Sheridan out?

Josh Pope wrote:

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

Josh Pope wrote:

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

Sheridan can spot decent players, but because he dosen't get a genuine promotion chasing budget he cant bring good players down here on a permenant basis, therefore he's forced to go down the short term loan route. until there's a commited decent owner, Argyle will remain midtable crap.

Sure, that's why we tried to !!!!!!!BUY!!!!!!!!! O'Connor then?

Ok then Sherlock, how much did we offer? Did he join? its the same old same old, no good player with the exception on Roobs has joined Argyle since Brent"saved" the club.Luke Mccormick joined in entirely different circumstances.

You're right. Only Peter Hartley for a few grand a week, among other very good players such as McHugh, Mellor and Cox. Banton and Smalley will be on good wages, and I can't see Morgan or Brunt playing for pennies. The idea that this team is James Brent's fault is beyond now, it's obsessive. The point is, there are plenty of managers capable of getting promotion and the way that we continue to bring in players even with a huge injury list is a little encouraging at the very least.


P.S. O'Connor didn't want to commit to an 18 month deal which is fair enough. Not our fault.

You really think they are good players? they are fourth division journeymen thats all, mid table players for a mid table club. The clubs problems start at the very top with Brent in my view. o'connor would have joined Argyle if he thought the club was going forward. p.s. Having you running the Trust has saved me Ten Quid.

Yes, he has to go asap. I don't care if he walks or is fired.

The slump that the team are experiencing is a terrible showing and the blame has to rest at the feet of Sheridan. His own words at the start of the 2014-15 season was that promotion was the aim.

I hope the Board at Argyle wake up and smell the coffee.

If Sheridan does walk or does get the sack, he may air dirty laundry in public not long after, now that would be priceless.

Moving on and reading along the lines elsewhere, Warnock and Sturrock are the choice of manager that some of the fanbase want.

Will it at least be Brent's fault if Sheridan isn't sacked asap?

Hitch wrote:

Will it at least be Brent's fault if Sheridan isn't sacked asap?

Yeah I'd settle for that.

The belief that we're horrendously underfunded or that money isn't provided to John Sheridan is nothing short of absolute bollocks though.

Josh Pope wrote:

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

Josh Pope wrote:

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

Sheridan can spot decent players, but because he dosen't get a genuine promotion chasing budget he cant bring good players down here on a permenant basis, therefore he's forced to go down the short term loan route. until there's a commited decent owner, Argyle will remain midtable crap.

Sure, that's why we tried to !!!!!!!BUY!!!!!!!!! O'Connor then?

Ok then Sherlock, how much did we offer? Did he join? its the same old same old, no good player with the exception on Roobs has joined Argyle since Brent"saved" the club.Luke Mccormick joined in entirely different circumstances.

You're right. Only Peter Hartley for a few grand a week, among other very good players such as McHugh, Mellor and Cox. Banton and Smalley will be on good wages, and I can't see Morgan or Brunt playing for pennies. The idea that this team is James Brent's fault is beyond now, it's obsessive. The point is, there are plenty of managers capable of getting promotion and the way that we continue to bring in players even with a huge injury list is a little encouraging at the very least.


P.S. O'Connor didn't want to commit to an 18 month deal which is fair enough. Not our fault.

Maybe a few hundred quid over what he was on at Hartlepool but 2 grand? do me a favor.

Morgan will be on an average L2 wage, alongside Brunt, Smalley and Mchugh.

Stop trying to make out we are paying these guys pop-star wages in order to take the heat of your Lord and Master James Brent.

Josh Pope wrote:

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

Josh Pope wrote:

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

Sheridan can spot decent players, but because he dosen't get a genuine promotion chasing budget he cant bring good players down here on a permenant basis, therefore he's forced to go down the short term loan route. until there's a commited decent owner, Argyle will remain midtable crap.

Sure, that's why we tried to !!!!!!!BUY!!!!!!!!! O'Connor then?

Ok then Sherlock, how much did we offer? Did he join? its the same old same old, no good player with the exception on Roobs has joined Argyle since Brent"saved" the club.Luke Mccormick joined in entirely different circumstances.

You're right. Only Peter Hartley for a few grand a week, among other very good players such as McHugh, Mellor and Cox. Banton and Smalley will be on good wages, and I can't see Morgan or Brunt playing for pennies. The idea that this team is James Brent's fault is beyond now, it's obsessive. The point is, there are plenty of managers capable of getting promotion and the way that we continue to bring in players even with a huge injury list is a little encouraging at the very least.


P.S. O'Connor didn't want to commit to an 18 month deal which is fair enough. Not our fault.

He must have some sort of Super-Agent if he can negotiate a few grand a week for a centre half whose bargaining position was that of someone who played a pivotal role in a team finishing bottom of the league.

I like Hartley btw, but you're away with the fairies if you think anyone other than RR will be on anything approaching "a few grand a week" at Brents Argyle.

Josh Pope wrote:

Hitch wrote:

Will it at least be Brent's fault if Sheridan isn't sacked asap?

Yeah I'd settle for that.

The belief that we're horrendously underfunded or that money isn't provided to John Sheridan is nothing short of absolute bollocks though.

If Sheridan does walk,and to be fair i'm not that bothered if he does.
All of the highlighted will come out in the wash.

As I have alluded to on many occasions getting rid of the manager is only a small skirmish in this war.
Too many are not thinking about the bigger picture.

Hitch wrote:

Will it at least be Brent's fault if Sheridan isn't sacked asap?

Of course it will.

So back to the point.
The club is in shit state with an owner who clearly has no intent to get out of L2.

What do we do as a fanbase..........blame Sheridan or address the wider issues?!!

Punchdrunk wrote:

Josh Pope wrote:

Hitch wrote:

Will it at least be Brent's fault if Sheridan isn't sacked asap?

Yeah I'd settle for that.

The belief that we're horrendously underfunded or that money isn't provided to John Sheridan is nothing short of absolute bollocks though.

If Sheridan does walk,and to be fair i'm not that bothered if he does.
All of the highlighted will come out in the wash.

As I have alluded to on many occasions getting rid of the manager is only a small skirmish in this war.
Too many are not thinking about the bigger picture.

I can't wait, lots of dirty laundry being aired.

You could possibly imagine a scenario where perhaps Argyle and Sheridan have words regarding that though, with possible pin-pointing at what can and can't be said. Brent and the club would not want anything untoward said about them now would they.

Jesus wept.

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

People seem to be suggesting that Sheridan is woefully underfunded, or that the squad isnt any better this season.

Blanchard out, McHugh in
Trotman out, Hartley in.
Berry out, Mellor in.
Hourihane out, Cox in.

Apart from Hourihane, each of those players is better than the equivalent last season. I'd bet they are being better paid too.

Kellett, O'Connor and Bobby have made important contributions as well. These loans dont always come free. We might have been paying wages or offering clubs a few thousand to sweeten loan deals. It wouldnt surprise me at all they way these clubs have been 'recallihg' players left right and centre until a new deal can be arranged.

And then of course there is Reuben Reid. He stayed at this club when he no doubt had better offers. So all in all you cant lay the blame at Brent's door. If it is his job to ensure the playing side of things improves, he has backed Sheridan to bring better players in.

It is Sheridan's fault he signed a waste of a wage in Marvin Morgan.
It is Sheridan's fault he never signed a midfielder WITH ANY GOAL THREAT WHATSOEVER to replace Hourihane.
It is Sheridan's fault his team is incapable of recovering from a losing position.
It is Sheridan's fault he gets outwitted by any pot bellied manager in a track suit.
It is Sheridan's fault that the club's most exciting attacker has barely featured AT ALL this season.
It is Sheridan's fault his team appears to ge incapable of winning away.

apart from appointing Sheridan or not sacking him sooner, I really cant understand why the fury is being directed at Brent in the situation we find ourselves in. Brent is still bringing in players from Birmingham and Mk Dons, he is doing his part. The shit effort on the pitch - the 10 points in 11 games - Sheridan has to take this responsibility.

GreenSam wrote:

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

The bottom line is he flounced because his pro Brent views did not get a universal welcome, for Sam to blame the punters on here for that is a School boy error! Not a good day for the Trust i would say.

I'm not blaming the punters on here for anything to do with Argyle, I'm just saying some of you (not all) don't make this place very welcoming for anyone whose views differ to yours by 1%.

I know it's hard to believe Sam, but most decent football Forums, by definition, are an extension of the terrace. The Oxford Debating Society they are not. It isn't their obligation to be welcoming.

As you've grown into adulthood Sam, Argyles biggest Forum has become more and more and more sanitised to the point that you may be under the impression that that is what your average Football Forum is like.

It isn't. Or at least it never was, and never damn well should be.

For people who've any sort of tendency to get even moderately offended by real life issues and opinions, then proper football forums are the last place they should be frequenting, IMHO.


(ATD, keeping it real).

ejh wrote:

People seem to be suggesting that Sheridan is woefully underfunded, or that the squad isnt any better this season.

Blanchard out, McHugh in
Trotman out, Hartley in.
Berry out, Mellor in.
Hourihane out, Cox in.

Apart from Hourihane, each of those players is better than the equivalent last season. I'd bet they are being better paid too.

Kellett, O'Connor and Bobby have made important contributions as well. These loans dont always come free. We might have been paying wages or offering clubs a few thousand to sweeten loan deals. It wouldnt surprise me at all they way these clubs have been 'recallihg' players left right and centre until a new deal can be arranged.

And then of course there is Reuben Reid. He stayed at this club when he no doubt had better offers. So all in all you cant lay the blame at Brent's door. If it is his job to ensure the playing side of things improves, he has backed Sheridan to bring better players in.

It is Sheridan's fault he signed a waste of a wage in Marvin Morgan.
It is Sheridan's fault he never signed a midfielder WITH ANY GOAL THREAT WHATSOEVER to replace Hourihane.
It is Sheridan's fault his team is incapable of recovering from a losing position.
It is Sheridan's fault he gets outwitted by any pot bellied manager in a track suit.
It is Sheridan's fault that the club's most exciting attacker has barely featured AT ALL this season.
It is Sheridan's fault his team appears to ge incapable of winning away.

apart from appointing Sheridan or not sacking him sooner, I really cant understand why the fury is being directed at Brent in the situation we find ourselves in. Brent is still bringing in players from Birmingham and Mk Dons, he is doing his part. The shit effort on the pitch - that is Sheridan's responsibility.

Partly - but the shit effort is actually being put in by the players playing like shit. Too easy to pile all the blame on Sheridan. I just don't believe these players are that inspired by the whole deep-rooted village set-up that runs throughout the entire club. Little or no passion or pride let alone technical ability. Comparing most players at this level, with a few exceptions, is like choosing which colour Austin Allegro you preferred.

Czarcasm wrote:

GreenSam wrote:

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

The bottom line is he flounced because his pro Brent views did not get a universal welcome, for Sam to blame the punters on here for that is a School boy error! Not a good day for the Trust i would say.

I'm not blaming the punters on here for anything to do with Argyle, I'm just saying some of you (not all) don't make this place very welcoming for anyone whose views differ to yours by 1%.

I know it's hard to believe Sam, but most decent football Forums, by definition, are an extension of the terrace. The Oxford Debating Society they are not. It isn't their obligation to be welcoming.

As you've grown into adulthood Sam, Argyles biggest Forum has become more and more and more sanitised to the point that you may be under the impression that that is what your average Football Forum is like.

It isn't. Or at least it never was, and never damn well should be.

For people who've any sort of tendency to get even moderately offended by real life issues and opinions, then proper football forums are the last place they should be frequenting, IMHO.





(ATD, keeping it real).

That's the problem Czar, these young 'uns have never experienced the 'terrace' mentality, just the heavily sanitised, all seated, family zoned borefest that modern football(and most football forums) has become.

ejh wrote:

People seem to be suggesting that Sheridan is woefully underfunded, or that the squad isnt any better this season.

Blanchard out, McHugh in
Trotman out, Hartley in.
Berry out, Mellor in.
Hourihane out, Cox in.

Apart from Hourihane, each of those players is better than the equivalent last season. I'd bet they are being better paid too.

Kellett, O'Connor and Bobby have made important contributions as well. These loans dont always come free. We might have been paying wages or offering clubs a few thousand to sweeten loan deals. It wouldnt surprise me at all they way these clubs have been 'recallihg' players left right and centre until a new deal can be arranged.

And then of course there is Reuben Reid. He stayed at this club when he no doubt had better offers. So all in all you cant lay the blame at Brent's door. If it is his job to ensure the playing side of things improves, he has backed Sheridan to bring better players in.

It is Sheridan's fault he signed a waste of a wage in Marvin Morgan.
It is Sheridan's fault he never signed a midfielder WITH ANY GOAL THREAT WHATSOEVER to replace Hourihane.
It is Sheridan's fault his team is incapable of recovering from a losing position.
It is Sheridan's fault he gets outwitted by any pot bellied manager in a track suit.
It is Sheridan's fault that the club's most exciting attacker has barely featured AT ALL this season.
It is Sheridan's fault his team appears to ge incapable of winning away.

apart from appointing Sheridan or not sacking him sooner, I really cant understand why the fury is being directed at Brent in the situation we find ourselves in. Brent is still bringing in players from Birmingham and Mk Dons, he is doing his part. The shit effort on the pitch - the 10 points in 11 games - Sheridan has to take this responsibility.

Failing to see the bigger picture is a terminal trait among the Argyle fanbase it seems.

Must be in the water

Yea Man wrote:

Jesus wept.

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

The football under both managers was pretty dire at times.
Hardly brilliant now though.

Elias wrote:

Yea Man wrote:

Jesus wept.

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

The football under both managers was pretty dire at times.
Hardly brilliant now though.

Wotton,Luggy



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

ejh wrote:

People seem to be suggesting that Sheridan is woefully underfunded, or that the squad isnt any better this season.

Blanchard out, McHugh in
Trotman out, Hartley in.
Berry out, Mellor in.
Hourihane out, Cox in.

Apart from Hourihane, each of those players is better than the equivalent last season. I'd bet they are being better paid too. Yes.

Kellett, O'Connor and Bobby have made important contributions as well. These loans dont always come free. We might have been paying wages or offering clubs a few thousand to sweeten loan deals. It wouldnt surprise me at all they way these clubs have been 'recallihg' players left right and centre until a new deal can be arranged. Yes.

And then of course there is Reuben Reid. He stayed at this club when he no doubt had better offers. So all in all you cant lay the blame at Brent's door. If it is his job to ensure the playing side of things improves, he has backed Sheridan to bring better players in.

It is Sheridan's fault he signed a waste of a wage in Marvin Morgan. Could it be that's all he could get for the money available?
It is Sheridan's fault he never signed a midfielder WITH ANY GOAL THREAT WHATSOEVER to replace Hourihane. Again because of money?
It is Sheridan's fault his team is incapable of recovering from a losing position. Yes.
It is Sheridan's fault he gets outwitted by any pot bellied manager in a track suit. Yes.
It is Sheridan's fault that the club's most exciting attacker has barely featured AT ALL this season. A big yes. Shez seems to have a problem with him.
It is Sheridan's fault his team appears to ge incapable of winning away. Yes because Shez seems unable to inspire the team.

apart from appointing Sheridan or not sacking him sooner, I really cant understand why the fury is being directed at Brent in the situation we find ourselves in. Brent is still bringing in players from Birmingham and Mk Dons, he is doing his part. I think the problem is that our better players are loans and short term ones at that. Again money? The shit effort on the pitch - the 10 points in 11 games - Sheridan has to take this responsibility. Yes and so should Brent, the board and the players.

I agree with a lot of that EJH.

As for budgets, we have no idea how big it is. The same as the club being able to say that its budget is the 7th - 9th biggest in the division. I really can't see clubs telling each other what they have available to spend.

Czarcasm wrote:

GreenSam wrote:

sufferedsince 68 wrote:

The bottom line is he flounced because his pro Brent views did not get a universal welcome, for Sam to blame the punters on here for that is a School boy error! Not a good day for the Trust i would say.

I'm not blaming the punters on here for anything to do with Argyle, I'm just saying some of you (not all) don't make this place very welcoming for anyone whose views differ to yours by 1%.

I know it's hard to believe Sam, but most decent football Forums, by definition, are an extension of the terrace. The Oxford Debating Society they are not. It isn't their obligation to be welcoming.

As you've grown into adulthood Sam, Argyles biggest Forum has become more and more and more sanitised to the point that you may be under the impression that that is what your average Football Forum is like.

It isn't. Or at least it never was, and never damn well should be.

For people who've any sort of tendency to get even moderately offended by real life issues and opinions, then proper football forums are the last place they should be frequenting, IMHO.


(ATD, keeping it real).

Fair play for at least being the only one to answer the points I made. I'll reply back in the same vein.

I see forums as more like a pub than a terrace. In the pub you have some banter but you do also at times have serious discussions. If serious is the wrong word, then perhaps sincere would be a better one. What I'm saying is, as well as the rowdiness and banter and the jukeboxes and the live sport on the big screen tele, the pub is also a place to have a chat or two.

I may be young in relative terms compared to you lot but I am also old enough to remember pasoti in its less sanitised days and the range of debates amongst the very colourful characters that frequent there was fantastic. Sadly a lot of them have gone now which makes the site a worse place- and this isn't me being two faced , I have made this point when having this debate face to face with a pasoti mod. I don't say different things to different audiences. But anyway, going back to the point, the point I was trying to make is that it's an atmosphere in which chatter and opinions can also flourish.

I agree it's nobody's obligation to be welcoming but say you walked into a pub (for the sake of example, let's say you were invited there by a mutual friend which is probably a fair analogy of the flight to ATD in the past two years), the regulars seemed alright at first but then you said the wrong thing about a certain masonic conspiracy theory, or you started talking about the 'unapproved of' topics that would be common parlance in any other pub. Imagine you were then snapped at, laughed at, or refused a pint by some of the rowdier regulars for holding a view or for talking about a topic that would be normal anywhere else. Now, I reckon you'd think it was a damn weird place and you'd consider drinking somewhere else the next night.

I did stick around here and I do genuinely enjoy posting on this site and that's not a sweet meat because I've got to know people on here better than what the first impressions are. But first impressions do count and I just wonder if they don't put people off. I've given my free advice to pasoti in the past (as mentioned earlier) and for the sake of even handedness I'll give my free advice to this place now and it's 'make it less of an uber in group'. Or at least, if you want it to be an uber in group then fair enough but accept the membership figures (bar takings, to extend the analogy further) will probably be lower.

One final point- how would you feel if you were frisked upon entry for the fear that you were a previously barred drinker (previously banned poster) who had come back in a moustache and glasses?

mouldyoldgoat wrote:

As for budgets, we have no idea how big it is. The same as the club being able to say that its budget is the 7th - 9th biggest in the division. I really can't see clubs telling each other what they have available to spend.

I made pretty much that exact same point a while back somewhere to somebody (I genuinely can't remember who or where) and was told that the clubs have to periodically submit accounts to the FL as part of the salary cap ruling. The FL then checks the figures for chicanery and distributes the compiled submissions to everybody in the league to allow everybody to police everybody else so, unlikely though it seems, if what I was told is true (and I was convinced enough at the time not to doubt that it was true) then there is a "Budget Table" and each team would certainly know its position in it.

That told me!

That wasn't meant to come across as a telling off! I'm sorry I can't be more specific about exactly what information is shared, who told me or how I found that out and I don't know that it is true for sure. I think it is though.

What really is odd is that this has never been published by the FL or leaked by anybody anywhere.

Make of it what you will.

What I make of it, is that I doubt it's true.

As you say yourself...

A budget table where every club knows everyone else's figures and yet they have never been leaked or publicly contested?

Yeah right!

I know Cambridge's budget has been widely discussed recently. Their biggest wage is £1500 per week on an annual turnover of £1.5M.