Dougie View on Game (Huddersfield)

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

exactly, before i start to judge him as a manager.

with his own squad, his own system and ample time to evaluate the players we have now.

Thank-you, exactly what I said you'd said.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

exactly, before i start to judge him as a manager.

with his own squad, his own system and ample time to evaluate the players we have now.

Thank-you, exactly what I said you'd said.

er no, you said i'd move into the "dougie is shyte" camp.

absolutely nothing like what i said.

no point debating with a troll, you say we'll lose every game, you say every player is 'shit', every manager is 'shit,' every sub is 'shit'

Lets be honest at a club like Bolton, which, in recent history, has achieved extremely limited "success" and has almost no avenue to spend money, you're probably going to be close to the mark if you predict "failure" for every manager.

you also used to say big sam was shit under the guise of "MRS RESPECTABLE" on bolton banter.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

wanderlust wrote:

Only an idiot would expect us to be competing for promotion after the previous manager was forced to get rid of more than half of the squad before a ball was kicked.

Hmm, I love sweeping statements that slag off 95% of Bolton fans, the bookies etc.

Spurious stats at best, grandiose statement designed to get attention at worst.

My understanding is that the vast majority of fans actually understand what has happened, are behind the manager and have limited expectations, if not hopes.

And bookies only exist to prey on fools that believe the media hype - which is why 99.9% of people don't gamble with a bookie on a regular basis.

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

no point debating with a troll, you say we'll lose every game, you say every player is 'shit', every manager is 'shit,' every sub is 'shit'

At the moment that's exactly how it seems.

There are plenty of clubs higher up the league than us that don't have a pot to piss in either.

But it's all relative.

have they achieved 2 European trips and a period of top 8 premier league finishes?

I doubt it.

It's all cyclical, unless you're deluded, like some appear to be and expect 5-0 wins every week with "proper" clean sheets.

"small" clubs with "small followings" and limited funds are generally going to find their ceiling and stay there, maybe bounce up and down but generally it's the case.

Natasha Whittam wrote:

Hipster_Nebula wrote:

no point debating with a troll, you say we'll lose every game, you say every player is 'shit', every manager is 'shit,' every sub is 'shit'

At the moment that's exactly how it seems.

There are plenty of clubs higher up the league than us that don't have a pot to piss in either.

Equally there are many that are below us that are way richer than we are - in fact I can't think of a single club below us in the country that has a bank balance of minus £136 million. Even Bury are loaded compared to us FFS.



What I do know is that the clubs above us have had more time to rebuild their squads.

wanderlust wrote:

Equally there are many that are below us that are way richer than we are - in fact I can't think of a single club below us in the country that has a bank balance of minus £136 million. Even Bury are loaded compared to us FFS.

What I do know is that the clubs above us have had more time to rebuild their squads.

And you call me a WUM!

These are the facts.

We are not in debt to the banks to a massive degree, hence we are probably better off than the majority of the Championship. Plus we have Sky payments that they don't. Heck, we just poached someones manager and his cronies and had to pay compensation. We can't be that skint.

I heard Eddie wants his money back - although that came from a red. If there's any truth in it it's likely his exit strategy would include at least some element of offloading his risk to banks - but I'm not sure if it's true in the first place.

But even if he doesn't want to get out, I'm sure he doesn't want to increase his risk which means austerity for now.

wanderlust wrote:

But even if he doesn't want to get out, I'm sure he doesn't want to increase his risk which means austerity for now.

He's just spent money on compensation for Freedman when he could have picked from any number of free agents. There will be money for Freedman to improve the bench in January.

wanderlust wrote:I heard Eddie wants his money back - although that came from a red.

How does the dmb know this?

Bernard Dennis Park wrote:

wanderlust wrote:I heard Eddie wants his money back - although that came from a red.

How does the dmb know this?

Doesn't make any financial sense anyway.

We are currently £135 million or so in debt, with all but £10 million or so owed to Davies.

Which bank in the world's current financial climate will see purchasing any of the remaining £125 million debt from the club to be an astute move - answer, no one!

The current debt is serviced - as far as I can tell - is by the Bank of Bermuda, loaning money to another business 'run' by Davies (with presumably assets to underwrite such debt), which in turn 'loans' it to the club in return for relatively high annual interest and for the loan to be repaid in full on a given date.

The interesting thing - if you find this sort of stuff at all interesting - is that the clubs debt is substantially greater than any previous assessment of Davies wealth - ergo 'others' have money invested in the club and Davies may not even have the greatest investment in the club - ie he probably possibly now only owns the club on 'paper'.

Who then invests substantial money into what on the face of it seems a very poor investment AND seemingly is not worried at all about the possibility of losing nearly all of it if the club can no longer continue to pay its way and goes into Administration?

Seems very murky waters the club as got itself into - hopefully the 'paymasters' continue to happily pump more money into the club!

I'd take anything a red says with a pinch of salt. United are one of the biggest club football teams in the world but they are still 350 million in debt.

One point in six against two lower grade Championship teams and you are satisfied?

Soul Kitchen wrote:One point in six against two lower grade Championship teams and you are satisfied?

Don't think anybody is SK.

I think a better question may be - Has he got the team he inherited from Coyle doing any better? - ie has he got more out of the same resources as his predecessor did?

I think the basic truth is that Coyle left us with a shit team - we have spent a lot of money we could not really afford - yet still remain to be poor in nearly every area on the pitch (thanks Owen!).

I guess for now we have stopped losing - only one loss in what eight since Freedman took over - so that's a step forward - it seems to indicate that he can organise the team better.

Then again we do seemed to have been lucky in a number of those games - which possibly cancels out the 'not losing' bit.

He can only play the players Coyle left him so I guess we do need to go through one or two transfer windows to see what players he can get in to turn the club around.

It does make you weep though that Coyle spent millions on Mills, Ngog, Sordell, Ream, as well as signing Pratley to a four year deal!!!

What sluffy says is true, but Freedman had the opportunity to take another player on loan and chose not to. I'm worried he thinks what we have is good enough.

Natasha Whittam wrote:What sluffy says is true, but Freedman had the opportunity to take another player on loan and chose not to. I'm worried he thinks what we have is good enough.

Who was the other player ?

Sluffy wrote:

Soul Kitchen wrote:One point in six against two lower grade Championship teams and you are satisfied?

Don't think anybody is SK.

I think a better question may be - Has he got the team he inherited from Coyle doing any better? - ie has he got more out of the same resources as his predecessor did?

I think the basic truth is that Coyle left us with a shit team - we have spent a lot of money we could not really afford - yet still remain to be poor in nearly every area on the pitch (thanks Owen!).

I guess for now we have stopped losing - only one loss in what eight since Freedman took over - so that's a step forward - it seems to indicate that he can organise the team better.

Then again we do seemed to have been lucky in a number of those games - which possibly cancels out the 'not losing' bit.

He can only play the players Coyle left him so I guess we do need to go through one or two transfer windows to see what players he can get in to turn the club around.

It does make you weep though that Coyle spent millions on Mills, Ngog, Sordell, Ream, as well as signing Pratley to a four year deal!!!

'the not losing bit' you talk about in some of the games is snatching draws and a loss from the jaws of victory! We are she ite and it will take more than a young manager with high expectations to put a smile on the fans faces I'm afraid. We need some half decent players with a bit of passion and a chairman that talks sense instead of just farting!! I've said it before but it matters not, we'll be along time out the Prem I'm afraid.