• ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:07 pm**

If there really is “hundreds” of managers out there who could with investment keep us up and get us playing great football why do so many managers get sacked every year despite frequently spending more money in one season than Dyche’s net spend in 8 years ?

Silva
Claude Puyol
Whoever managed Fulham when they spent £100m plus
Pardew
To name but a few....

Would any of us be comfortable in giving managers like Mark Hughes and his ilk £50m or more to spend on players as Burnley manager ? Look how it turned out for Stoke when they started to try and change their style and bring in 2 or 3 highly paid “better” footballers.

The only person who deserves to be given more money to spend and prove himself is Dyche....because even if he does get a bit of a war chest to spend it still is likely to be peanuts compared to most of the league so we will still need the skills that Dyche possesses which have helped us over achieve for the last 8 years under his management.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:11 pm**

Only would Burnley fans, root for the consortium who are rumoured to be looking to spend much less and look closer to our business model which is spending as little as we can possible get away with!

I've noticed it's the exact same people who have had their head in the sand when it comes to realising that the board have completely given up on our Premier League status for at least the last 3 transfer windows.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:11 pm**

Right_winger wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:37 pm
First transfer we should do is transfer Dyche out the door. He’s hopeless in the market.

I thought of laughing at that but then realised you might have even been daft enough to have meant it.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:12 pm**

BigChaCha wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:11 pm
Only would Burnley fans, root for the consortium who are rumoured to be looking to spend much less and look closer to our business model which is spending as little as we can possible get away with!

Don’t think that’s anything like the case with either of the bidders

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:15 pm**

ClaretTony wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:12 pm
Don’t think that’s anything like the case with either of the bidders

In other words both are looking to spend considerable sums of money?

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:15 pm**

I just hope we can get a win or two in the next few games to give the league table less of the disastrous look it has at the moment. The bottom four are already looking slightly adrift, that gap cannot widen.

I fear how the league form is going could be a delaying factor in the takeover (if we aren’t in this league I doubt anyone wants us), just my own thoughts there though.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:21 pm**

TVC15 wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:07 pm
If there really is “hundreds” of managers out there who could with investment keep us up and get us playing great football why do so many managers get sacked every year despite frequently spending more money in one season than Dyche’s net spend in 8 years ?

Silva
Claude Puyol
Whoever managed Fulham when they spent £100m plus
Pardew
To name but a few....

Would any of us be comfortable in giving managers like Mark Hughes and his ilk £50m or more to spend on players as Burnley manager ? Look how it turned out for Stoke when they started to try and change their style and bring in 2 or 3 highly paid “better” footballers.

The only person who deserves to be given more money to spend and prove himself is Dyche....because even if he does get a bit of a war chest to spend it still is likely to be peanuts compared to most of the league so we will still need the skills that Dyche possesses which have helped us over achieve for the last 8 years under his management.

You’ve purposefully mentioned the worst out there to bolster your point, equally for the balance of fairness you could have mentioned allardyce or pulis who are more than capable of steadying a ship in rocky waters it’s hardly uncharted territory for them. Sometimes for the purpose of entertainment things need freshening up, new ideas & fresh challenges & perspective changes. It’s probably irrelevant anyway no guarantees or indications exist promising the committal to spend money.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:21 pm**

TVC15 wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:07 pm
If there really is “hundreds” of managers out there who could with investment keep us up and get us playing great football why do so many managers get sacked every year despite frequently spending more money in one season than Dyche’s net spend in 8 years ?

Silva
Claude Puyol
Whoever managed Fulham when they spent £100m plus
Pardew
To name but a few....

Would any of us be comfortable in giving managers like Mark Hughes and his ilk £50m or more to spend on players as Burnley manager ? Look how it turned out for Stoke when they started to try and change their style and bring in 2 or 3 highly paid “better” footballers.

The only person who deserves to be given more money to spend and prove himself is Dyche....because even if he does get a bit of a war chest to spend it still is likely to be peanuts compared to most of the league so we will still need the skills that Dyche possesses which have helped us over achieve for the last 8 years under his management.

Ahh the old Hughes at Stoke argument. They had their highest ever PL finish (9th) 3 years on the trot with Hughes. They played brilliant football at times with Bojan, Shakiri and Arnautović pulling the strings. Yes their now in the Championship. But you’ll find every football club have dropped a level after the manager has been sacked, wether that’s Stoke, Man Utd or Barcelona. All it takes is one bad start and you’re in huge trouble. As for Fulham, nah. People point out they spent £100m but forget their competing against teams that have been assembled over several transfer windows and spent the same if not more. They tried to do it in one go.

Given football is the biggest global sport. I find it hard to believe there isn’t 100s of managers who could take us over and invest and play good stuff.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:25 pm**

jedi_master wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:15 pm
I just hope we can get a win or two in the next few games to give the league table less of the disastrous look it has at the moment. The bottom four are already looking slightly adrift, that gap cannot widen.

I fear how the league form is going could be a delaying factor in the takeover (if we aren’t in this league I doubt anyone wants us), just my own thoughts there though.

Monday is huge. Still plenty of points to play for but hopefully on Monday we will make the turf a ‘happy place’.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:27 pm**

doesn’t take much to trigger the usual zealots.

For the time Dyche has been with us his transfer record has been poor.

He’s been with us a long time too long now

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:32 pm**

Right_winger wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:27 pm
doesn’t take much to trigger the usual zealots.

For the time Dyche has been with us his transfer record has been poor.

He’s been with us a long time too long now

Yes you are right. Imagine where we could have finished instead of 7th and 10th if he was actually any good in the transfer market.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:44 pm**

COBBLE wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:59 pm
Heavily invest, new manager IF current manager cannot adapt to strategy of new owners.

That sounds the fairest solution. I can see Dyche walking if ALK is successful and they start to sign new upcoming talents that he won't play.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:57 pm**

Steddyman wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:44 pm
That sounds the fairest solution. I can see Dyche walking if ALK is successful and they start to sign new upcoming talents that he won't play.

Why wouldn’t he play them and which other up and coming talents hasn’t he played?

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:57 pm**

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:21 pm
You’ve purposefully mentioned the worst out there to bolster your point, equally for the balance of fairness you could have mentioned allardyce or pulis who are more than capable of steadying a ship in rocky waters it’s hardly uncharted territory for them. Sometimes for the purpose of entertainment things need freshening up, new ideas & fresh challenges & perspective changes. It’s probably irrelevant anyway no guarantees or indications exist promising the committal to spend money.

I know - silly me....I should have mentioned the best managers to bolster my point and tried to confuse everyone.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:00 pm**

scouseclaret wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:05 pm
That’s just ********. Dyche prefers working with the best players he can afford. Older players tend to be cheaper, but the likes of Gray, Pope, Tarko and Taylor were hardly veterans when he brought them in, and all have or will make a big profit for the club.

Who knows what SD could do with a vaguely competitive budget, but surely he’s earned the right to have a crack - if that is indeed what’s on offer.

Time will tell. I think he'll still prefer going down the route of experienced, steady eddie types. The Gibson fiasco shows the problems that could stem from having a bigger, better squad.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:06 pm**

DCWat wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:57 pm
Why wouldn’t he play them and which other up and coming talents hasn’t he played?

Because he's too loyal to his old favourites? He wouldn't even drop Barnes last season when he was injured and his performances absolutely stunk.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:08 pm**

This thread is deteriorating.......

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:10 pm**

jrgbfc wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:06 pm
Because he's too loyal to his old favourites? He wouldn't even drop Barnes last season when he was injured and his performances absolutely stunk.

His loyalty to the old favourites has worked out quite well over the past 8 years.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:10 pm**

Steve-Harpers-perm wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:32 pm
Yes you are right. Imagine where we could have finished instead of 7th and 10th if he was actually any good in the transfer market.

Nothing to do with his efforts in the transfer market. Our team has largely been similar throughout.

However look at our squad now. It’s a complete shambles, Embarrassing for a premier league club. Not al Dyches fault granted but he shoulders a fair percentage of the blame.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:15 pm**

Right_winger wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:10 pm
Nothing to do with his efforts in the transfer market. Our team has largely been similar throughout.

However look at our squad now. It’s a complete shambles, Embarrassing for a premier league club. Not al Dyches fault granted but he shoulders a fair percentage of the blame.

Nothing to do with his efforts in the transfer market must have missed the bit where the players volunteer to play for us on a week to week basis?

Think we know where the blame lies for the strength of the current squad.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:20 pm**

TVC15 wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:57 pm
I know - silly me....I should have mentioned the best managers to bolster my point and tried to confuse everyone.

It just demonstrates the ability to cohesively structure a convincing post without having the need to counter, the way you’ve chosen maybe it’s deliberate to confuse or you are simply not thinking straight I’m not sure! I’m certainly not confused more amazed how Alan Pardew or Claude puyol could be considered trustworthy with an imaginary transfer budget in a post SD era without even thinking of anybody more suitable.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:25 pm**

Steve-Harpers-perm wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:10 pm
His loyalty to the old favourites has worked out quite well over the past 8 years.

Yes it has, nobody can deny the great job he's done. But having money to spend will bring extra problems for him and force him out of his comfort zone a bit.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:29 pm**

jrgbfc wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:25 pm
Yes it has, nobody can deny the great job he's done. But having money to spend will bring extra problems for him and force him out of his comfort zone a bit.

We have no idea it will bring ‘extra problems’. Comfort zone makes no sense given he can only work with what he’s got unless he demands that the board don’t back him in the transfer market which would be a bit weird.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:31 pm**

Right_winger wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:27 pm
doesn’t take much to trigger the usual zealots.

For the time Dyche has been with us his transfer record has been poor.

He’s been with us a long time too long now

Just out interest, does anyone know what Dyche’s net spend has been since he became manager?

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:34 pm**

I personally would hope that the American bid is successful, but then, what do I know. This certainly is dragging on somewhat, to say the least.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:37 pm**

scouseclaret wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:31 pm
Just out interest, does anyone know what Dyche’s net spend has been since he became manager?

Isn’t it around £45m ? Something like that.
I can’t think of a team over a similar period in this league who has had a lower net spend....yet some just trot out the same old rubbish about how poor a transfer record SD has.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:40 pm**

jrgbfc wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:06 pm
Because he's too loyal to his old favourites? He wouldn't even drop Barnes last season when he was injured and his performances absolutely stunk.

What options has he had?

I do agree that on occasion, I’d have liked Dyche to be more willing to change things. What we have to remember though is that we’ve got to where we are and achieved what we have by Dyche keeping a tight knit squad. I think the other factor is that the options available to Dyche, to change things up, have been very limited.

For me, he’s more than earned his chance to have some financial backing and with this I’d expect to see a little more in terms of style and rotation.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:43 pm**

Dyche has had his hands tied year after year in the transfer market, judge him when he has had some serious money to spend.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:43 pm**

TVC15 wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:37 pm
Isn’t it around £45m ? Something like that.
I can’t think of a team over a similar period in this league who has had a lower net spend....yet some just trot out the same old rubbish about how poor a transfer record SD has.

It’s a really strange and lazy argument given the success he has brought us.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:44 pm**

bfcjg wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:43 pm
Dyche has had his hands tied year after year in the transfer market, judge him when he has had some serious money to spend.

Have you forgot to change your username!?

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:07 pm**

TVC15 wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:37 pm
Isn’t it around £45m ? Something like that.
I can’t think of a team over a similar period in this league who has had a lower net spend....yet some just trot out the same old rubbish about how poor a transfer record SD has.

So about £5m season. I would ask any of those who criticise and/or would have him sacked, who else in world football has achieved as much as he has on a similar budget?

I would think he has generated at least £100m a season in additional revenue over these 8 years. Pound for pound, he may well be the best manager in the world.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:09 pm**

bfcjg wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:43 pm
Dyche has had his hands tied year after year in the transfer market, judge him when he has had some serious money to spend.

I think his potential is when he doesn't have a lot of money to spend.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:20 pm**

Jakubclaret wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 9:20 pm
It just demonstrates the ability to cohesively structure a convincing post without having the need to counter, the way you’ve chosen maybe it’s deliberate to confuse or you are simply not thinking straight I’m not sure! I’m certainly not confused more amazed how Alan Pardew or Claude puyol could be considered trustworthy with an imaginary transfer budget in a post SD era without even thinking of anybody more suitable.

As usual you’ve lost me. I mentioned Puyol and Pardew as examples of managers who went to new clubs, spent lots of money on new players and ended up getting sacked.

I was putting forward an argument for wanting to stick with SD if we get taken over rather than go for what is a supposed upgrade. Personally I think the most successful manager we have had in the last 50 years deserves it.

Not sure exactly what you are arguing for - are you suggesting you would rather have Allardyce or Pullis in charge ?

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:25 pm**

FactualFrank wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:09 pm
I think his potential is when he doesn't have a lot of money to spend.

You might be right, but we’ll never know until he gets the chance. If the opportunity is there (and I’m still pretty sceptical) I’d like to see him given that chance at Burnley.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:33 pm**

TVC15 wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:20 pm
As usual you’ve lost me. I mentioned Puyol and Pardew as examples of managers who went to new clubs, spent lots of money on new players and ended up getting sacked.

I was putting forward an argument for wanting to stick with SD if we get taken over rather than go for what is a supposed upgrade. Personally I think the most successful manager we have had in the last 50 years deserves it.

Not sure exactly what you are arguing for - are you suggesting you would rather have Allardyce or Pullis in charge ?

That’s not very difficult but I’ll try to explain - I know exactly what your argument was you’d prefer to stick with Dyche & I agree it’s better the devil you know, I’d rather have allardyce or Eddie Howe before puyol & Pardew, whoever ends up taking over would hopefully recognise the importance of retaining Dyche for his knowledge on the club & the fact he’s settled, I don’t why I suggested pulis the mans a snake, I don’t see any logical reason for the possible prospective new owners to dispense with Dyche unless there’s a personality clash or Dyche himself decides he’s had enough.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:34 pm**

FactualFrank wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:09 pm
I think his potential is when he doesn't have a lot of money to spend.

Bit like Howe then?

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:36 pm**

Right_winger wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:27 pm
doesn’t take much to trigger the usual zealots.

For the time Dyche has been with us his transfer record has been poor.

He’s been with us a long time too long now

His signings have been more good than bad if you look at it properly.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:36 pm**

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:34 pm
Bit like Howe then?

I'm taking Dyche as an individual, really. I just think some managers are better with a lower budget.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:08 pm**

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 10:36 pm
His signings have been more good than bad if you look at it properly.

I Disagree, only a couple of signings have been good, some more than good but loads of absolute roasters and a waste of resources though.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:13 pm**

Right_winger wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:08 pm
I Disagree, only a couple of signings have been good, some more than good but loads of absolute roasters and a waste of resources though.

Only two of Dyche’s signings have been good? Care to name them?

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:16 pm**

The next few days could be the most momentous in our history and we are squabbling about Dyche's transfer record. FFS.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:28 pm**

DCWat wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:57 pm
Why wouldn’t he play them and which other up and coming talents hasn’t he played?

He rarely changes a winning team.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:32 pm**

Steddyman wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:28 pm
He rarely changes a winning team.

What a nice criticism to make that would be.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:34 pm**

Rileybobs wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:13 pm
Only two of Dyche’s signings have been good? Care to name them?

Two is being generous if we can all ignore the likes of Heaton, Michael Keane, Andre Gray, Joey Barton, Chris Wood, Nick Pope, Charlie Taylor etc etc. Such a weird thing from supposed Burnley fans almost suggesting Dyche for the last 8 years has just tuned up at 3pm stood on the touchine before driving back to Kettering.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:37 pm**

Right_winger wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:08 pm
I Disagree, only a couple of signings have been good, some more than good but loads of absolute roasters and a waste of resources though.

Which of Tarky, Pope, Taylor, Wood, Rodriguez, Westwood (double player of the season awards a couple of seasons ago), Gray or Defour were the good 2? I think the others may be unhappy to be cast into the roaster or waste of resources heap. Even the Hendrick haters have to agree he more than justified the resources spent on him during his time here. Not to mention Cork, Barnes, Ings, Lowton, Bardsley, Vokes. (Some may have been here pre Dyche, can't remember)

Players who were signed by other managers have had the best part of their careers under SD.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:38 pm**

Right_winger wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:08 pm
I Disagree, only a couple of signings have been good, some more than good but loads of absolute roasters and a waste of resources though.

Let's have your list of good vs OK vs bad then, I could do with a laugh.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:44 pm**

Right winger and jrgbfc trying to outdo each other in the stupid stakes

Could be some real guff posted by 2am

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:51 pm**

Maybe start a Dyche thread for all this? I want to read about the takeover, not how Dyche has fared in the transfer market.

Posted: **Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:56 pm**

Tarkys got his pen out is the rumour from next door.

Posted: **Sun Nov 22, 2020 12:20 am**

claretlegend wrote: ↑
Sat Nov 21, 2020 11:51 pm
Maybe start a Dyche thread for all this? I want to read about the takeover, not how Dyche has fared in the transfer market.

Yes come peeps - focus, let's stay on topic please. Some of us have lives to lead.

ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover

Re: ALK Capital or Farnell/Elkashashy takeover