Just now, W.cramp said:

See, meanderson looked ok until he gave us duff info on Stephenson. For that reason, I am out

Well tbf he said SS didn't fancy him. And now that rings true.

10 minutes ago, Sluffy said:

Ok, what's in a name but my thoughts are are that Evatt had far too much influence, spaffed millions on a collection of number 10 players the last being a reported £1.3m on Randall at the start of the January 25 window of which he was 'sacked' before it had even closed.

The concern for me, if there is one, is how the story got to Nixon's ear, if there is any truth in it.

Aye, Evatt acted as he ran the place, vetoed sales too.

Would assume it's the same source as the people on here.

3 minutes ago, gonzo said:

Well tbf he said SS didn't fancy him. And now that rings true.

For the fees involved they're very good signings indeed. Just think SS was unsure if Championship-ready.

Mad that Nixon posts a vague (made up ??) story about an unnamed Manager and a few posts later people on here are convinced the story is true and definitely about us.

53 minutes ago, jmjhb said:

For the fees involved they're very good signings indeed. Just think SS was unsure if Championship-ready.

The problem for SS would be managers are judged short term were for fergal its probably a great investment down the line in a few years . If there is any truth in it it probably confirms what they were both saying about the budget and it wasn’t a bluff

12 minutes ago, Farnywhite said:

The problem for SS would be managers are judged short term were for fergal its probably a great investment down the line in a few years . If there is any truth in it it probably confirms what they were both saying about the budget and it wasn’t a bluff

How do you read that though from just a rumour? I only go off this as you say, 'if there is any truth' but then say it 'probably confirms' which makes no sense at all.

55 minutes ago, Ani said:

Mad that Nixon posts a vague (made up ??) story about an unnamed Manager and a few posts later people on here are convinced the story is true and definitely about us.

Who actually is convinced on here?

If you are thinking I am one of them, my point was actually that I believe Harkin is here simply to have a strategic view of the transfers strategy at the club rather than repeating what had just happened under Evatt.

I gave a scenario of this by using what 'may' have happened with the seemingly 'on-off' signing with Stephenson, where the 'gossip' claimed Schumacher was not convinced about signing him.

I've no idea if that actually took place or not.

I'm certainly not convinced it did.

I'm not saying something like that didn't happen either.

But if it did it would be a worry that internal 'gripes' are reaching the ear of the likes of Nixon.

32 minutes ago, Winchester White said:

How do you read that though from just a rumour? I only go off this as you say, 'if there is any truth' but then say it 'probably confirms' which makes no sense at all.

I can’t see it being as bad as Nixon is making out and it would effect SS position but there is probably some disagreement there because it’s coming from different sources such as Marc iles but if there is a disagreement about the fee which was iles take on it then the conclusion would be it is a tight budget we haven’t spent millions on the lad and SS would prefer the money to be used else were

19 minutes ago, Farnywhite said:

I can’t see it being as bad as Nixon is making out and it would effect SS position but there is probably some disagreement there because it’s coming from different sources such as Marc iles but if there is a disagreement about the fee which was iles take on it then the conclusion would be it is a tight budget we haven’t spent millions on the lad and SS would prefer the money to be used else were

Where’s the link on this. I’ve searched on BEN threads and Iles on Twitter and can’t see owt?

3 minutes ago, desperado said:

Where’s the link on this. I’ve searched on BEN threads and Iles on Twitter and can’t see owt?

I think it was on his podcast

27 minutes ago, Farnywhite said:

I can’t see it being as bad as Nixon is making out and it would effect SS position but there is probably some disagreement there because it’s coming from different sources such as Marc iles but if there is a disagreement about the fee which was iles take on it then the conclusion would be it is a tight budget we haven’t spent millions on the lad and SS would prefer the money to be used else were

Bloody hell Farny. A couple of full stops wouldn't go amiss! 😁

We're now fishing in a fresh pond where fees are multiples above our pockets.

I still think a bit of, for us, decent spend may occur, but late on.

Meanwhile, buy good, solid, experienced leaders & then lets see what the loan market brings.

2 hours ago, W.cramp said:

See, meanderson looked ok until he gave us duff info on Stephenson. For that reason, I am out

Me too! I take the bits I get with a pinch of salt now, they've definitely battened down the hatches a more since the start of the window.

And that's a good thing by the way, I shouldn't be hearing about the stuff I do.

3 hours ago, Farnywhite said:

I can’t see it being as bad as Nixon is making out and it would effect SS position but there is probably some disagreement there because it’s coming from different sources such as Marc iles but if there is a disagreement about the fee which was iles take on it then the conclusion would be it is a tight budget we haven’t spent millions on the lad and SS would prefer the money to be used else were

So a load of speculative bollocks then?

Haven’t there always been arguments over players and budgets, it’s not something new it’s just that the differences used to be manager to chairman whereas now it’s manager/coach to DoF or such. One is mainly concerned with finance and the other performance but usually there’s an accommodation between the two just as I’m sure there is between Schuey and Fergal so nothing to worry about for me even if there was a difference of opinion and what’s wrong with a bit of friction anyway?

Spurs signing Tonali for £100M

seems strange that the wealthiest club in the world keep having to sell their best players - Tonali, Gordon, Isak, Anderson etc

read it's because by staying at St James they just don't generate the same revenue the likes of Spurs do with all their gigs and NFL games

so if they really want to compete they need to get a ground that generates big money

can see the toon being up for that

I hope there's disagreements between Schuey, Fergal and Jimmy regarding transfers, so that the reason for signings: ability, cost, and temperament etc are interrogated properly, this is how we make our budget go further. We can't afford a Championship version of Randall.

Edited July 6Jul 6 by Zog1

15 hours ago, Ani said:

Mad that Nixon posts a vague (made up ??) story about an unnamed Manager and a few posts later people on here are convinced the story is true and definitely about us.

It's just mad that anybody pays any attention to anything Nixon says, he seems to know fuck all, I'm not sure he ever gets anything correct does he? - yet some hang on his every word. He's not had an "inside track" at this club since the Owen Coyle days

46 minutes ago, Zico said:

Spurs signing Tonali for £100M

seems strange that the wealthiest club in the world keep having to sell their best players - Tonali, Gordon, Isak, Anderson etc

read it's because by staying at St James they just don't generate the same revenue the likes of Spurs do with all their gigs and NFL games

so if they really want to compete they need to get a ground that generates big money

can see the toon being up for that

Read that Spurs can spend something like £400m and still not be worried about PSR

Nixon mentioned the fallout is between manager and director of football, we don't have a dof......Stoke do, and look how much they have spent and on who

28 minutes ago, Wullie said:

Nixon mentioned the fallout is between manager and director of football, we don't have a dof......Stoke do, and look how much they have spent and on who

Yes we do. Fergal Harkin is our Director of Football.

34 minutes ago, Wullie said:

Nixon mentioned the fallout is between manager and director of football, we don't have a dof......Stoke do, and look how much they have spent and on who

3 minutes ago, Cheese said:

Yes we do. Fergal Harkin is our Director of Football.

aye

and @meanderson93 has already told us they didn't agree on signing Stephenson

make of that what you will

3 minutes ago, Cheese said:

Yes we do. Fergal Harkin is our Director of Football.

Funny isn't it, Club refer to him as "Sporting Director" but on his own LinkedIn he has his role as "Director of Football"

14 minutes ago, meanderson93 said:

Funny isn't it, Club refer to him as "Sporting Director" but on his own LinkedIn he has his role as "Director of Football"

Same thing.

1 hour ago, Zog1 said:

I hope there's disagreements between Schuey, Fergal and Jimmy regarding transfers, so that the reason for signings: ability, cost, and temperament etc are interrogated properly, this is how we make our budget go further. We can't afford a Championship version of Randall.

Yeah but there will be instances where you don't get a transfer right, nobody has a 100% record

Edited July 6Jul 6 by jmjhb