Net spend 50m, gross spend a lot more fuelled by selling a handful of PL quality players for decent money.Holtyclaret wrote: ↑Sat Feb 17, 2024 7:35 pmRelegation following promotion (with a fair chance of a swift return).
Pretty much identical I’d suggest unless you’re slanting towards VKs allowed net spend of circa £50m over four windows as opposed to Dyche who had two bob but inherited some solid players as a starting point.
Plus footballs spiralled financially in the 10 years since.
Kompany inherited a nucleus of experienced PL players, one of whom in Barnes he revived, one in Jay he revived for half a season- Jay, Barnes, Cork, Lowton (dropped), Gudmundsson, Brownhill, Taylor. Roberts had only had 1 season so not grouping him in that batch. But that was the core of our side last year and has been for stretches this year.
Dyche didn't inherit anything like as many PL-seasoned players as that. Didn't inherit high value players to sell for big money to fund a rebuild. Lost Charlie Austin, the club top scorer, at the start of the season and still got us up. Certainly never got the money we had in the summer. And we never looked this far off it. We barely had Vokes fit all season- our promotion had been built on the Vokes/Ings double act and we got to see it for less than 1/3 of that Prem year due to Vokes' injury.
I'm for giving Kompany til the first international break in the Championship, but it's a very, very different scenario. Dyche we looked like we just needed a bit more cash to bring in 1-2 players and we'd have been good, or had Vokes been fit all season it could have been a closer run thing. He inherited a more stable scenario than Kompany did (We knew players would be leaving and others would be sold), but also far less in the way of assets or playing tools to work with, and kept us in it better than this.