Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Tony Mowbray Transfer Record
#1
After all the debate, just decided to do a bit of googling whilst watching the CL.

Total spent in 2 n 1/2 seasons: £31.5m
Total recouped in 2 n 1/2 seasons: £34.5m

Net spend: MINUS £3m 

For all the talk of him spending loads of money, over the course of his time here, he inherited a messed up squad from Robson, totally changed the team, reduced the age, improved he style of play, and had a negative net spend....

Furthermore, of the money he spent we actually recouped £7m on players as well as having well over a thousand appearances out of Dorrans, Mulumbu, Olsson, Koren, Brunt and Morrison as we established ourselves in the PL.
Reply
#2
(09-28-2016, 07:51 PM)Sw4Baggie Wrote: After all the debate, just decided to do a bit of googling whilst watching the CL.

Total spent in 2 n 1/2 seasons: £31.5m
Total recouped in 2 n 1/2 seasons: £34.5m

Net spend: MINUS £3m 

For all the talk of him spending loads of money, over the course of his time here, he inherited a messed up squad from Robson, totally changed the team, reduced the age, improved he style of play, and had a negative net spend....

Furthermore, of the money he spent we actually recouped £7m on players as well as having well over a thousand appearances out of Dorrans, Mulumbu, Olsson, Koren, Brunt and Morrison as we established ourselves in the PL.

When did Mowbray have control of budget, and selling of players? JP squeezed every penny out of the deals and afforded Mowbray a significant budget far higher than any of our opponents. Happy to agree his biggest legacy was the players he brought to the club. The rest meh.
Reply
#3
Were Shelton Martis and Pele his or Robbos?

I do like Mowbray as a man and he deserves better than a shit tip like Coventry,
Reply
#4
They were TM's.
Reply
#5
Both Mowbray's.

Mixed record, like all managers but overall you'd say his signings were successful.
Reply
#6
(09-28-2016, 08:22 PM)Birdman1811 Wrote: Both Mowbray's.

Mixed record, like all managers but overall you'd say his signings were successful.

Very much so.
Reply
#7
Depends on what you consider loads of money.

In the Championship the parachute payments gave the club a huge advantage. Stoke and Hull got promoted without that luxury and both survived the following season in the Premier League. Would you have preferred to stay in the top league or have a pretty looking net spend column?
Reply
#8
(09-28-2016, 08:08 PM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:
(09-28-2016, 07:51 PM)Sw4Baggie Wrote: After all the debate, just decided to do a bit of googling whilst watching the CL.

Total spent in 2 n 1/2 seasons: £31.5m
Total recouped in 2 n 1/2 seasons: £34.5m

Net spend: MINUS £3m 

For all the talk of him spending loads of money, over the course of his time here, he inherited a messed up squad from Robson, totally changed the team, reduced the age, improved he style of play, and had a negative net spend....

Furthermore, of the money he spent we actually recouped £7m on players as well as having well over a thousand appearances out of Dorrans, Mulumbu, Olsson, Koren, Brunt and Morrison as we established ourselves in the PL.

When did Mowbray have control of budget, and selling of players? JP squeezed every penny out of the deals and afforded Mowbray a significant budget far higher than any of our opponents. Happy to agree his biggest legacy was the players he brought to the club. The rest meh.

But by that logic, he also wasn't the one getting his trousers pulled down over players that weren't worth the money.... 

Which opponents were our transfer budget and wage bill much higher than? The rivals that we finished above in the Championship? Biggest spend/biggest budget, finished top playing the best football... What more did he need to do? 

The club - which he was indeed part of - made a mistake in approach for the Prem. We invested in fees instead of wages and didn't attract quality required.

(09-28-2016, 08:08 PM)Derek Hardballs Wrote:
(09-28-2016, 07:51 PM)Sw4Baggie Wrote: After all the debate, just decided to do a bit of googling whilst watching the CL.

Total spent in 2 n 1/2 seasons: £31.5m
Total recouped in 2 n 1/2 seasons: £34.5m

Net spend: MINUS £3m 

For all the talk of him spending loads of money, over the course of his time here, he inherited a messed up squad from Robson, totally changed the team, reduced the age, improved he style of play, and had a negative net spend....

Furthermore, of the money he spent we actually recouped £7m on players as well as having well over a thousand appearances out of Dorrans, Mulumbu, Olsson, Koren, Brunt and Morrison as we established ourselves in the PL.

When did Mowbray have control of budget, and selling of players? JP squeezed every penny out of the deals and afforded Mowbray a significant budget far higher than any of our opponents. Happy to agree his biggest legacy was the players he brought to the club. The rest meh.

But by that logic, he also wasn't the one getting his trousers pulled down over players that weren't worth the money.... 

Which opponents were our transfer budget and wage bill much higher than? The rivals that we finished above in the Championship? Biggest spend/biggest budget, finished top playing the best football... What more did he need to do? 

The club - which he was indeed part of - made a mistake in approach for the Prem. We invested in fees instead of wages and didn't attract quality required. In fairness, we probably had enough to survive, but we'll never know. Boro who came down with us certainly spent a lot more.
Reply
#9
Money spent is only part of the story. West Brom paid £3m for Scott Carson while Stoke dropped on Thomas Sorenson on a free.

Stoke also paid over £5m for Dave Kitson who never scored a goal.
Reply
#10
(09-28-2016, 08:38 PM)superbobby Wrote: Depends on what you consider loads of money.

In the Championship the parachute payments gave the club a huge advantage. Stoke and Hull got promoted without that luxury and both survived the following season in the Premier League. Would you have preferred to stay in the top league or have a pretty looking net spend column?

Stoke brought in some experienced PL players on loan on big wages using Coates' money, and Hull very nearly went into administration as a legacy of overspending a couple years later.  If imagine our budgets that season weren't hugely dissimilar. 

Stoke spent more money than is that season, but did well to survive. I've already stated we underachieved respective to Hull, but so did a lot of better resources teams than us.

(09-28-2016, 08:52 PM)superbobby Wrote: Money spent is only part of the story. West Brom paid £3m for Scott Carson while Stoke dropped on Thomas Sorenson on a free.

Stoke also paid over £5m for Dave Kitson who never scored a goal.

Doesn't this contradict what you said ^^
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)