Clerry Jambo Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 With talk of challenging for the title and Cup runs, it is just taking us back to what we had in Vlad's first season. As a club we are actively reducing the debt, have a top team running the football side of things and a squad, albeit can still be reduced, that should give us a superb platform to stabilise and hopefully go on and consistently challenge at the top end of the table. We keep saying it but it is really now Quality over Quantity. JJ knows the areas we need to strengthen so lets hope he can found the right players that will take us forward. Lets not ruin another great chance to keep us at the top and strive to get closer to the smellies. I don't think we are good enough yet but a bit of fine tuning and there's no reason why we can't sustain a challenge to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Clerry - Hearts can't spend money they don't have or haven't earned it's as simple as that. New UEFA regulations mean that Hearts must stop trading a such big losses, must continue to reduce debt levels and basically continue to improve the clubs finances or else we would be barred from entering any of the UEFA Competitions. If we want to play in europe then we have to continue to strive to improve our finances and live within our means - big spending and speculating to accumulate unless it was generated by selling players to finance it is no longer possible assuming we want to play in Europe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Wiseau Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 The good thing is, Clerry, that this time we've not pished all our cash up the wall building this team. I think our starting line up against the vermin cost us something like ?60k in transfer fees (unless I'm completely mistaken, Templeton was the only one that cost us anything). It means that Mr Romanov will fully trust JJ and might just let him go out and get the one or two quality players he needs to make a flash in the pan run of great form a real challenge for a trophy. The big key, though, is keeping our top boys. If we hang on to Kyle, Zaliukas, Wallace, Kello, Driver, Skacel and Templeton (or even most of them), we have the basis of a quality team for the next 2/3 years. I like the way it's being done this time round as well. Don't get me wrong, I was loving it when we were going out spending big bucks on class players, but this time we have the right balance. Good youngsters, a few older heads, boys the fans can relate to. JJ and Lockey. It's good times the now mate, hopefully they get even better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groot Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Charlie in defence of Clerry I don't believe he's saying we have to splash the cash, I think he's saying (and if so I agree) that we're not far from having a team that could possibly challenge the OF on a consistent basis, as such we can't strip the team down like what happened after 05/06 Yes we need to sell players, but at the same time let JJ wheel & deal so we're not weakening ourselves by much if at all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 The good thing is, Clerry, that this time we've not pished all our cash up the wall building this team. I think our starting line up against the vermin cost us something like ?60k in transfer fees (unless I'm completely mistaken, Templeton was the only one that cost us anything). It means that Mr Romanov will fully trust JJ and might just let him go out and get the one or two quality players he needs to make a flash in the pan run of great form a real challenge for a trophy. The big key, though, is keeping our top boys. If we hang on to Kyle, Zaliukas, Wallace, Kello, Driver, Skacel and Templeton (or even most of them), we have the basis of a quality team for the next 2/3 years. I like the way it's being done this time round as well. Don't get me wrong, I was loving it when we were going out spending big bucks on class players, but this time we have the right balance. Good youngsters, a few older heads, boys the fans can relate to. JJ and Lockey. It's good times the now mate, hopefully they get even better. I think Hearts will continue to seek value from out of contract players and only pay relatively low transfer fees if we pay any at all. I think going out and spending relatively big money (in SPL terms) on another teams best player is unlikely. Jefferies and Romanov always seem to do better when bargain hunting than when splashing the cash imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radioactive Mince Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 The good thing is, Clerry, that this time we've not pished all our cash up the wall building this team. I think our starting line up against the vermin cost us something like ?60k in transfer fees (unless I'm completely mistaken, Templeton was the only one that cost us anything). It means that Mr Romanov will fully trust JJ and might just let him go out and get the one or two quality players he needs to make a flash in the pan run of great form a real challenge for a trophy. The big key, though, is keeping our top boys. If we hang on to Kyle, Zaliukas, Wallace, Kello, Driver, Skacel and Templeton (or even most of them), we have the basis of a quality team for the next 2/3 years. I like the way it's being done this time round as well. Don't get me wrong, I was loving it when we were going out spending big bucks on class players, but this time we have the right balance. Good youngsters, a few older heads, boys the fans can relate to. JJ and Lockey. It's good times the now mate, hopefully they get even better. Spot on IMO. I think Charlie Brown has looked at the poster and not the post perhaps. I think Clerry meant that we can let the deadwood go and then, with the wages that'd be freed up by their departures (anybody's guess) we can sign one or two Bosmans of decent pedigree. If Clerry means sign guys in this window then I could be wrong about that, although it's possible we could sign a couple of guys in the knowledge that we might increase our wage bill for 5 months but be better off after that? Just trying to understand, man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Charlie in defence of Clerry I don't believe he's saying we have to splash the cash, I think he's saying (and if so I agree) that we're not far from having a team that could possibly challenge the OF on a consistent basis, as such we can't strip the team down like what happened after 05/06 Yes we need to sell players, but at the same time let JJ wheel & deal so we're not weakening ourselves by much if at all yes but we also need to reduce our debt levels - UEFA's new financial fair play rules require this - so unless UBIG are prepared to continue to swap yet more debt for equity then any money raised from players sales would probably have to be used to reduce the book value of debts and show UEFA that we are serious about puting our financial affairs in order otherwise we'd not get a UEFA license? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 details of UEFA financial fair play rules here http://www.uefa.com/uefa/aboutuefa/organisation/executivecommittee/news/newsid=1493078.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Benoit Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 yes but we also need to reduce our debt levels - UEFA's new financial fair play rules require this - so unless UBIG are prepared to continue to swap yet more debt for equity then any money raised from players sales would probably have to be used to reduce the book value of debts and show UEFA that we are serious about puting our financial affairs in order otherwise we'd not get a UEFA license? Nobody on the thread has mentioned using money from player sales to buy people. What we can do is cut the deadwood and youngsters who aren't going to make it and then use a fraction of the savings towards getting more quality in place of them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stanley_ Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 With talk of challenging for the title and Cup runs, it is just taking us back to what we had in Vlad's first season. As a club we are actively reducing the debt, have a top team running the football side of things and a squad, albeit can still be reduced, that should give us a superb platform to stabilise and hopefully go on and consistently challenge at the top end of the table. We keep saying it but it is really now Quality over Quantity. JJ knows the areas we need to strengthen so lets hope he can found the right players that will take us forward. Lets not ruin another great chance to keep us at the top and strive to get closer to the smellies. I don't think we are good enough yet but a bit of fine tuning and there's no reason why we can't sustain a challenge to them. Good post. I think the way we have progressed this season has been a lot more stable than in 2005-06. It feels like more of a long-term project now. Gradually the highest earners have been leaving the club at the end of their contracts and we've been able to replace them with players on pre-contracts. CB, you're clearly knowledgeable about Hearts but the "we have no money and won't sign anyone" posts on many threads is a little tiresome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Groot Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Charlie I agree with your replies to me and faceman, getting the debt down is the key thing and the quickest way to do that is selling players, and as you say any replacements would either be Bosmans or nominal fees as you say, that would be an improvement as after 2005/2006 we sold Skacel/Bednar etc and lost others and they were never any real attempts to replace them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mahgrassyshoes Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Charlie, I think what Clerry is trying to say is we can continue what we are doing and because sustained challengers to the OF. I don't think he is saying we can go out and splash the cash and attempt to win the league. I think he means we have the backbone there now we can start bringing through youth to replace the out-going guys whether that be retiring (skacel is the only one i can think of in the remotely short term) or through sales. We can also make the odd cheap/bosman signing to replace these guys and keep some experience in the team. I think it's kind of back to the Robinson days, in terms of the blend of youth and experience and wheeling and dealing that can be done, except this time we won't just accept the first bid for any quality players we do produce. I also think there's a fair amount more ambition with this board. I think what also helps is Celtic and, particularly, Rangers are in the same position. Although it will always exist due to the crowds they attract and size of tehir stadia, the financial gap between us and the OF is decreasing. Rangers will also have to show signes of getting rid of the debt, they are currently doing so and look at how it's effecting them. As Clerry says, there is a platform for a sustained challenge to the OF over years, not just this season. It's up to the guys at the top whether we use it to our advantage or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Good post. I think the way we have progressed this season has been a lot more stable than in 2005-06. It feels like more of a long-term project now. Gradually the highest earners have been leaving the club at the end of their contracts and we've been able to replace them with players on pre-contracts. CB, you're clearly knowledgeable about Hearts but the "we have no money and won't sign anyone" posts on many threads is a little tiresome. People are ignoring the financial realities of Scottish fitba - when was the last time we paid a transfer fee for anybody? Balogh almost 2 years ago? even then that was financed by the value of securing a top 6 finish. Since then not only have we seen falling attendances and corporate income at all SPL clubs, revenue is down or stagant at best, we also have HMRC getting very tough with football clubs up and down the country for money owed or outstanding. Any movement for bringing players in has to be balanced by players going out and most of the time that is at the end of contracts. last summer we did manage to lose 4 higher earners in Kingston, Nade, Goncalves and Stewart and that provided some leeway to bring in Kyle, Elliot, Skacel and Mrowiec plus sign Kello & Zaliukas on permanent contracts. Most players contracts end in the summer - that is when money is freed up to 1) continue to lower the wage bill 2) recruit new players. We haven't sold anybody since Berra in 2009 - of course selling somebody for a good fee would change the balance of money available. All SPL clubs are feeling the pinch just now and transfer activity is very low - any deals that do happen are usually on the back of someone else leaving. Why do you think there is all the talk of SPL reconstruction in the first place? Money is tight and getting even tighter in the SPL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hughesie27 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 The good thing is, Clerry, that this time we've not pished all our cash up the wall building this team. I think our starting line up against the vermin cost us something like ?60k in transfer fees (unless I'm completely mistaken, Templeton was the only one that cost us anything). It means that Mr Romanov will fully trust JJ and might just let him go out and get the one or two quality players he needs to make a flash in the pan run of great form a real challenge for a trophy. The big key, though, is keeping our top boys. If we hang on to Kyle, Zaliukas, Wallace, Kello, Driver, Skacel and Templeton (or even most of them), we have the basis of a quality team for the next 2/3 years. I like the way it's being done this time round as well. Don't get me wrong, I was loving it when we were going out spending big bucks on class players, but this time we have the right balance. Good youngsters, a few older heads, boys the fans can relate to. JJ and Lockey. It's good times the now mate, hopefully they get even better. Correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stanley_ Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 People are ignoring the financial realities of Scottish fitba - when was the last time we paid a transfer fee for anybody? Balogh almost 2 years ago? even then that was financed by the value of securing a top 6 finish. Since then not only have we seen falling attendances and corporate income at all SPL clubs, revenue is down or stagant at best, we also have HMRC getting very tough with football clubs up and down the country for money owed or outstanding. Any movement for bringing players in has to be balanced by players going out and most of the time that is at the end of contracts. last summer we did manage to lose 4 higher earners in Kingston, Nade, Goncalves and Stewart and that provided some leeway to bring in Kyle, Elliot, Skacel and Mrowiec plus sign Kello & Zaliukas on permanent contracts. Most players contracts end in the summer - that is when money is freed up to 1) continue to lower the wage bill 2) recruit new players. We haven't sold anybody since Berra in 2009 - of course selling somebody for a good fee would change the balance of money available. All SPL clubs are feeling the pinch just now and transfer activity is very low - any deals that do happen are usually on the back of someone else leaving. Why do you think there is all the talk of SPL reconstruction in the first place? Money is tight and getting even tighter in the SPL. Yes, but where did Clerry actually say he was wanting us to spend large fees on players? I'm sure if someone had started a thread linking us to Skacel before he had signed you would have posted on it to say we have no money. We can continue to progress with our current approach. The highest earners leave at the end of their contracts and we sign players on pre-contracts/bring through youngsters. I don't see how anything on this thread contradicts that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 there are differences between 05/06 and 10/11 in the potential the club has to progress. in 05/06 we had all the top players and we also had an owner who was in a position to pour yet further funds into his 'project'. where we suffered was that most of that money was wasted and we also still had the policy whereby the owner was a little too involved in areas of the club that didn't require his input. ultimately we fell flat on our faces. in 10/11 we do not quite have the same level of squad as we did back then. we don't have the level of investment that we had back then. where we have major advantages over the previous era is in that we have managed to significantly reduce the wages burden, and we no longer have a policy of the owner crossing certain lines of demarcation. ultimately this may well prove to be a better 'starting point' for us to actually make steady progress from where we are now. unfortunately i can't see the club maintaining the level of performance we have seen and the promising squad for all that long a period. let's face it, we've never seen one of the exceptional teams we get from time to time last all that long. players will no doubt continue to be sold as we still have the debt. up and coming players will always want to better themselves in any case, therefore player sales are just part of life in modern day football. the magnificent manager we have will not be our manager for all that long. it would be naive to think that he'll go on for another full term 3 year contract after the current one has run it's course. all we can hope is that we get very lucky again when the time comes to replace him. it's a real pity that we don't have the sizable funds of 05/06 for our fully autonomous manager to use in order for us to kick on. it's a real pity that we didn't have jim jefferies (in his current job description) at the helm when we started our champions league qualifiers campaign. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miller Jambo 60 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 there are differences between 05/06 and 10/11 in the potential the club has to progress. in 05/06 we had all the top players and we also had an owner who was in a position to pour yet further funds into his 'project'. where we suffered was that most of that money was wasted and we also still had the policy whereby the owner was a little too involved in areas of the club that didn't require his input. ultimately we fell flat on our faces. in 10/11 we do not quite have the same level of squad as we did back then. we don't have the level of investment that we had back then. where we have major advantages over the previous era is in that we have managed to significantly reduce the wages burden, and we no longer have a policy of the owner crossing certain lines of demarcation. ultimately this may well prove to be a better 'starting point' for us to actually make steady progress from where we are now. unfortunately i can't see the club maintaining the level of performance we have seen and the promising squad for all that long a period. let's face it, we've never seen one of the exceptional teams we get from time to time last all that long. players will no doubt continue to be sold as we still have the debt. up and coming players will always want to better themselves in any case, therefore player sales are just part of life in modern day football. the magnificent manager we have will not be our manager for all that long. it would be naive to think that he'll go on for another full term 3 year contract after the current one has run it's course. all we can hope is that we get very lucky again when the time comes to replace him. it's a real pity that we don't have the sizable funds of 05/06 for our fully autonomous manager to use in order for us to kick on. it's a real pity that we didn't have jim jefferies (in his current job description) at the helm when we started our champions league qualifiers campaign. Cool you going the morn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southcapital Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Are Rudi and Wallace the only 2 players from that team? I know Driver but he hasn't played this season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMc Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 People are ignoring the financial realities of Scottish fitba - when was the last time we paid a transfer fee for anybody? Balogh almost 2 years ago? even then that was financed by the value of securing a top 6 finish. Since then not only have we seen falling attendances and corporate income at all SPL clubs, revenue is down or stagant at best, we also have HMRC getting very tough with football clubs up and down the country for money owed or outstanding. Any movement for bringing players in has to be balanced by players going out and most of the time that is at the end of contracts. last summer we did manage to lose 4 higher earners in Kingston, Nade, Goncalves and Stewart and that provided some leeway to bring in Kyle, Elliot, Skacel and Mrowiec plus sign Kello & Zaliukas on permanent contracts. Most players contracts end in the summer - that is when money is freed up to 1) continue to lower the wage bill 2) recruit new players. We haven't sold anybody since Berra in 2009 - of course selling somebody for a good fee would change the balance of money available. All SPL clubs are feeling the pinch just now and transfer activity is very low - any deals that do happen are usually on the back of someone else leaving. Why do you think there is all the talk of SPL reconstruction in the first place? Money is tight and getting even tighter in the SPL. If all we were thinking of was debt reduction then why did we bother signing Kyle and Rudi? I doubt we plan on selling them. Surely if all we are thinking of is debt reduction then their wages are a shocking waste of money? Or are we perhaps trying to balance debt reduction and success on the pitch? Therefore we could easily buy a player or two for under ?500k, especially if it is pretty likely we will take in ?2M-?5M in transfers in the next couple of seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stanley_ Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Are Rudi and Wallace the only 2 players from that team? I know Driver but he hasn't played this season Elliot as well. Driver didn't play in 2005-06. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnjl Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 People are ignoring the financial realities of Scottish fitba - when was the last time we paid a transfer fee for anybody? Balogh almost 2 years ago? even then that was financed by the value of securing a top 6 finish. Since then not only have we seen falling attendances and corporate income at all SPL clubs, revenue is down or stagant at best, we also have HMRC getting very tough with football clubs up and down the country for money owed or outstanding. Any movement for bringing players in has to be balanced by players going out and most of the time that is at the end of contracts. last summer we did manage to lose 4 higher earners in Kingston, Nade, Goncalves and Stewart and that provided some leeway to bring in Kyle, Elliot, Skacel and Mrowiec plus sign Kello & Zaliukas on permanent contracts. Most players contracts end in the summer - that is when money is freed up to 1) continue to lower the wage bill 2) recruit new players. We haven't sold anybody since Berra in 2009 - of course selling somebody for a good fee would change the balance of money available. All SPL clubs are feeling the pinch just now and transfer activity is very low - any deals that do happen are usually on the back of someone else leaving. Why do you think there is all the talk of SPL reconstruction in the first place? Money is tight and getting even tighter in the SPL. Surely if players contracts are ending in the summer and the club knows they are not going to be offered new ones we could bring a new player in now and still reduce the wage bill in the medium term. For example if bouzid and jamie mole are leaving in the summer we could bring one player in now and let thos two leave in a few months. Therefore still making an overall saving. Or is that oversimplifying ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clerry Jambo Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 Sorry for not being crystal folks, I certainly DIDN'T mean splashing the cash ( although would be nice ) but as most have picked up on, we have deadwood which JJ will deal with and hopefully allow us to target the best players from other SPL sides, Bryson as an example and other comparible leagues. Ofcourse our best players will be sold on, but if JJ is allowed to build we can possibly lose the Wallace's and Driver's and it will not affect us too badly as long as we bring in the right players within our pay structure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 If all we were thinking of was debt reduction then why did we bother signing Kyle and Rudi? I doubt we plan on selling them. Surely if all we are thinking of is debt reduction then their wages are a shocking waste of money? Or are we perhaps trying to balance debt reduction and success on the pitch? Therefore we could easily buy a player or two for under ?500k, especially if it is pretty likely we will take in ?2M-?5M in transfers in the next couple of seasons. If all we were/are thinking of is debt reduction then we wouldn't have made a bid for Craig Bryson either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMc Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 If all we were/are thinking of is debt reduction then we wouldn't have made a bid for Craig Bryson either. That's what I was thinking. We clearly have two main objectives: Off field debt reduction and on field success. At the moment we seem to have the balance pretty well spot on. Bryson is clearly one of JJ's people (in the same way KK is). He is also young and talented. This leads me to believe that he would go up in value were he to sign for us and would be unlikely to do the dirty on his mentor. I don't think it would be a big risk with ?300k. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnjl Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 If all we were/are thinking of is debt reduction then we wouldn't have made a bid for Craig Bryson either. Exactly. I just don't see why cb thinks it's inconceivable for us to sign new players. More players will leave than be brought in ( which is what happened in the last transfer window ) but if we want to bring in a player during the season (rudi for example) or in the winter transfer window, surely that's ok of it's balanced out in the summer. Don't see what the problem with signing a new player would be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bert Le Clos Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 The most pleasing thing for me, and the most promising thing for Hearts, is that over the next 5 years I think we will really start to reap the rewards of Ricarton as we start seeing more and more youngsters being brought through from the youth set-up. Hearts, although we don't own Ricarton, made a serious investment in it. And while we've seen a few youngsters come through our youth set-up (Gordon, Berra, Wallace, Driver etc.) I think we will only see the real benefits of the investment over the next few years. I think the first batch of young players to fully go through Ricarton are now about 16-17. I've heard a lot of good things about these lads and if we can blood them into the first team gradually when they are ready I think we will either see real success on the pitch and/or be able to sell some of these players on at a considerable profit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bighusref Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Yes, but where did Clerry actually say he was wanting us to spend large fees on players? I'm sure if someone had started a thread linking us to Skacel before he had signed you would have posted on it to say we have no money. We can continue to progress with our current approach. The highest earners leave at the end of their contracts and we sign players on pre-contracts/bring through youngsters. I don't see how anything on this thread contradicts that. To be fair, if Charlie had his way, our team would be.... Youngster Youngster Youngster Youngster Youngster Youngster Youngster Youngster Youngster Youngster Kevin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debut 4 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 The good thing is, Clerry, that this time we've not pished all our cash up the wall building this team. I think our starting line up against the vermin cost us something like ?60k in transfer fees (unless I'm completely mistaken, Templeton was the only one that cost us anything). It means that Mr Romanov will fully trust JJ and might just let him go out and get the one or two quality players he needs to make a flash in the pan run of great form a real challenge for a trophy. The big key, though, is keeping our top boys. If we hang on to Kyle, Zaliukas, Wallace, Kello, Driver, Skacel and Templeton (or even most of them), we have the basis of a quality team for the next 2/3 years. I like the way it's being done this time round as well. Don't get me wrong, I was loving it when we were going out spending big bucks on class players, but this time we have the right balance. Good youngsters, a few older heads, boys the fans can relate to. JJ and Lockey. It's good times the now mate, hopefully they get even better. Good post and exactly my thoughts. The big key, as pointed out, is the management team. They`ve got all the players playing to their maximum and found the right chemistry in the team. The players we`ve signed have one distinguishing attribute too, real determination. This has enhanced the side greatly and the general feeling when you watch Hearts for me, is that your getting 11 fighting maroon jerseys who`ll see the game through until the 95th minute no matter what.(not short on ability either i may add but thats not the general point ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drylaw Hearts Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 To be fair, if Charlie had his way, our team would be.... Youngster Youngster Youngster Youngster Youngster Youngster Youngster Youngster Youngster Youngster Kevin Smith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Miller Jambo 60 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 like your style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Wiseau Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 This thread is just another nail in the coffin for Clerry's grumpy reputation, by the way. You'll be getting called a VALDsheep next my man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ewan1874 Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 It would be interesting to see how the cost of players wages this season compare to the players wages in 05/06. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clerry Jambo Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 This thread is just another nail in the coffin for Clerry's grumpy reputation, by the way. You'll be getting called a VALDsheep next my man. Total unfair Charles.................Baaaaaaaaaaa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Benoit Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Total unfair Charles.................Baaaaaaaaaaa Quite right i never thought you were grumpy, pessimistic maybe but never grumpy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clerry Jambo Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 Quite right i never thought you were grumpy, pessimistic maybe but never grumpy Now that's fair Frenchie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Now that's fair Frenchie hoy clerry, it's only fair you sign a prepared statement to denounce the POP. do you agree to sign? if yes i'll write one up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mahgrassyshoes Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Now that's fair Frenchie Away, you're like the victor meldrew of kickback! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clerry Jambo Posted January 10, 2011 Author Share Posted January 10, 2011 hoy clerry, it's only fair you sign a prepared statement to denounce the POP. do you agree to sign? if yes i'll write one up. Spanky, seriously what the feck does POP mean........I realise it appears to be nailed at "that Anti Vlad" mob but can you enlighten me Sir before I sign any prepared statement Thank You Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Victorian Posted January 10, 2011 Share Posted January 10, 2011 Spanky, seriously what the feck does POP mean........I realise it appears to be nailed at "that Anti Vlad" mob but can you enlighten me Sir before I sign any prepared statement Thank You that's good enough. well said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debut 4 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Now that's fair Frenchie stop it clerry now....you`ll be getting all tizzy with the "baaaaanter" and all this ligthearted craic...too positive for you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambo_74 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Spanky, seriously what the feck does POP mean........I realise it appears to be nailed at "that Anti Vlad" mob but can you enlighten me Sir before I sign any prepared statement Thank You Make up your own mind. POP Post Office Protocol (Internet email protocol) POP Point Of Presence POP Popular POP Population POP Prince of Persia (video game) POP Piece Of Paper POP Package on Package (integrated circuits) POP Point Of Purchase POP Probability of Precipitation POP Prince of Peace POP Proof Of Purchase POP Pursuit of Perfection (gaming) POP Public Offering Price (finance) PoP Planes of Power (Everquest expansion) POP Plaster of Paris POP Piece of Pie POP Problem Oriented Policing POP Persistent Organic Pollutant POP Princess of Power (She-Ra toy and animated TV show) POP Pacific Ocean Park (nautical theme park) POP Proof of Principle POP Power Of The Pen POP Pelvic Organ Prolapse POP Progestogen-Only Pill (contraception) POP Passing Out Parade POP Period Of Performance POP Purchase Order Processing POP Pay One Price POP Parallel Ocean Program (Global Ocean Model) POP Premium Only Plan (employee benefit plan) POP Proof of Performance POP Picture Outside Picture (television feature) POP Place of Performance POP Pop From Stack POP Point of Production POP Printing-Out Paper POP Proof of Product (validate/verify vendor's part number) POP Performance Oriented Packaging POP Program Operating Plan POP Pissed Off Person POP Point of Penetration POP Power of Prevention (American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists) POP Prolyl Oligopeptidase POP Pok?mon Organized Play POP Put on Production POP Picture of Performance (human resources) POP Probability of Paternity POP Prophets of Profit POP Parent Orientation Program (various colleges/universities) POP Plug-in Optronic Payload POP Pain on Palpation POP Principal-Only Payment (loans) POP Polar Orbiting Platform (ASPRS) POP Puerto Plata, Dominican Republic - La Union (Airport Code) POP Professional Options Package POP Peak Overpressure POP Package-Oriented Programming POP Payment on Principal (lending) POP Precision Optical Performance POP Picture on Profile (roleplaying gaming) POP Proper Operating Procedure (military) POP Proofs-Of-Principle POP Prodigies of Peace POP Post Office Preferred (envelope size which conforms to Post Office requirement) POP Processing of Precursor POP Plasma Oscillation Probe POP Processor on Plug-In (H/W) POP Peak Optical Power POP Premium Offset Plan (insurance) POP Perpendicular to Orbital Plane POP Project Objective Plan POP Presensitized Offset Plate POP Persistent Occipitoposterior Position (complication of labor and delivery) POP Pulsed Optically Pumped (quantum optical physics) POP Parity of Product POP Power Optimization Problem POP Process Operating Procedure POP Pipeline Outfit, Petroleum POP Pre-Teens Oppose Prohibition (Kids Next Door show) POP Protected Outperformance Participation Unit POP Pustaka-On-Phone Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clerry Jambo Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 "Plethora of Pesh" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambo_74 Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 "Plethora of Pesh" To be fair, that is the best one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Exactly. I just don't see why cb thinks it's inconceivable for us to sign new players. More players will leave than be brought in ( which is what happened in the last transfer window ) but if we want to bring in a player during the season (rudi for example) or in the winter transfer window, surely that's ok of it's balanced out in the summer. Don't see what the problem with signing a new player would be. The alleged bids for Bryson - remember Killie Chairman Michael Johnston denied that Kilmarnock had received any formal bids at for Bryson - were I believe negotiations by Hearts to try to get Bryson signed for very little cash down with Killie to then receive additional payments towards his increasing value dependant on number of games played, any caps received, and a future sell on percentage. Jim Jefferies repeatedly said he had a maximum amount for Bryson and wasn't going above that figure. This deal didn't go ahead as presumably Killie weren't interested in an add-on's deal and wanted more money and more money up front for the player - regardless the transfer didn't happen and now he's also being linked or touted to Championship clubs. Iam not against us signing players - we will sign new players but I don't think we are in a position to go out spending a few hundred thousand on players which people consider to be relatively trivial amounts as we don't have the cash available to fund this without bringing in some money first either by releasing or selling players. When players are sold or when players move on there is of course more scope to bring new players in as replacements - but short term if we are to bring anyody in then I'll wager it would be on a low fee or no fee or delayed payment basis and probably also tied to getting some players off the wage bill to accommodate the new signing(s). Our wage bill, squad size and number of players on the books is already too many considering no reserve league thus new players in = some moving out.....in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigO Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The alleged bids for Bryson - remember Killie Chairman Michael Johnston denied that Kilmarnock had received any formal bids at for Bryson - were I believe negotiations by Hearts to try to get Bryson signed for very little cash down with Killie to then receive additional payments towards his increasing value dependant on number of games played, any caps received, and a future sell on percentage. Jim Jefferies repeatedly said he had a maximum amount for Bryson and wasn't going above that figure. This deal didn't go ahead as presumably Killie weren't interested in an add-on's deal and wanted more money and more money up front for the player - regardless the transfer didn't happen and now he's also being linked or touted to Championship clubs. Iam not against us signing players - we will sign new players but I don't think we are in a position to go out spending a few hundred thousand on players which people consider to be relatively trivial amounts as we don't have the cash available to fund this without bringing in some money first either by releasing or selling players. When players are sold or when players move on there is of course more scope to bring new players in as replacements - but short term if we are to bring anyody in then I'll wager it would be on a low fee or no fee or delayed payment basis and probably also tied to getting some players off the wage bill to accommodate the new signing(s). Our wage bill, squad size and number of players on the books is already too many considering no reserve league thus new players in = some moving out.....in my opinion. VR bid JJs recommended amount for Bryson and JJ was perfectly happy with how we went about our business. The only thing which stopped even negotiations opening was Johnston's refusal to deal with JJ and BB. He said so himself. Maybe our offer wouldn't have been enough and we'll see what he goes for but that and that alone is why Hearts didn't get close to signing him. Charlie, you worry too much about Hearts needing to do this and only being able to do that. At the end of the day, if VR wants to bankrole a signing or two, he will and I, for one, won't complain. We need players off the books to allow the coaching staff to do their jobs more easily as much as anything else Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossthejambo Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 The alleged bids for Bryson - remember Killie Chairman Michael Johnston denied that Kilmarnock had received any formal bids at for Bryson - were I believe negotiations by Hearts to try to get Bryson signed for very little cash down with Killie to then receive additional payments towards his increasing value dependant on number of games played, any caps received, and a future sell on percentage. Jim Jefferies repeatedly said he had a maximum amount for Bryson and wasn't going above that figure. This deal didn't go ahead as presumably Killie weren't interested in an add-on's deal and wanted more money and more money up front for the player - regardless the transfer didn't happen and now he's also being linked or touted to Championship clubs. Iam not against us signing players - we will sign new players but I don't think we are in a position to go out spending a few hundred thousand on players which people consider to be relatively trivial amounts as we don't have the cash available to fund this without bringing in some money first either by releasing or selling players. When players are sold or when players move on there is of course more scope to bring new players in as replacements - but short term if we are to bring anyody in then I'll wager it would be on a low fee or no fee or delayed payment basis and probably also tied to getting some players off the wage bill to accommodate the new signing(s). Our wage bill, squad size and number of players on the books is already too many considering no reserve league thus new players in = some moving out.....in my opinion. Alleged? The bids were made and knocked back. There's no alleged about it CB. I think Vlad will get the cheque book out for at least one new player this month, whether that's Bryson or Wright or someone from left field I don't know but I think we'll get someone in. I can only imagine that we'll be looking to loan or sell a couple as well but I don't get the impression that signing someone is dependent on selling someone. I await a rewrite of a previous post about debt reduction, wage bills needing slashed, scottish football's skint, yada yada. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clerry Jambo Posted January 11, 2011 Author Share Posted January 11, 2011 The alleged bids for Bryson - remember Killie Chairman Michael Johnston denied that Kilmarnock had received any formal bids at for Bryson - were I believe negotiations by Hearts to try to get Bryson signed for very little cash down with Killie to then receive additional payments towards his increasing value dependant on number of games played, any caps received, and a future sell on percentage. Jim Jefferies repeatedly said he had a maximum amount for Bryson and wasn't going above that figure. This deal didn't go ahead as presumably Killie weren't interested in an add-on's deal and wanted more money and more money up front for the player - regardless the transfer didn't happen and now he's also being linked or touted to Championship clubs. Iam not against us signing players - we will sign new players but I don't think we are in a position to go out spending a few hundred thousand on players which people consider to be relatively trivial amounts as we don't have the cash available to fund this without bringing in some money first either by releasing or selling players. When players are sold or when players move on there is of course more scope to bring new players in as replacements - but short term if we are to bring anyody in then I'll wager it would be on a low fee or no fee or delayed payment basis and probably also tied to getting some players off the wage bill to accommodate the new signing(s). Our wage bill, squad size and number of players on the books is already too many considering no reserve league thus new players in = some moving out.....in my opinion. Charlie, I think you picked me up wrong at the start of the thread. I realise the club can't spend loads of cash, infact even the smellies are hardly spending with Rangers being the most obvious. When you look at where we are now compared to the last few years of embarrassment, we have a basis to make the club stronger without having to throw large amounts of cash at it. JJ will get rid of the deadwood, but it takes time unfortunately. Players will be sold and going by Vlad's previous, we'll get decent fees. But I think we have an opportunity, allied to some shrewd signings in the transfer market, whether that be now or in the summer to cement our position in the Top 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigO Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Charlie, I think you picked me up wrong at the start of the thread. I realise the club can't spend loads of cash, infact even the smellies are hardly spending with Rangers being the most obvious. When you look at where we are now compared to the last few years of embarrassment, we have a basis to make the club stronger without having to throw large amounts of cash at it. JJ will get rid of the deadwood, but it takes time unfortunately. Players will be sold and going by Vlad's previous, we'll get decent fees. But I think we have an opportunity, allied to some shrewd buys in the transfer market, whether that be now or in the summer to cement our position in the Top 3. And it's a good thread Clerry cos you're spot on. GTHe highlighted sentence above is the one for me. Not often a team in Scotland is top 3 two years running and almost never 3 years running - our stats on this are surprisingly poor for the 3rd team in Scotland (on overall league record). It may seem unambitious to want to cement top 3, but doing so over a sustained period would be a great achievement and you are right, we have the solid base to do so. What I'd say is we need to maybe start seeing the next generation coming through over the next season or two. Temps and, hopefully increasingly, Arvy will do for this season, but we need to keep that conveyor belt going and, along with a bit of shrewd dealings and, yes Charlie, a wee bit investment, that sustained top 3 could just maybe see us scaring the uglies every season or two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie-Brown Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Alleged? The bids were made and knocked back. There's no alleged about it CB. I think Vlad will get the cheque book out for at least one new player this month, whether that's Bryson or Wright or someone from left field I don't know but I think we'll get someone in. I can only imagine that we'll be looking to loan or sell a couple as well but I don't get the impression that signing someone is dependent on selling someone. I await a rewrite of a previous post about debt reduction, wage bills needing slashed, scottish football's skint, yada yada. Killie Chairman Michael Johnston said there had been 1 or 2 enquiries but no formal bids. Do you have any concrete information that we are able to spend or is it just a gut feeling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossthejambo Posted January 11, 2011 Share Posted January 11, 2011 Killie Chairman Michael Johnston said there had been 1 or 2 enquiries but no formal bids. Do you have any concrete information that we are able to spend or is it just a gut feeling? I don't believe a word that man says to be honest but there you go. A gut feeling, it's never been a problem for Vlad before, I can't imagine that it would be too big a problem now either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.