Oh sorry, the article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19342352
Surely, our targets shouldn't be changed to be made achievable. That's why it's a target and if we are changing it to support DF, why couldn't we do it for Coyle...? Because our financial restraints wouldn't allow it, that's why.
-----
Ah I get it you did not want Coyle sacked. That's what this article is all about. Am I right?
No.
That's what you want it to be about. I'm making a comparison.
why couldn't we do it for Coyle...?
-----
Explain then please?
It's a comparison. There is nothing in my content which suggests I didn't want Coyle sacked. Nothing.
I have no pr Coyle agenda, Petrov. It's just that you have a very anti Coyle one. You've been arguing your agenda for months now, we've moved on. That's not what this article is about.
"MT, you're either blatantly ignoring my question because you can't provide an answer for it, or you don't understand what I am asking properly."
I don't mind you asking people to keep on topic, but I'll keep my opinion if that's ok..
If all those quotes say PG expects Promotion, who's actually said the targets changed then...?
I'm not sure you know what your question is..
Surely, our targets shouldn't be changed to be made achievable. That's why it's a target and if we are changing it to support DF, why couldn't we do it for Coyle...? Because our financial restraints wouldn't allow it, that's why.
-----
So if our targets had changed for Coyle what would have been the result for him? Would he be still in a job if PG had not demanded promotion from him?
Surely, our targets shouldn't be changed to be made achievable. That's why it's a target and if we are changing it to support DF, why couldn't we do it for Coyle...? Because our financial restraints wouldn't allow it, that's why.
-----
Coyle being rubbish got him the sack. Not the clubs finances!
If all those quotes say PG expects Promotion, who's actually said the targets changed then...?
------
What?
Not sure what you're asking?
Petrov, I am saying that we sacked Coyle because he couldn't maintain a 2 point average and we wouldn't get promoted.
So, if DF doesn't maintain a 2 point average and doesn't get promoted, we should be unhappy too, no? I'd even suggest that we were right to sack Coyle, but surely, our financial status doens't change with a new manager and if that's the reason that we 'NEEDED' to get promoted, then we still NEED that now, don't we?
Your article asks us if PG has changed his targets..
"So my point is this; Has the target been revised for the new manager and if so, how have we miraculously managed to now be able to afford to stay in the Championship for another season?"
I've said yes and explained why...
So are you asking a question or telling me...? Seriously haven't got a clue what you're trying to achieve... You've asked for opinions rather than deliver a statement.. You've got the opinions.....
Petrov, I am saying that we sacked Coyle because he couldn't maintain a 2 point average and we wouldn't get promoted
------
Coyle went due to close to 18 months of shocking football and results. Relegation, poor signings and a failure to show any type of improvement. The failure to get the 2 point target was just one of a list of things that coyle failed to do.
DF may have a similar target but this is not his team. I am sure if PG suggested it he then retorted with a slamming of our playing squad telling PG that what Coyle said about the current crop of players was carp. Therefore DF may have had his terms before he took the job.
MT, you're beginning to irritate me a bit, as it appears I am irritating you, unintentionally.
Take my question that you quoted in your last post. When I say 'afford' I mean finiancially.
How have we miraculously managed to now be able to (financially) afford to stay in the Championship for another season?
I think you know that that is what I'm asking, that's why I think your ignoring my point because you can't provide an answer.
Have our finances improved since DF came in?
Have our finances improved since DF came in?
----
No but maybe DF can deal with the lack of finance better than coyle did.
No but maybe DF can deal with the lack of finance better than coyle did.
------
So we still need to get promoted then? So that we can cope, financially?
Based on what we know about out finances (i.e. the little amount made public such as the debt figure) we need to achieve promotion. However not knowing the details we don't know enough to pass a judgement on whether this is still the case.
For example, certain projects could have been put on hold to free up cash (such as developments around the Middlebrook complex) or whether Eddie is bankrolling us to give Dougie more time.
Maybe but as a chairman PG he gave Coyle the grace of relegation which is bad financially so giving DF 18 months to get us up however poor financially maybe all he has. 2 points was set in August. Watching Coyles dross he would not have got anyone to do the job with those demands
It is conceivable our finances have improved.
Eddie could have opened the purse strings and I'm sure I've read he's extended the notice on calling in the debt..
So yes........ The finances COULD HAVE changed....
spot my deliberate mistake.charlton are above us.
We could not afford to go down!
Absolutely no-one on here thinks we are going down, not even the most pessimistic.
TRR has created an article posing a very good question. None of us have the answer, but the debate is valid.
Being in the Prem has caused the debt. We won't know until the 2013 accounts are released whether a year in the Championship has increased or decreased the debt.
The target will have had to be revised to get somebody considered half decent to take the job.
Who would've taken it otherwise? The club's as low as it's been for a long time, player morale is through the floor, there's a fair bit of deadwood to shift and we can't defend for toffee. Now get us promoted this season or you're out on your ear in the summer - who would've come on those terms?
I know that this doesn't answer your financial question, but, I'm not sure there is an answer to that now due to how poor the team has been.
Sign in if you want to comment
Revised Targets?
Page 3 of 3
posted on 10/12/12
Oh sorry, the article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/19342352
posted on 10/12/12
Surely, our targets shouldn't be changed to be made achievable. That's why it's a target and if we are changing it to support DF, why couldn't we do it for Coyle...? Because our financial restraints wouldn't allow it, that's why.
-----
Ah I get it you did not want Coyle sacked. That's what this article is all about. Am I right?
posted on 10/12/12
No.
That's what you want it to be about. I'm making a comparison.
posted on 10/12/12
why couldn't we do it for Coyle...?
-----
Explain then please?
posted on 10/12/12
It's a comparison. There is nothing in my content which suggests I didn't want Coyle sacked. Nothing.
I have no pr Coyle agenda, Petrov. It's just that you have a very anti Coyle one. You've been arguing your agenda for months now, we've moved on. That's not what this article is about.
posted on 10/12/12
"MT, you're either blatantly ignoring my question because you can't provide an answer for it, or you don't understand what I am asking properly."
I don't mind you asking people to keep on topic, but I'll keep my opinion if that's ok..
If all those quotes say PG expects Promotion, who's actually said the targets changed then...?
I'm not sure you know what your question is..
posted on 10/12/12
Surely, our targets shouldn't be changed to be made achievable. That's why it's a target and if we are changing it to support DF, why couldn't we do it for Coyle...? Because our financial restraints wouldn't allow it, that's why.
-----
So if our targets had changed for Coyle what would have been the result for him? Would he be still in a job if PG had not demanded promotion from him?
posted on 10/12/12
Surely, our targets shouldn't be changed to be made achievable. That's why it's a target and if we are changing it to support DF, why couldn't we do it for Coyle...? Because our financial restraints wouldn't allow it, that's why.
-----
Coyle being rubbish got him the sack. Not the clubs finances!
posted on 10/12/12
If all those quotes say PG expects Promotion, who's actually said the targets changed then...?
------
What?
Not sure what you're asking?
Petrov, I am saying that we sacked Coyle because he couldn't maintain a 2 point average and we wouldn't get promoted.
So, if DF doesn't maintain a 2 point average and doesn't get promoted, we should be unhappy too, no? I'd even suggest that we were right to sack Coyle, but surely, our financial status doens't change with a new manager and if that's the reason that we 'NEEDED' to get promoted, then we still NEED that now, don't we?
posted on 10/12/12
Your article asks us if PG has changed his targets..
"So my point is this; Has the target been revised for the new manager and if so, how have we miraculously managed to now be able to afford to stay in the Championship for another season?"
I've said yes and explained why...
So are you asking a question or telling me...? Seriously haven't got a clue what you're trying to achieve... You've asked for opinions rather than deliver a statement.. You've got the opinions.....
posted on 10/12/12
Petrov, I am saying that we sacked Coyle because he couldn't maintain a 2 point average and we wouldn't get promoted
------
Coyle went due to close to 18 months of shocking football and results. Relegation, poor signings and a failure to show any type of improvement. The failure to get the 2 point target was just one of a list of things that coyle failed to do.
DF may have a similar target but this is not his team. I am sure if PG suggested it he then retorted with a slamming of our playing squad telling PG that what Coyle said about the current crop of players was carp. Therefore DF may have had his terms before he took the job.
posted on 10/12/12
MT, you're beginning to irritate me a bit, as it appears I am irritating you, unintentionally.
Take my question that you quoted in your last post. When I say 'afford' I mean finiancially.
How have we miraculously managed to now be able to (financially) afford to stay in the Championship for another season?
I think you know that that is what I'm asking, that's why I think your ignoring my point because you can't provide an answer.
Have our finances improved since DF came in?
posted on 10/12/12
Have our finances improved since DF came in?
----
No but maybe DF can deal with the lack of finance better than coyle did.
posted on 10/12/12
No but maybe DF can deal with the lack of finance better than coyle did.
------
So we still need to get promoted then? So that we can cope, financially?
posted on 10/12/12
Based on what we know about out finances (i.e. the little amount made public such as the debt figure) we need to achieve promotion. However not knowing the details we don't know enough to pass a judgement on whether this is still the case.
For example, certain projects could have been put on hold to free up cash (such as developments around the Middlebrook complex) or whether Eddie is bankrolling us to give Dougie more time.
posted on 10/12/12
Maybe but as a chairman PG he gave Coyle the grace of relegation which is bad financially so giving DF 18 months to get us up however poor financially maybe all he has. 2 points was set in August. Watching Coyles dross he would not have got anyone to do the job with those demands
posted on 10/12/12
It is conceivable our finances have improved.
Eddie could have opened the purse strings and I'm sure I've read he's extended the notice on calling in the debt..
So yes........ The finances COULD HAVE changed....
posted on 10/12/12
spot my deliberate mistake.charlton are above us.
posted on 11/12/12
We could not afford to go down!
posted on 11/12/12
Absolutely no-one on here thinks we are going down, not even the most pessimistic.
TRR has created an article posing a very good question. None of us have the answer, but the debate is valid.
Being in the Prem has caused the debt. We won't know until the 2013 accounts are released whether a year in the Championship has increased or decreased the debt.
posted on 11/12/12
The target will have had to be revised to get somebody considered half decent to take the job.
Who would've taken it otherwise? The club's as low as it's been for a long time, player morale is through the floor, there's a fair bit of deadwood to shift and we can't defend for toffee. Now get us promoted this season or you're out on your ear in the summer - who would've come on those terms?
I know that this doesn't answer your financial question, but, I'm not sure there is an answer to that now due to how poor the team has been.
Page 3 of 3