Our budget

[slack_pie]

I think we were all surprised by the number and quality of signings made yesterday. Not only because of the short notice, but because of what Ardley said about having little resources to work with. I think the Danes said during the presser that we'd have a similar budget to those teams competing at the top of the NL, but it seems to me we are signing players that most of our competitors wouldn't be able to attract.

So do you think the Danes and Ardley have been playing our chances/ambitions down? Are they pushing the boat out in an attempt to bounce back straight away, or is this just a sign that our new owners have the funds to take us forward?

I'm not complaining in any way - yesterday was fantastic - but I thought the new approach involved spending less but being smarter, and basically becoming a selling club that develops players. From a NL perspective, it looks like we've just splashed the cash.

I'm fine with it as long as the new owners are responsible with the money they spend, and don't do what our previous owners have done by gambling on swift promotions. They seem about as measured and intelligent as football owners get, so I'll trust they know what they are doing.

[TSANHO]

I think we were all surprised by the number and quality of signings made yesterday. Not only because of the short notice, but because of what Ardley said about having little resources to work with. I think the Danes said during the presser that we'd have a similar budget to those teams competing at the top of the NL, but it seems to me we are signing players that most of our competitors wouldn't be able to attract.

So do you think the Danes and Ardley have been playing our chances/ambitions down? Are they pushing the boat out in an attempt to bounce back straight away, or is this just a sign that our new owners have the funds to take us forward?

I'm not complaining in any way - yesterday was fantastic - but I thought the new approach involved spending less but being smarter, and basically becoming a selling club that develops players. From a NL perspective, it looks like we've just splashed the cash.

I'm fine with it as long as the new owners are responsible with the money they spend, and don't do what our previous owners have done by gambling on swift promotions. They seem about as measured and intelligent as football owners get, so I'll trust they know what they are doing.

Good post, I was thinking exactly the same. The main concern for me is the age of some of the players they are signing, they have zero sell on value.

On the other hand they have been very restricted on how much time they had to deliver the signings so in that respect they have done great business....and probably have had to pay over the oddsto get half decent players.

We may see a more refined approach to signing players as time goes on.

[LaxtonLad]

I think we were all surprised by the number and quality of signings made yesterday. Not only because of the short notice, but because of what Ardley said about having little resources to work with. I think the Danes said during the presser that we'd have a similar budget to those teams competing at the top of the NL, but it seems to me we are signing players that most of our competitors wouldn't be able to attract.

So do you think the Danes and Ardley have been playing our chances/ambitions down? Are they pushing the boat out in an attempt to bounce back straight away, or is this just a sign that our new owners have the funds to take us forward?

I'm not complaining in any way - yesterday was fantastic - but I thought the new approach involved spending less but being smarter, and basically becoming a selling club that develops players. From a NL perspective, it looks like we've just splashed the cash.

I'm fine with it as long as the new owners are responsible with the money they spend, and don't do what our previous owners have done by gambling on swift promotions. They seem about as measured and intelligent as football owners get, so I'll trust they know what they are doing.

Personally, I think the Danes, using their particular methods, and Ardley, telling them exactly what type of player he wanted, sought out these players weeks ago, knowing the sale was imminent. Silence all round was paramount - conspiracy or what?

[Scanlon's Hatrick]

Good post, I was thinking exactly the same. The main concern for me is the age of some of the players they are signing, they have zero sell on value.

On the other hand they have been very restricted on how much time they had to deliver the signings so in that respect they have done great business....and probably have had to pay over the oddsto get half decent players.

We may see a more refined approach to signing players as time goes on.

My thoughts exactly.

Apart from Nathan, all the new players are at an "experienced" age without being a veteran and over the hill (not suggesting for one moment Nathan is).

I am no expert on the NL but from what I have seen and read, it's relentless. Are these 30 somethings going to last the pace in a game ?

I hope that we get a big centre forward who is maybe mid twenties, ditto any other new signings. I think we have enough experience now.

Not being negative after such a surprising/welcome last couple of days.

[legs77]

I think our hands were tied and I think for the future they will target younger players for resale.

We badly needed defenders and I agree we cant sell them due to their age but most will only have one year deals....for me its about staying up this season and take it from there.

[slack_pie]

Good post, I was thinking exactly the same. The main concern for me is the age of some of the players they are signing, they have zero sell on value.

On the other hand they have been very restricted on how much time they had to deliver the signings so in that respect they have done great business....and probably have had to pay over the oddsto get half decent players.

We may see a more refined approach to signing players as time goes on.

It looks like they just went out and got what we needed. It's all well and good saying we want to develop younger players, but we desperately needed an experienced, commanding centre back - which is what we got.

Maybe we'll see the new approach phased in over time. This summer was more a matter of necessity, as we simply didn't have the numbers.

[Bernard_Bresslaw]

I think our hands were tied and I think for the future they will target younger players for resale.

We badly needed defenders and I agree we cant sell them due to their age but most will only have one year deals....for me its about staying up this season and take it from there.

Agree.

With almost a dozen players with zero or next to no first team experience we needed older heads. To an extent this was an (apparently well-planned) firefighting exercise after the summer exodus and existing deficiencies.

Tyson aside we have 2 outfield player just over 30, a 29 year old and a 23 year old. This was absolutely necessary to give us the spine we need. At the end of the day if you want a player with Ben Turner's attributes at the age of 25/26 then you pay for the privilege and we would've been nowhere near getting him. Gary Strodder was 30 when he arrived and we haven't had many like him since.

Also although O'Brien is great news he isn't really an addition and in normal circumstances he would probably already have signed a new contract before the ebd of last season. We're also likely to lose a couple more experienced players.

Sam Allardyce started with experienced players like Hendon (unless it was Colin Murphy?) and Mark Robson before he could add saleable assets like Andy Hughes (discounting his Gabriel Chi Chi Mendez phase of course) and this feels like the closest we've come to his quality of recruitment since.

[KeepTheMagpieFlyingH]

It looks like they just went out and got what we needed. It's all well and good saying we want to develop younger players, but we desperately needed an experienced, commanding centre back - which is what we got.

Maybe we'll see the new approach phased in over time. This summer was more a matter of necessity, as we simply didn't have the numbers.

Agree 100%

[Bartlett's Dust]

Personally, I think the Danes, using their particular methods, and Ardley, telling them exactly what type of player he wanted, sought out these players weeks ago, knowing the sale was imminent. Silence all round was paramount - conspiracy or what?

6 comma's in one sentence. A new world record?

[Kyle95]

Y

I think we were all surprised by the number and quality of signings made yesterday. Not only because of the short notice, but because of what Ardley said about having little resources to work with. I think the Danes said during the presser that we'd have a similar budget to those teams competing at the top of the NL, but it seems to me we are signing players that most of our competitors wouldn't be able to attract.

So do you think the Danes and Ardley have been playing our chances/ambitions down? Are they pushing the boat out in an attempt to bounce back straight away, or is this just a sign that our new owners have the funds to take us forward?

I'm not complaining in any way - yesterday was fantastic - but I thought the new approach involved spending less but being smarter, and basically becoming a selling club that develops players. From a NL perspective, it looks like we've just splashed the cash.

I'm fine with it as long as the new owners are responsible with the money they spend, and don't do what our previous owners have done by gambling on swift promotions. They seem about as measured and intelligent as football owners get, so I'll trust they know what they are doing.

I think given the circumstances the new owners, and Ardley are just looking at getting a competitive squad in place. I think their immediate aim is to try and get the club promoted, we will then see their ultimate aim come into action, ie selling players for profit if and when we get promoted. Let us not forget that Stead, Vaughan, and Ward were released, i can imagine that took a big chunk off the wage bill.