sure of the relevance, and we can't be sure how much Kelvin knew of other budgets at that time, or if he was using that statement in order to stop club's putting up their prices when we try to sign players. It is a statement that we have to take into account but we cannot put that much weight on it.

Kelvin has said that we are up to the max that we can spend on players, that to sign new players we have to release some and that the club will run a loss this season.

Our budget is 3rd biggest for the division (possibly 2nd biggest if as has been reported that Bradford's gates are only based on hugely discounted ticket prices). The only people who don't want to accept that are those who don't want to accept that Wilder hasn't done a good a job this season and appears to be only a mediocre manager at this level.

And I really hope I am proved wrong.

Simplistic in the extreme to suggest that we have the 3rd biggest crowds and so are the third biggest spenders.

KT told Oxvox that he believed we were the 7th/8th highest spenders in the Division. I believe that he said it earlier in th season in his Q&ampA sessions with the local papers or on the OUFC website as well. Why would he bend the truth? I am sure that he is much closer to it than either you or I.

Sorry but to suggest that the only people who suggest this are those who want to suggest CW has done a good job this season is also nonsense.

IF we are the 7th/8th higfhest spenders in the Division then to me 7th, as stated is a par performance. If however we were to be the second highest spenders then not.

Except that isn't what I said. I provided all the evidence needed that we have the 3rd biggest budget in the division.

If you choose to prefer to ignore the facts because it doesn't match the outcome that you want to argue, that is up to you.

You show me evidence that Kelvin has said more than once that OUFC budget is 7th or 8th in the division.

[JoeyBeauchamp]

I think, rather than going round in circles, this boils down to two things, which I don't think many would disagree with

1. We should be up there challenging for the play-offs, given our resources, fan base and ambition.
2. While CW has made a number of curious or wrong decisions, such as loan signings, tactics and player management, he is the best manager we have had for some time and to get rid of him at the business end of a season when we are threatening the play-offs would be absolute madness.

My own personal view is that stability and patience are rare qualities in football, and - unless we lose every game of the rest of the season and finish near the bottom - I hope CW is manager next season whether we go up or not.

[Isaac]

Isaac, you are casting aspersions ont he FL's ability to enforce their own rules. I think you need to show why you believe this, without recourse to unsubstantiated rhetoric.

The old &quotsome way to get around the rules&quot argument is always wheeled out by those who don't like the natural conclusion to the argument, that Oxford United are not a God like team unable to do no wrong. It never ceases to amaze me that people can't simply accept that everyone has played by the rules and Oxford United, and Wilder in particular, has underperformed compared to others?

You're wrong on the wage cap. My understanding is that it is based on current year turnover.

Investment in a football club does not affect turnover or the wage cap.

I'm casting aspersions because I cannot find (after a quick google search) any evidence on the web about what the FL are going about the wage cap, or what you say of their policing of it is correct.

If you can provide some, please do, as it will provide some clarification for me and others as at the moment there is a lot of unsubstatiated rhetoric and it's not all mine.