What or who is to blame?

This Forum is the main messageboard to discuss all things Claret and Blue and beyond
Chester Perry
Posts: 19173
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3116 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Oct 04, 2020 2:10 pm

SGr wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 11:19 pm
It’s Mike Garlick for me.

I’ve been criticising our recruitment for years on here, well documented. I’ve banged on about how we should/should not be signing this, that, the other - but ultimately all of it is irrelevant in hindsight.

We are 3 games into the season with “winnable” games being played and have spent roughly £1m on 31 year old Stephens and a 3rd choice goalkeeper. Deals aren’t being done to actually improve the XI, short or long term. What’s the point in any recruitment policy if the man with the chequebook isn’t going to get things over the line?
and yet in the last 4 completed seasons we have spent more than double the amount on transfers we had spent in the previous !30+ seasons - In reality this board and manager have spent around 70% (if not more) of all the clubs transfer spending in it's history.
This user liked this post: CombatClaret

BabylonClaret
Posts: 3077
Joined: Sun Jan 24, 2016 10:51 pm
Been Liked: 707 times
Has Liked: 618 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by BabylonClaret » Sun Oct 04, 2020 2:35 pm

Of course they've spent more. Weve earned a lot more too. You need to look at what we spend in the context t of where we are now. Not the past.

Its clear manager and chairman are at loggerheads. Their spat is affecting the team and the whole atmosphere around the club. Bottom line though is we've taken a very cautious line over the last 5 windows and we aren't seeing anything coming through this except targets that most of us could make a decent up front stab at.

Whether that is down to Dyche being too narrow or Garlick being too tight is up for debate. I'd argue more the latter more than the former - Dyche has shown he's prepared to bring in players who aren't "steady away" if they fit- defour, grossiky, santamaria, are three that spring to mind immediately. We didn't land all of them of course but it shows this idea that Dyche only wants English trusted old heads is nonsense.

warksclaret
Posts: 6594
Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
Been Liked: 1676 times
Has Liked: 754 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by warksclaret » Sun Oct 04, 2020 2:36 pm

For me things have gone wrong with the appointment of Mike Rigg a failure at his two previous clubs and since the creation of this recruitment/analytical dinosaur we have in two years seen barely any new faces as a result

Prior to this we were astute at recruiting which led to significant profits when the players left us ie Trippier,Vokes Heaton, Ings, Austin, Keane, Gray. These alone gave us close to £60m profit which we could re-invest in new players without dipping in to SKY money. Add to that astute signings and free transfers like Arfield, Jones, Boyd, Kightly, Ward, JBG, Pope and Barton. All these 7 cost us a total of £7m and have made a major contribution on the pitch..We also made a few bad buys but name me a manager in the PL that hasn't.

I cannot believe a successful businessman like MG could not say during recent discussions with ALK"look through COVID we are short of funds.We want to ensure PL survival and also keep our manager motivated. We would like to spend circa £20-£25m in much needed new players-do we have your support. It means if the take-over goes ahead, this amount of debt/borrowings will be in the management accounts". For me this would also have tested the metal of the potential new consortium.

CombatClaret
Posts: 4381
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:09 pm
Been Liked: 1825 times
Has Liked: 929 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by CombatClaret » Sun Oct 04, 2020 2:41 pm

There's isn't a problem, there's only our circumstances. We've overachieved for several years and now in a time where long term financial security is at extreme risk it might be the we're finally unable to outrun our circumstances.

Chester Perry
Posts: 19173
Joined: Thu Jun 02, 2016 11:06 am
Been Liked: 3116 times
Has Liked: 481 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by Chester Perry » Sun Oct 04, 2020 2:46 pm

BabylonClaret wrote:
Sun Oct 04, 2020 2:35 pm
Of course they've spent more. Weve earned a lot more too. You need to look at what we spend in the context t of where we are now. Not the past.
are you thinking that I am not aware of that

CaptJohn
Posts: 1525
Joined: Tue Jan 26, 2016 5:41 pm
Been Liked: 462 times
Has Liked: 329 times
Location: Malabo, EG/Chester
Contact:

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by CaptJohn » Sun Oct 04, 2020 2:52 pm

I must confess I'm to blame :oops:
I hadn't got round to putting my BFC plate onto my new Jag. It's in place now so hopefully our results will pick up.
P1010596.JPG
P1010596.JPG (76.88 KiB) Viewed 880 times

levraiclaret
Posts: 1566
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 11:40 am
Been Liked: 428 times
Has Liked: 1460 times
Location: Leicestershire
Contact:

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by levraiclaret » Sun Oct 04, 2020 3:33 pm

Stayingup wrote:
Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:06 am
Gibson + (Covid) could be the root of the problem between Chairman and Manager. Exacerbated by not retaining Hendrick and Lennion. Will it be fatal? Could be.
The impact of covid on the club's finances and (possibly) on Garlick's finances will be the main cause I guess. I am led to believe that Garlick wanted to sell out/cash in before the pandemic arrived. That is probably why he wants to conserve cash/avoid taking on debt. Rotten timing for him and us.

theboydonegood
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:52 pm
Been Liked: 8 times
Has Liked: 13 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by theboydonegood » Sun Oct 04, 2020 3:39 pm

Covid19
This user liked this post: boatshed bill

Conroy92
Posts: 1331
Joined: Mon Feb 01, 2016 9:06 pm
Been Liked: 497 times
Has Liked: 30 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by Conroy92 » Sun Oct 04, 2020 4:08 pm

SGr wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 11:35 pm
Few points from this one.

Firstly, I haven’t said we’re relegated. So I don’t see what there is to be shown up about.

Second, Burnley surviving this season under the current conditions wouldn’t justify anything that has gone on off the field. Dyche isn’t happy, hasn’t been for ages, and it’s blatantly obvious.

And finally, you can act as smug as you like, but I don’t care about being “shown up”. I want us to stay up. I have my opinions on how that’ll happen, but all I care about is the result.
A note on the first and second points, problems with recruitment leave a future problem, not an immediate one, depending on your amount of outgoings I suppose. We have had a problem over the past few seasons with recruitment, there hasn't been an immediate problem with the results. However it looks like it's catching up with us. Ultimately, while some will argue we were always going to get relegated amongst the heavy weights, we haven't done enough to give ourselves a chance. It seems that is a board descions to me. They have been great for us but I feel the need to post profits each year rather than investing money back into the playing squad has started to work against us.

If we had made that extra signing over the last couple of windows, and instead had 20m at bank rather than 40m, we'd be in a much better position on the field. Of course hindsight is a wonderful thing but I think your bang on SGR.

A question for people, with all the OOC players next year and the age of the squad how will we manage that rebuilding job without a few more bodies this window?

SGr
Posts: 4412
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:46 pm
Been Liked: 1022 times
Has Liked: 307 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by SGr » Sun Oct 04, 2020 5:02 pm

Conroy92 wrote:
Sun Oct 04, 2020 4:08 pm
A note on the first and second points, problems with recruitment leave a future problem, not an immediate one, depending on your amount of outgoings I suppose. We have had a problem over the past few seasons with recruitment, there hasn't been an immediate problem with the results. However it looks like it's catching up with us. Ultimately, while some will argue we were always going to get relegated amongst the heavy weights, we haven't done enough to give ourselves a chance.
Completely agree with this and it’s the point I’ve been making in previous windows. You leave it too long to improve the XI and all of a sudden there will be 3-4 positions that need sorting in the same window. And we don’t have the money to do that.

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 14566
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 3435 times
Has Liked: 6339 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Sun Oct 04, 2020 5:03 pm

SGr wrote:
Sun Oct 04, 2020 5:02 pm
Completely agree with this and it’s the point I’ve been making in previous windows. You leave it too long to improve the XI and all of a sudden there will be 3-4 positions that need sorting in the same window. And we don’t have the money to do that.
Without Covid the money would be there.

Unfortunalty its here

Erasmus
Posts: 761
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 574 times
Has Liked: 44 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by Erasmus » Sun Oct 04, 2020 5:44 pm

No one is to blame. Just the opposite, all those running the club deserve enormous praise for achieving what no other club of Burnley's standing has ever achieved before, unless backed by some wealthy donor. Look down the Premier League, there isn't a single club there that is in the same position as Burnley, so every season we will have to battle against enormous odds just to avoid relegation. That we have achieved so much means that all those involved must be given credit. Burnley in the Premier League will always be fighting against unavoidable disadvantages; it's just the way it is and no one is to be blamed.
These 4 users liked this post: Bcap1959 CombatClaret evensteadiereddie expoultryboy

AfloatinClaret
Posts: 1828
Joined: Sat May 26, 2018 7:16 pm
Been Liked: 559 times
Has Liked: 1393 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by AfloatinClaret » Sun Oct 04, 2020 6:32 pm

Erasmus wrote:
Sun Oct 04, 2020 5:44 pm
No one is to blame...
Exactly! As I've posted on a couple of threads lately: Never mind about a new RW/CB etc. following the departure of Joe Hart, what we're lacking and need most desperately is a Premiership-ready Scapegoat.

Winstonswhite
Posts: 2531
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 8:04 am
Been Liked: 605 times
Has Liked: 309 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by Winstonswhite » Sun Oct 04, 2020 6:42 pm

The question I’ve got is has Mike Garlick become more bothered about the club or his investment in the club.

What I mean by that is if the sale goes through, he stands to make a lot of money - but if he spends 30 million (for example) then surely that will directly influence how much the club would be sold for?

BOYSIE31
Posts: 2357
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:46 pm
Been Liked: 264 times
Has Liked: 1111 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by BOYSIE31 » Sun Oct 04, 2020 6:47 pm

SGr wrote:
Sat Oct 03, 2020 11:19 pm
It’s Mike Garlick for me.

I’ve been criticising our recruitment for years on here, well documented. I’ve banged on about how we should/should not be signing this, that, the other - but ultimately all of it is irrelevant in hindsight.

We are 3 games into the season with “winnable” games being played and have spent roughly £1m on 31 year old Stephens and a 3rd choice goalkeeper. Deals aren’t being done to actually improve the XI, short or long term. What’s the point in any recruitment policy if the man with the chequebook isn’t going to get things over the line?


We have not really improved the so called starting 11 for 3 years now and just keep offering new contracts to 30 year old plus players so we will be in real trouble if we drop as will possibly drop again - I have been on about what is happening right now for ages but certain people in here try to belittle you

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 14566
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 3435 times
Has Liked: 6339 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Sun Oct 04, 2020 6:52 pm

It's how you come across that's the problem, those inane rants..

LaLigaClaret
Posts: 813
Joined: Tue May 24, 2016 9:30 pm
Been Liked: 191 times
Has Liked: 34 times
Location: Norfolk

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by LaLigaClaret » Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:34 pm

GodIsADeeJay81 wrote:
Sun Oct 04, 2020 12:03 am
How Hendrick was treated?

Offered a new contract on more than one occasion but HE made the choice to not sign a new deal, run down his old one and leave when it expired.

I'm intrigued to hear how you perceive he was treated and how that is an issue for the other players.
In fact I can't wait to hear this one...
Simple really.

Sean Dyche said quite specifically he wanted the contracts sorted out on numerous occasions but it all fell on deaf ears. Dyche specifically stated he wanted the players who were in the last year of their contract to be retained but they were not. This situation was not just about Hendrick as there were others too.

In case it has escaped your attention there were and are a number of players not in the first team squad who also did not get new contracts or wanted away from the club.

It is clearly obvious that the Chairman wanted a smaller squad so the wage bill was reduced. The club let Hendrick run down his contract in spite of the fact that from a logical playing point of view he would need to be replaced but the Chairman knew that whatever happened in term of our results after the lockdown we would not be relegated last season. Neither you or I know what or if Hendrick was offered any improvement on his then contract existing at the time. Knowing the way the club sets pay caps it is probable he would not have had any improvement and instead just another extension. I remember reading at the time that it was mooted that this was just a 1 year extension which was not acceptable to him. The club could have and should have tried selling him. Maybe we would not have received a lot but it would have been a lot more than the nothing we received just letting him walk away. When it was clear that Hendrick would not agree to play on with a temporary extension to the season end the club should have been proactive in identifying a replacement and then acting promptly to get someone as soon as the window opened but that didn't happen.

On what planet do you live on if you think that letting a player go with a residual value that would have been more than his wages would have been is good financial management when we then faff about during the transfer window to replace him with someone older and then pay out a transfer fee for the replacement plus pay out the same wages that we would have paid to Hendrick on a two year contract which is what Stephens has been given. Garlick is supposed to be a businessman, its a joke.

The reason it impacts on the players is because a large number of them are also now in the last year of their contract and they wonder will the club offer me a new contract or will they expect me to run myself ragged for them with a smaller squad, increasingly older aging players, a team ravaged by injuries, junior players not good enough for the PL, Tarkowski wanting to go, and the clear message that we are pot less and there will be no investment in the squad. On top of all this the players who respect and trust Dyche clearly agree with him about the need to invest in the squad because a number of them publicly said so. They can see that despite achieving so much for the club the manager is being ignored or disrespected by the Board who refuse to invest in the team to progress the club.

Sean Dyche doesn't even know what budget he has and the Chairman remains completely silent about everything. Garlick only seems self absorbed in the sale of the club to someone else. Its a complete shambles and EVERY fan of the club needs to stand up like a jedi to demand we have the ambition to progress and not capitulate by instead falling to your knees, giving up and settling for a stupifying future of non descript fixtures against Exeter or Barrow.

Erasmus
Posts: 761
Joined: Tue May 17, 2016 1:46 pm
Been Liked: 574 times
Has Liked: 44 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by Erasmus » Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:37 pm

Nothing at all is clearly obvious to us, as we have so little knowledge of the workings of the club. Guesses aren't clearly obvious, and we have no idea of how and why Hendrick left. Agnostics all of us.

GodIsADeeJay81
Posts: 14566
Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
Been Liked: 3435 times
Has Liked: 6339 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by GodIsADeeJay81 » Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:40 pm

LaLigaClaret wrote:
Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:34 pm
Simple really.

Sean Dyche said quite specifically he wanted the contracts sorted out on numerous occasions but it all fell on deaf ears. Dyche specifically stated he wanted the players who were in the last year of their contract to be retained but they were not. This situation was not just about Hendrick as there were others too.

In case it has escaped your attention there were and are a number of players not in the first team squad who also did not get new contracts or wanted away from the club.

It is clearly obvious that the Chairman wanted a smaller squad so the wage bill was reduced. The club let Hendrick run down his contract in spite of the fact that from a logical playing point of view he would need to be replaced but the Chairman knew that whatever happened in term of our results after the lockdown we would not be relegated last season. Neither you or I know what or if Hendrick was offered any improvement on his then contract existing at the time. Knowing the way the club sets pay caps it is probable he would not have had any improvement and instead just another extension. I remember reading at the time that it was mooted that this was just a 1 year extension which was not acceptable to him. The club could have and should have tried selling him. Maybe we would not have received a lot but it would have been a lot more than the nothing we received just letting him walk away. When it was clear that Hendrick would not agree to play on with a temporary extension to the season end the club should have been proactive in identifying a replacement and then acting promptly to get someone as soon as the window opened but that didn't happen.

On what planet do you live on if you think that letting a player go with a residual value that would have been more than his wages would have been is good financial management when we then faff about during the transfer window to replace him with someone older and then pay out a transfer fee for the replacement plus pay out the same wages that we would have paid to Hendrick on a two year contract which is what Stephens has been given. Garlick is supposed to be a businessman, its a joke.

The reason it impacts on the players is because a large number of them are also now in the last year of their contract and they wonder will the club offer me a new contract or will they expect me to run myself ragged for them with a smaller squad, increasingly older aging players, a team ravaged by injuries, junior players not good enough for the PL, Tarkowski wanting to go, and the clear message that we are pot less and there will be no investment in the squad. On top of all this the players who respect and trust Dyche clearly agree with him about the need to invest in the squad because a number of them publicly said so. They can see that despite achieving so much for the club the manager is being ignored or disrespected by the Board who refuse to invest in the team to progress the club.

Sean Dyche doesn't even know what budget he has and the Chairman remains completely silent about everything. Garlick only seems self absorbed in the sale of the club to someone else. Its a complete shambles and EVERY fan of the club needs to stand up like a jedi to demand we have the ambition to progress and not capitulate by instead falling to your knees, giving up and settling for a stupifying future of non descript fixtures against Exeter or Barrow.
So that doesn't really explain how Hendrick was treated in the eyes of some fans.

He was offered a contract that the club felt met its wage structure.
He was still used as a first team player right up until his contract expired and he decided he didn't want to play for us after the restart.

He decided he wanted more money, a fresh challenge and to play in his favoured position.

I'm failing to see how the claims that he was poorly treated are valid.

Same applies to other players who've left, we aren't missing Lennon, nor Hart.

None of those who left at the end of their contracts were treated like lepers.

dsr
Posts: 15139
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 12:47 pm
Been Liked: 4549 times
Has Liked: 2241 times

Re: What or who is to blame?

Post by dsr » Mon Oct 05, 2020 12:59 am

LaLigaClaret wrote:
Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:34 pm
Sean Dyche said quite specifically he wanted the contracts sorted out on numerous occasions but it all fell on deaf ears. Dyche specifically stated he wanted the players who were in the last year of their contract to be retained but they were not. This situation was not just about Hendrick as there were others too.
The others were Hart, Lennon, and Bardsley. Bardsley, as you may have noticed, is still here; and I doubt Dyche was falling over backwards about Hart or Lennon. This was all about Hendrick.
LaLigaClaret wrote:
Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:34 pm
Neither you or I know what or if Hendrick was offered any improvement on his then contract existing at the time. Knowing the way the club sets pay caps it is probable he would not have had any improvement and instead just another extension. I remember reading at the time that it was mooted that this was just a 1 year extension which was not acceptable to him. The club could have and should have tried selling him. Maybe we would not have received a lot but it would have been a lot more than the nothing we received just letting him walk away. When it was clear that Hendrick would not agree to play on with a temporary extension to the season end the club should have been proactive in identifying a replacement and then acting promptly to get someone as soon as the window opened but that didn't happen.
You're right that neither you nor I know what Hendrick was offered, but I am interested that you do know the way the club sets pay caps. How do they do it?

Why do you believe Hendrick was offered no pay rise? Is that based on your knowledge of the renewed or extended contracts signed by Pope, Lowton, Taylor, Mee, Tarkowski, McNeill, Gudmondsson, Westwood, Wood, Barnes, and Long during the past year or two? Is it your understanding that none of them were offered pay rises?

Why do you suggest it was just a one year extension? Is it based on genuine knowledge, or have you just picked the worst of all possible rumours because it gives you the best chance to slag off Garlick?

What makes you think we didn't try to sell him? Is it based on genuine knowledge, or have you just picked the worst of all possible rumours because it gives you the best chance to slag off Garlick?

For that matter, what makes you think he was willing to be sold? Is it based on genuine knowledge, or have you just picked the worst of all possible rumours because it gives you the best chance to slag off Garlick?
LaLigaClaret wrote:
Sun Oct 04, 2020 9:34 pm
The Chairman remains completely silent about everything. Garlick only seems self absorbed in the sale of the club to someone else.
No, the Chairman does not remain silent about everything. I'm sure he tells the people who need to know. What is bugging you is that he hasn't told you what he is doing.

Finally, why do you think he has lost interest in the running of the club? Is it based on genuine knowledge, or have you just picked the worst of all possible rumours because it gives you the best chance to slag off Garlick?
This user liked this post: JohnMac

Post Reply