| Welcome to The Arab League, one of the longest established Dundee United Football forums, with many members from the old ArabFC forum. New members are always welcomed, so to join the debate, just sign up - registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join The Arab League! If you're already a member please log in: |
| Thompson confirms exits; Most of the midfield to leave | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 9 2011, 10:51 PM (4,514 Views) | |
| Micky | Mar 10 2011, 10:31 AM Post #16 |
|
Gordon Chisholm
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I wonder if the Prince will stay, given he's a new father and his girlfriends family are all still in Dundee... The rest, meh. Gomis has phoned in just about all of this season, and Conway has been injured for most of it. Conway will probably continue the age old tradition of signing for Rangers and getting crocked, Gomis will likey go to Coventry/Notts County/A.N.Other and Buaben, who knows? |
![]() |
|
| Cobardon | Mar 10 2011, 10:38 AM Post #17 |
|
Uncle Smurf
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
More to the point, from those players' points of view, neither would they have enjoyed the cup win, its attendant bonuses and all the glory that went with it. The likes of Middlesbrough aren't likely to win national trophies any time soon. They will pay more though. |
![]() |
|
| whatsthatonyourback | Mar 10 2011, 10:45 AM Post #18 |
|
Waldo Jeffers
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Much, much more. Who wouldn't move to Boro if you could multiply your wages several times over? |
![]() |
|
| Ivan | Mar 10 2011, 11:20 AM Post #19 |
|
F*cking plebs.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
|
![]() |
|
| Ivan | Mar 10 2011, 11:27 AM Post #20 |
|
F*cking plebs.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
In other news, Eggman is of course correct. All we know at this stage is that Thompson won't meet the salaries demanded by the out of contract players. As business with a turnover of £5M - £6M pa and wage bill of £3M pa, it is inconceivable that there are insufficient resources to pay any of the out of contract players what they are asking for (unless Davie Robertson won't accept a penny less than £20k per week). Thompson has made a decision on the relative worth of the players to the club versus their demands and decided that the club would be better served by not paying what is being asked. That's won't pay, not can't pay. I make no comment as to whether he's right in his judgement, by the way. Although I do think he's a cock.
|
![]() |
|
| whatsthatonyourback | Mar 10 2011, 01:07 PM Post #21 |
|
Waldo Jeffers
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sure, United/ST could pay a few of those players what they want, but that has some unfortunate consequences. 1) Irrespective of turnover, the figures just published show we're running at around break-even in the most successful season we've had in nearly a quarter of a century. Even with no increases in pay, that will turn into a loss in the very likely event of subsequent seasons being less successful. And income is going down anyway, even if we had the exact same season this time around. 2) Costs could be cut elsewhere to create the space to pay the out-of-contractors what they want. Trim the squad. Cut backroom staff. Scale back youth & community activity. I don't get the impression we have a lot of fat to trim, so these will be painful and probably detrimental in the long term. In short, focus the entire club on immediate success on the park, probably to maintain last season's achievements, and hope the future takes care of itself. 3) So, somehow we've paid them what they wanted - but that's not the end of it. The rest of the squad will see this, and will want comparable rises. In an environment of wage deflation, we will have created our very own little wage bubble. 4) OK, so we can't reasonably afford to keep them all - so we focus on retaining the two that give the best value - say Buaben & Gomis. Our wagebill might remain around the same, but our squad has got thinner and we've still got the wage bubble problem, just to a lesser degree. It's a tricky one, and the easy option to keep the fans like Ivan & Eggs happy is not one that leads to financial stability. What's ST supposed to do without compromising his goal of making United financially sound? If that makes him appear like a cock to some of the fans, so be it. Fans are mostly fannies anyway. |
![]() |
|
| The Eggman | Mar 10 2011, 01:15 PM Post #22 |
|
Tommy McLean
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
What's Cameron and Clegg to do without compromising their goal of cutting the deficit? Since it was his dad who made the money, what would his dad want him to do? Digressing now, but has anyone seen You Can't Take it With You? Some intriguing quandaries on there. |
![]() |
|
| whatsthatonyourback | Mar 10 2011, 01:21 PM Post #23 |
|
Waldo Jeffers
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
So you're suggesting ST should decide who gets a contract offer by using a ouija board? I don't know what Cleggeron has got to do with United. If you're objecting to something specific in my premise of what ST's goals are, or should be, please state your position. In all seriousness - what would you do in ST's position? No "oh, I wouldn't be in his position in the first place, we'd be much better run if I was in charge" nonsense. If you were asked by him right now for advice on the players with expiring contracts, what would you say? |
![]() |
|
| Ivan | Mar 10 2011, 01:23 PM Post #24 |
|
F*cking plebs.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Sorry, nothing at all there adds anything to the debate. We can pay but we choose not to pay. Thompson may be right or he may be wrong but let's not pretend he had no choice.
Don't personalise this. I'm not suggesting we should break the bank. I'd just like a little honesty about the choices which are being made.
No you're a fanny. |
![]() |
|
| whatsthatonyourback | Mar 10 2011, 01:30 PM Post #25 |
|
Waldo Jeffers
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
OK, so you've called ST a dick and me a fanny. Is someone going to get labeled an anus or a nipple to complete the erogenous zones set? Meanwhile, you've also concluded that ST has some sort of choice in how he spends United's budget. Excellent. Not sure it helps move debate on very far, however. What choices does ST have? What would you do in ST's shoes? Easy to bitch and moan, but unless you've got something constructive to contribute, it doesn't count for much. |
![]() |
|
| The Eggman | Mar 10 2011, 01:35 PM Post #26 |
|
Tommy McLean
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
The reason I mentioned Clegg and Cameron is that they have goals of cutting the deficit. There are various ways they can do this. They're going for the slash heavy now approach, while other people believe that the slash heavy approach will be more harmful in the long run, for various reasons, and they suggest a less harsh cutting process. The deficit would still be cut, but it would take longer. ST is trying to cut the deficit, and it looks like is going for the slash heavy approach. But that's not the only option he has. By choosing this option, the United team may suffer badly, which may result in fewer fans in 3, 4, 10 years time, which will have financial implications (and while also make it shitier to be a fan). I don't know the amount of ST's inheritance, or his other income, or what outgoings he has, or what increased terms have been asked for, so I can't say for sure. All I've said is that I think ST is adamant on putting in as little money to United as possible, and getting out as much as he can. I'm basing that impression on what I've heard him say. It seems that he would rather wash his hands and be done with the whole business. I don't know what legal ties he has to United, or what was left in the will for him. So all I'm suggesting is that he's going for the slash heavy approach now, to cut the deficit as quickly as possible, and if that means not paying signing on fees for the contract renewals for players who believe they have contributed a lot to United and can get better pay elsewhere, then so be it. He probably prefers taking gambles on unproven players who come in at a much lower cost on the balance sheet. |
![]() |
|
| Ivan | Mar 10 2011, 01:47 PM Post #27 |
|
F*cking plebs.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Well, I thought it was funny. Is the anus an erogenous zone? Perhaps the prostate but not the anus per se. At least, not for me. Moving on. I'd want to see the figures before making decisions. Might be considered a bit reckless otherwise. Rest assured, I'd make decisions though. Just as Thompson is making decisions. They may or may not be the same decisions but I'd make them and I wouldn't peddle the line that I had no options to choose between. Out of interest. If Thompson indeed has no decisions to make. How much could we save by punting this expensive employee? |
![]() |
|
| whatsthatonyourback | Mar 10 2011, 01:55 PM Post #28 |
|
Waldo Jeffers
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
I don't think how much ST was left by his father is any of our business, and any of that money he chucks into United should be viewed as unexpected charitable bonuses. I don't see ST's approach as "slashing" anything, either. To extend your rather unwelcome comparison between UK PLC and Dundee United Football Company Ltd, I think the former have a rather better credit line than United, and their finances are far more likely to revive dramatically with an upturn in the economy. The the UK defaults, the world is more or less buggered. If DUFC defaults, it's no big deal in the great scheme of things. DUFC probably set a turnover record last season that will, sadly, remain a high-water mark for some years, and we still didn't turn a real profit. Continuing to run at the same level of expenditure will result in fairly hefty losses and risk the bank saying "enough". Again, I really want to know what fans who are critical of what ST is doing would rather he did in the current circumstances. I'm not saying he's flawless (where is Yaz, anyway?) but I think he's getting some rather unfair stick from at least two quarters on this board. |
![]() |
|
| Ivan | Mar 10 2011, 02:07 PM Post #29 |
|
F*cking plebs.
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
Just to be clear, again. I haven't criticised Thompson for deciding against offering contracts to the out of contract players, I've criticised the suggestion that he had no option. That's simply not true, although it is typical of his constant negative, woe is me, unenthusiastic stewardship of the club. |
![]() |
|
| The Eggman | Mar 10 2011, 02:09 PM Post #30 |
|
Tommy McLean
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
|
It is when I'm basing my views on his motivations. Unless you're saying I shouldn't have right to a view on the motivations of the owner of the football club I support (financially as well as vocally etc). Edited by The Eggman, Mar 10 2011, 02:13 PM.
|
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Any Football · Next Topic » |





![]](http://z5.ifrm.com/static/1/pip_r.png)




4:58 PM Jul 13