Bedsheets, Pitchforks and colours nailed etc.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

He did the same at Celtic bringing in unknown youngsters and geriatrics on frees (and not uncoincidentally) by the bucketload...
The fact it worked at Celtic says more about Scottish football than Lennon's capability.

[thebish]

But did Lennon assemble his squad on the basis of making it better or making it cheaper?

Like getting two right-backs he now doesn't use? Arguably neither.

Which, with respect, is the one copper bottomed example. Which is now taken to apparently be the landing light through the fog to highlight his obvious ineptitude.

or.... the three strikers who never score?

[norm the jedi]

But did Lennon assemble his squad on the basis of making it better or making it cheaper?

Like getting two right-backs he now doesn't use? Arguably neither.

Which, with respect, is the one copper bottomed example. Which is now taken to apparently be the landing light through the fog to highlight his obvious ineptitude.
Not going to try and excuse it no idea what motivated it or what's gone on? But there's clearly more to it than a drunken buy it now on football managers ebay.

However it seems to me as someone who doesn't take that much notice, that the better quality he has brought in seems mostly to have been borrowed and has not stopped here. Leaving, 'what he has assembled'...which is the car boot end of the journeyman bargain bucket mixed with a blend of geriatrics, out of contract elsewhere, who can barely break into a trot and yooofs who can't apparently withstand the rigours of 2 games a week in a mans league.

Our wage bill is £16M.

Which I am willing I bet puts us halfway up the table.

It isn't like we are (or have been) absolute paupers in that regard. Lennon has signed a lot of players and most can't even get in his side.

That speaks for itself.

16M Now or when last published ? genuine enquiry not to be a smart arse just find it hard to believe?
If we have not been absolute paupers in relative terms who have we bought for anything approaching a decent Fee..
Why have we not kept loanees who did well for us.. or retained our better players at the end of contracts.
Logic would suggest that we can't afford to pay the going rate either in initial fees or packages.

An awful lot of what we have had in the last 18 months would seem to best be described as 'a punt' short term plaster for short term hole.. Eidur, Heskey etc.

Edit - David Conn puts it at 37M in 2014 highest in the division and 107% of turn over? That makes even less feckin sense

[StaffsTrotter]

Thats where I am Norm. I know every manager is the same and misses targets, so needs contingencies. But some observers seem to believe everything can always fall sequentially in terms of acquiring targets and spending an agreed set budget, but in what is now our weak spot, I'd guess NL was expecting ALF to come back (he'd been here & wanted to come back & we were 'in' for him) and never thought he'd end up with what he's had to scrabble around to get.

[Worthy4England]

But did Lennon assemble his squad on the basis of making it better or making it cheaper?

Like getting two right-backs he now doesn't use? Arguably neither.

Which, with respect, is the one copper bottomed example. Which is now taken to apparently be the landing light through the fog to highlight his obvious ineptitude.
Not going to try and excuse it no idea what motivated it or what's gone on? But there's clearly more to it than a drunken buy it now on football managers ebay.

However it seems to me as someone who doesn't take that much notice, that the better quality he has brought in seems mostly to have been borrowed and has not stopped here. Leaving, 'what he has assembled'...which is the car boot end of the journeyman bargain bucket mixed with a blend of geriatrics, out of contract elsewhere, who can barely break into a trot and yooofs who can't apparently withstand the rigours of 2 games a week in a mans league.

Our wage bill is £16M.

Which I am willing I bet puts us halfway up the table.

It isn't like we are (or have been) absolute paupers in that regard. Lennon has signed a lot of players and most can't even get in his side.

That speaks for itself.

16M Now or when last published ? genuine enquiry not to be a smart arse just find it hard to believe?
If we have not been absolute paupers in relative terms who have we bought for anything approaching a decent Fee..
Why have we not kept loanees who did well for us.. or retained our better players at the end of contracts.
Logic would suggest that we can't afford to pay the going rate either in initial fees or packages.

An awful lot of what we have had in the last 18 months would seem to best be described as 'a punt' short term plaster for short term hole.. Eidur, Heskey etc.

Last published was £30.x M which was to the year ended 30 June 2014.

[StaffsTrotter]

But did Lennon assemble his squad on the basis of making it better or making it cheaper?

Like getting two right-backs he now doesn't use? Arguably neither.

Which, with respect, is the one copper bottomed example. Which is now taken to apparently be the landing light through the fog to highlight his obvious ineptitude.
Not going to try and excuse it no idea what motivated it or what's gone on? But there's clearly more to it than a drunken buy it now on football managers ebay.

However it seems to me as someone who doesn't take that much notice, that the better quality he has brought in seems mostly to have been borrowed and has not stopped here. Leaving, 'what he has assembled'...which is the car boot end of the journeyman bargain bucket mixed with a blend of geriatrics, out of contract elsewhere, who can barely break into a trot and yooofs who can't apparently withstand the rigours of 2 games a week in a mans league.

Our wage bill is £16M.

Which I am willing I bet puts us halfway up the table.

It isn't like we are (or have been) absolute paupers in that regard. Lennon has signed a lot of players and most can't even get in his side.

That speaks for itself.

16M Now or when last published ? genuine enquiry not to be a smart arse just find it hard to believe?
If we have not been absolute paupers in relative terms who have we bought for anything approaching a decent Fee..
Why have we not kept loanees who did well for us.. or retained our better players at the end of contracts.
Logic would suggest that we can't afford to pay the going rate either in initial fees or packages.

An awful lot of what we have had in the last 18 months would seem to best be described as 'a punt' short term plaster for short term hole.. Eidur, Heskey etc.

or has subsequently been demonstrated as unaffordable in the market place on a more permanent deal - ALF, Bannan

[norm the jedi]

Sorry thread updated in 3 directions made me head spin!

So we have more than halved the wage bill in 12 months £34.7 according to David Conn, who knows his stuff.. down to £16 Million

Whilst retaining a similar number of employees [I'm guessing]

The productivity of most businesses would suffer on them numbers.. wouldn't it?

Or is Lennon really supposed to make us better ?

There's an argument that we should have been better for 34.7 but that wasn't NL's doing was it ?

Cut the wage bill by >50% De-skill the work force and improve performance? Good trick if you can pull it off.

Or [again genuine question ] am I missing summat?

[Worthy4England]

Sorry thread updated in 3 directions made me head spin!

So we have more than halved the wage bill in 12 months £34.7 according to David Conn, who knows his stuff.. down to £16 Million

Whilst retaining a similar number of employees [I'm guessing]

The productivity of most businesses would suffer on them numbers.. wouldn't it?

Or is Lennon really supposed to make us better ?

There's an argument that we should have been better for 34.7 but that wasn't NL's doing was it ?

Cut the wage bill by >50% De-skill the work force and improve performance? Good trick if you can pull it off.

Or [again genuine question ] am I missing summat?

I think the bit you might be missing (if I may make so bold ) is that despite the significant cuts, our £16m wage bill would still be mid-table level for the division.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablo ... -wage-bill" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We signed 12 players since July 1st and a couple of loanees so in total 18 players since Lennon took over. So it's not like he has to play the terminally useless he was stuck with, so why are we in 24th?

The lowest wage bill last season was Peterborough @ £6.2m.

Yet we're sat in 24th and looking clueless.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

He did the same at Celtic bringing in unknown youngsters and geriatrics on frees (and not uncoincidentally) by the bucketload...
The fact it worked at Celtic says more about Scottish football than Lennon's capability.

I think, Worthy, this answers your question...

[norm the jedi]

Sorry thread updated in 3 directions made me head spin!

So we have more than halved the wage bill in 12 months £34.7 according to David Conn, who knows his stuff.. down to £16 Million

Whilst retaining a similar number of employees [I'm guessing]

The productivity of most businesses would suffer on them numbers.. wouldn't it?

Or is Lennon really supposed to make us better ?

There's an argument that we should have been better for 34.7 but that wasn't NL's doing was it ?

Cut the wage bill by >50% De-skill the work force and improve performance? Good trick if you can pull it off.

Or [again genuine question ] am I missing summat?

I think the bit you might be missing (if I may make so bold ) is that despite the significant cuts, our £16m wage bill would still be mid-table level for the division.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablo ... -wage-bill" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We signed 12 players since July 1st and a couple of loanees so in total 18 players since Lennon took over. So it's not like he has to play the terminally useless he was stuck with, so why are we in 24th?

The lowest wage bill last season was Peterborough @ £6.2m.

Yet we're sat in 24th and looking clueless.

Feel free to go Boldly old chap

We are where we are because we aren't very good I suspect. Individually or collectively. Not entirely convinced that it is all down to NL
If he could have bought ALF I'm not sure he'd have fecked the deal off in favour of the shop mobility Saganauts!

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Not entirely convinced that it is all down to NL

Neither am I

But he's played a poor hand badly

[norm the jedi]

Not entirely convinced that it is all down to NL

Neither am I

But he's played a poor hand badly

Fair play . Does that disqualify him from playing a better one post take over (he said optimistically and somewhat uncharacteristically)

Or is it time for Carlos Manage a Team [copyright A Sugar]

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Lennon's part of the problem, not the solution.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Not entirely convinced that it is all down to NL

Neither am I

But he's played a poor hand badly

Fair play . Does that disqualify him from playing a better one post take over (he said optimistically and somewhat uncharacteristically)

Or is it time for Carlos Manage a Team [copyright A Sugar]

I honestly don't know, Norm. I'd be intrigued to see what he could have done with a better team, but then Dougie would have done better with Juke, etc etc.

What I do feel is that although Lennon has been forgiven some shortcomings by circumstance, changing the manager is very small potatoes compared to changing the ownership structure. It's not quite rearranging the Titanic's deckchairs, but it's certainly not checking the radar for icebergs.

[Lost Leopard Spot]

Not entirely convinced that it is all down to NL

Neither am I

But he's played a poor hand badly

Fair play . Does that disqualify him from playing a better one post take over (he said optimistically and somewhat uncharacteristically)

Or is it time for Carlos Manage a Team [copyright A Sugar]

I honestly don't know, Norm. I'd be intrigued to see what he could have done with a better team, but then Dougie would have done better with Juke, etc etc.

What I do feel is that although Lennon has been forgiven some shortcomings by circumstance, changing the manager is very small potatoes compared to changing the ownership structure. It's not quite rearranging the Titanic's deckchairs, but it's certainly not checking the radar for icebergs.

You're wrong!
If P&O get bought out by White Star Line, the ship is still crewed by the sailors under the captain's command... it's them that steer into or away from icebergs, no matter what the CEO of White Star might decree.

[norm the jedi]

Not entirely convinced that it is all down to NL

Neither am I

But he's played a poor hand badly

Fair play . Does that disqualify him from playing a better one post take over (he said optimistically and somewhat uncharacteristically)

Or is it time for Carlos Manage a Team [copyright A Sugar]

I honestly don't know, Norm. I'd be intrigued to see what he could have done with a better team, but then Dougie would have done better with Juke, etc etc.

What I do feel is that although Lennon has been forgiven some shortcomings by circumstance, changing the manager is very small potatoes compared to changing the ownership structure. It's not quite rearranging the Titanic's deckchairs, but it's certainly not checking the radar for icebergs.

You're wrong!
If P&O get bought out by White Star Line, the ship is still crewed by the sailors under the captain's command... it's them that steer into or away from icebergs, no matter what the CEO of White Star might decree.

Except the new chair provides the captain wherewithall to improve the crew rendering your analogy holed below the waterline.

[thebish]

there are multiple factors at work in our demise... the fact that there are more factors than just Lenny doesn't mean Lenny isn't one of the factors.

bottom line for me is the following question - and this is merely a matter of opinion - it's not easily measurable or provable..

here's the question:

Can you - hand on heart (or other equivalent gesture of honesty suitable to your culture/proclivity) - declare that being bottom right now, 4pts adrift having scored 12 goals in 18 matches, on a PPG of 0.66666(recurring) is the absolute BEST that could have been achieved with the squad and resources we have.

I don't think it is. so I have to conclude that Lenny is not doing as well as he might and so must shoulder some (not all) of the blame. It's not hugely controversial, surely, to point that out?

[Hoboh]

there are multiple factors at work in our demise... the fact that there are more factors than just Lenny doesn't mean Lenny isn't one of the factors.

bottom line for me is the following question - and this is merely a matter of opinion - it's not easily measurable or provable..

here's the question:

Can you - hand on heart (or other equivalent gesture of honesty suitable to your culture/proclivity) - declare that being bottom right now, 4pts adrift having scored 12 goals in 18 matches, on a PPG of 0.66666(recurring) is the absolute BEST that could have been achieved with the squad and resources we have.

I don't think it is. so I have to conclude that Lenny is not doing as well as he might and so must shoulder some (not all) of the blame. It's not hugely controversial, surely, to point that out?

Shoot! yet a n other point of agreement, I need to lay down

[BWFC_Insane]

there are multiple factors at work in our demise... the fact that there are more factors than just Lenny doesn't mean Lenny isn't one of the factors.

bottom line for me is the following question - and this is merely a matter of opinion - it's not easily measurable or provable..

here's the question:

Can you - hand on heart (or other equivalent gesture of honesty suitable to your culture/proclivity) - declare that being bottom right now, 4pts adrift having scored 12 goals in 18 matches, on a PPG of 0.66666(recurring) is the absolute BEST that could have been achieved with the squad and resources we have.

I don't think it is. so I have to conclude that Lenny is not doing as well as he might and so must shoulder some (not all) of the blame. It's not hugely controversial, surely, to point that out?

This sums it up. The results this season are a disgrace. Even under the circumstances.

There are far bigger things going on right now and in many respects Lennon is a lucky, lucky man.

But for me, he's completely failed and I hope if we do find new owners they will review the situation when appropriate if results don't change.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

there are multiple factors at work in our demise... the fact that there are more factors than just Lenny doesn't mean Lenny isn't one of the factors.

bottom line for me is the following question - and this is merely a matter of opinion - it's not easily measurable or provable..

here's the question:

Can you - hand on heart (or other equivalent gesture of honesty suitable to your culture/proclivity) - declare that being bottom right now, 4pts adrift having scored 12 goals in 18 matches, on a PPG of 0.66666(recurring) is the absolute BEST that could have been achieved with the squad and resources we have.

I don't think it is. so I have to conclude that Lenny is not doing as well as he might and so must shoulder some (not all) of the blame. It's not hugely controversial, surely, to point that out?

This sums it up. The results this season are a disgrace. Even under the circumstances.

There are far bigger things going on right now and in many respects Lennon is a lucky, lucky man.

But for me, he's completely failed and I hope if we do find new owners they will review the situation when appropriate if results don't change.

Which is what it would/will come down to - what it always comes down to, in the end.