2020/ 21 Squad and Pre-season News

Grovehill wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Earwegoagain wrote:

Graiser wrote:

Doyle reportedly will be on 3.75k per week, not small beans for L2

Thats the cost of league 1 football these days if a club is serious, plenty will be.

How's that going to be paid for with small to non-existent crowds?

Don't know ask Bolton they've signed him.

Good question!  Why are they paying league 1 wages in league 2?

Because they don't want to stay in L2!

Don't knock it, PAFC have done the same thing.

They have have they?  The L2 proposed cap is £1.25M.  According to the figures bandied about on this thread, Bolton are paying Doyle 195K a year.  That's over 15% of their budget on one player!

Since the squad sizes are proposed to be capped at "Twenty senior professionals", that leaves  £1062500 for the other nineteen players.  That's  £55,921 each.  £1075 a week per player.  ...and that's with paying the "youth"  players nothing!

Way to go Bolton.  No wonder they are so successful of late!

Thing is that Bolton fans may actually buy into the ambition and what's more be excited to watch Doyle banging the goals in and turn up in numbers and actually recoup the clubs investment as they sell out the stands. Roller coaster or a Segway? We've endured years of Brent's austerity and I don't see Covid as a get of of jail card for having any ambition to actually win football matches and I applaud Bolton for having a feckin go. If it goes tits up so be it at least they are trying I wouldn't knock them for that.

If it wasn't for the financial impact of Covid on football and more importantly SH's business interests in the States, I suspect PAFC would have been doing exactly the same as Bolton.

bolton will soon understand the hardway that spending money because their owners have it while they dont run a club that generates income streams is only go to lead them back into admin before too long.

The excuses were made early doors on that fans forum ! The chairman has been quoted many times its gunna be run along the same lines as before but this time gunna there be using /relying on the the youth players that have signed there first pro deal (nice saving there) plus they already dropped the Don’t expect any decent signing vibe as well at that fans forum !
We will struggle in L1 like the last time we if we don’t sign anyone decent we’re come straight back down the gap is quite massive that’s why you need a couple of decent players and this time try stay there consolidate for a season then try and move on again further but that’s gunna be a lot harder to do relying on youths & loan deals though

Angry wrote:

bolton will soon understand the hardway that spending money because their owners have it while they dont run a club that generates income streams is only go to lead them back into admin before too long.

Not sure I'd agree with that because if the team is successful then the fans turn up (if allowed obvs) providing the income. Believe it or not league 2 ain't that wealthy so having owners willing to buy players like Doyle is a massive advantage. We've spent years more than we should have in the lower leagues because Argyle fans love a "good player at this level" Doyle is a good player at the next level which is where they obviously aim to be.

Didn't PAFC "consolidate" under Adams(thanks to a good run in the second half of the first season back in L1 ) on the last return to L1, before a bad end of season run the following season saw them  drop down again?

The trouble at Home Park is that successive managers (and owners) have taken the easy option of signing journeymen players (usually for free) who as said above "can do a job in this league" but can't cope with a step up.

Sheridan & Adams were clearly on a tight budget while RL only seems comfortable signing players he knows.

Unless WBA surprise everyone and lend us their keeper for another season, RL (and previous managers) have only used the loan system as very short term fixes with Josh Grant not wanting to join permanently despite being "part" of a promotion winning team and Cooper also looking unlikely to join.

Argyle really do need to start thinking long term in terms of player recruitment and go for players who might not yet be the finished article, but will improve and become important players for the Club.

Trouble is, this is a long term strategy and most Managers and owners seem unable to look beyond the current season.

Grovehill wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

Mayor, MacF(off), Aimson & Telford were all offered good money to drag them down from the North West.

Doyle may well have got £100k as a signing on/image rights payment meaning his weekly wage is a "mere" £2k.

And any rules introduced after he signed can't be used to the detriment of existing employment contracts anyway.

 

LOl.  Says who, you?  

He is just one cog in the wheel.  If he gets more money there's less for everyone else in the squad.  It's so simple a concept that almost anybody can understand it.

..and you really think the Efl are going to let something so obvious as "signing on/image rights payments" be used to skirt the rules?

Says who? Well, employment law for a start as the Contracts of Employment have been signed and therefore cannot be changed without the agreement of both parties-in just the same way as your employer could not force you to take a pay cut. Clubs like Sunderland and Ipswich will also block any action that affects existing contacts as their wage levels will be way higher than the proposed cap. And of course, the PFA has already objected to this "restraint of trade"

If you think the EFL is all powerful, just consider Eufa's ffp rules and Man City!

You seem to have trouble understanding the most simple of concepts.


The EFL rules (if voted in) will apply a wage cap to the club, not an individual player. The whole teams wages in total must be under 2.5 million. If Sunderland and Ipswich have a big problem with that, they are going to have to find another league to play in.

Rickler wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

Mayor, MacF(off), Aimson & Telford were all offered good money to drag them down from the North West.

Doyle may well have got £100k as a signing on/image rights payment meaning his weekly wage is a "mere" £2k.

And any rules introduced after he signed can't be used to the detriment of existing employment contracts anyway.

 

LOl.  Says who, you?  

He is just one cog in the wheel.  If he gets more money there's less for everyone else in the squad.  It's so simple a concept that almost anybody can understand it.

..and you really think the Efl are going to let something so obvious as "signing on/image rights payments" be used to skirt the rules?

Says who? Well, employment law for a start as the Contracts of Employment have been signed and therefore cannot be changed without the agreement of both parties-in just the same way as your employer could not force you to take a pay cut. Clubs like Sunderland and Ipswich will also block any action that affects existing contacts as their wage levels will be way higher than the proposed cap. And of course, the PFA has already objected to this "restraint of trade"

If you think the EFL is all powerful, just consider Eufa's ffp rules and Man City!

You seem to have trouble understanding the most simple of concepts.


The EFL rules (if voted in) will apply a wage cap to the club, not an individual player.  The whole teams wages in total must be under 2.5 million.  If Sunderland and Ipswich have a big problem with that,  they are going to have to find another league to play in.

I assume you are trying to be funny. Either that or you have a Learning disability!

Grovehill wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

Rickler wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

Mayor, MacF(off), Aimson & Telford were all offered good money to drag them down from the North West.

Doyle may well have got £100k as a signing on/image rights payment meaning his weekly wage is a "mere" £2k.

And any rules introduced after he signed can't be used to the detriment of existing employment contracts anyway.

 

LOl.  Says who, you?  

He is just one cog in the wheel.  If he gets more money there's less for everyone else in the squad.  It's so simple a concept that almost anybody can understand it.

..and you really think the Efl are going to let something so obvious as "signing on/image rights payments" be used to skirt the rules?

Says who? Well, employment law for a start as the Contracts of Employment have been signed and therefore cannot be changed without the agreement of both parties-in just the same way as your employer could not force you to take a pay cut. Clubs like Sunderland and Ipswich will also block any action that affects existing contacts as their wage levels will be way higher than the proposed cap. And of course, the PFA has already objected to this "restraint of trade"

If you think the EFL is all powerful, just consider Eufa's ffp rules and Man City!

You seem to have trouble understanding the most simple of concepts.


The EFL rules (if voted in) will apply a wage cap to the club, not an individual player.  The whole teams wages in total must be under 2.5 million.  If Sunderland and Ipswich have a big problem with that,  they are going to have to find another league to play in.

I assume you are trying to be funny. Either that or you have a Learning disability!

I think you're the one most posters on here find a joke.  
As for a learning disability? You're also the one who seems to be unable to comprehend what a club wage cap actually is.

Several posters have pointed out that the proposed wage cap (if voted in) cannot be implemented to the detriment of existing contracts, and may have to be phased in over a number of seasons.

I assumed that you suggestion that the implementation of such a rule would cause Ipswich Town and Sunderland to resign from the EFL and ask to join the Norfolk Sunday League and Northern League (Div 2) was an attempt at humour.

As I was wrong, please accept my apologies. And my advice to seek help for your mental health issues.
(perhaps the person who types your posts for you could help)

Grovehill wrote:

Several posters have pointed out that the proposed wage cap (if voted in) cannot be implemented to the detriment of existing contracts, and may have to be phased in over a number of seasons.

I assumed that you suggestion that the implementation of such a rule would cause Ipswich Town and Sunderland to resign from the EFL and ask to join the Norfolk Sunday League and Northern League (Div 2) was an attempt at humour.

As I was wrong, please accept my apologies. And my advice to seek help for your mental health issues.
(perhaps the person who types your posts for you could help)  

It doesn't matter if a thousand posters have pointed out the wage cap cannot be implemented to the detriment of existing contracts, what the EFL says, will go.  Do you think the EFL has not considered the legal issues?   ..and if Sunderland etc want to play in the league they will have to obey the EFL rules.   Maybe the EFl will 'phase' in the wage cap, but there has been no talk  of that so far - it would rather negate the point of a wage cap in the first place!

As for my mental health...  At least I don't believe in Simon Hallett being the front for a secret consortium - talk about being delusional!!!

Grovehill wrote:

Several posters have pointed out that the proposed wage cap (if voted in) cannot be implemented to the detriment of existing contracts, and may have to be phased in over a number of seasons.

I assumed that you suggestion that the implementation of such a rule would cause Ipswich Town and Sunderland to resign from the EFL and ask to join the Norfolk Sunday League and Northern League (Div 2) was an attempt at humour.

As I was wrong, please accept my apologies. And my advice to seek help for your mental health issues.
(perhaps the person who types your posts for you could help)  

Your comment about seeking advice for mental health issues is trawling the depths of abuse, for all you know Rickler could have mental health issues and therefore your comment is derogatory and demeaning and should be withdrawn with an accompanying apology.

Rickler wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

Several posters have pointed out that the proposed wage cap (if voted in) cannot be implemented to the detriment of existing contracts, and may have to be phased in over a number of seasons.

I assumed that you suggestion that the implementation of such a rule would cause Ipswich Town and Sunderland to resign from the EFL and ask to join the Norfolk Sunday League and Northern League (Div 2) was an attempt at humour.

As I was wrong, please accept my apologies. And my advice to seek help for your mental health issues.
(perhaps the person who types your posts for you could help)  

It doesn't matter if a thousand posters have pointed out the wage cap cannot be implemented to the detriment of existing contracts, what the EFL says, will go.  Do you think the EFL has not considered the legal issues?   ..and if Sunderland etc want to play in the league they will have to obey the EFL rules.   Maybe the EFl will 'phase' in the wage cap, but there has been no talk  of that so far - it would rather negate the point of a wage cap in the first place!

As for my mental health...  At least I don't believe in Simon Hallett being the front for a secret consortium - talk about being delusional!!!

The only phasing I could envisage is because of players on current contracts which have to be honoured, if those contracts are “decent” then a club could be at at a disadvantage when signing new players by having to offer lower salaries while adhering to the wage cap, so maybe a phasing with that scenario.

Graiser wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

Several posters have pointed out that the proposed wage cap (if voted in) cannot be implemented to the detriment of existing contracts, and may have to be phased in over a number of seasons.

I assumed that you suggestion that the implementation of such a rule would cause Ipswich Town and Sunderland to resign from the EFL and ask to join the Norfolk Sunday League and Northern League (Div 2) was an attempt at humour.

As I was wrong, please accept my apologies. And my advice to seek help for your mental health issues.
(perhaps the person who types your posts for you could help)  

Your comment about seeking advice for mental health issues is trawling the depths of abuse, for all you know Rickler could have mental health issues and therefore your comment is derogatory and demeaning and should be withdrawn with an accompanying apology.

lol I've just sprayed coffee all over the laptop screen. The one poster who has widely abused all and sundry across ATD is deserving of an apology because someone has a pop back in his direction ! Perhaps you better ask him what a whack job is..........
Jesus wept Graiser !

harvetheslayer wrote:

Graiser wrote:

Grovehill wrote:

Several posters have pointed out that the proposed wage cap (if voted in) cannot be implemented to the detriment of existing contracts, and may have to be phased in over a number of seasons.

I assumed that you suggestion that the implementation of such a rule would cause Ipswich Town and Sunderland to resign from the EFL and ask to join the Norfolk Sunday League and Northern League (Div 2) was an attempt at humour.

As I was wrong, please accept my apologies. And my advice to seek help for your mental health issues.
(perhaps the person who types your posts for you could help)  

Your comment about seeking advice for mental health issues is trawling the depths of abuse, for all you know Rickler could have mental health issues and therefore your comment is derogatory and demeaning and should be withdrawn with an accompanying apology.

lol I've just sprayed coffee all over the laptop screen. The one poster who has widely abused all and sundry across ATD is deserving of an apology because someone has a pop back in his direction ! Perhaps you better ask him what a whack job is..........
Jesus wept Graiser !

So it’s ok then is it ?

I apologise fully and unreservedly for inferring Rickler has any mental health issues.




He is clearly a naturally obnoxious, self made dickhead

Grovehill wrote:

I apologise fully and unreservedly for inferring Rickler has any mental health issues.




He is clearly a naturally obnoxious, self made dickhead  

much like yourself

Grovehill wrote:

I apologise fully and unreservedly for inferring Rickler has any mental health issues.




He is clearly a naturally obnoxious, self made dickhead  

Dear oh dear what a sad person you really are

Grovehill wrote:

I apologise fully and unreservedly for inferring Rickler has any mental health issues.




He is clearly a naturally obnoxious, self made dickhead  

I object to the word "naturally".

It's taken a miniscule amount of my ability in order to deal with 'over imaginative conspiracy idiots', like yourself.

Whenever Rickler posts, I think "There's a village somewhere missing it's idiot"

Grovehill wrote:

Whenever Rickler posts, I think "There's a village somewhere missing it's idiot"

It's its.

Idiot.

Grovehill wrote:

Whenever Rickler posts, I think "There's a village somewhere missing it's idiot"

im sure you would moan that village is in LA and not Plymouth die to your xenophobe

Baby trouble

Looks like Ryan Hardie partner had just had a baby, could stop his move down to here.

Blackpool fans on him

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Tgwu wrote:

Baby trouble

Looks like Ryan Hardie partner had just had a baby, could stop his move down to here.

Blackpool fans on him

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

hahahhaha not another one whos going to piss around deciding whether hes going to sign a deal here or not on the back of his girlfriend having a baby...

has McFadzean finally made his mind up yet? cause i would rather see the club tell him to do one now than have him sign.

If I was in charge I would give him 24 hours to make his mind up. He has had more than enough time.