Except it won't be, as he's clearly stated the funds he'll put in are limited
So therefore, there is a decent chance his initial splurge won't get us back up.
After that what happens? If he's not prepared to bankroll us year on year that long term gain simply won't happen.
Look, i've nothing against him, we NEED someone in to replace DS/MWJ that much is clear, and if its PC then great, looks a pretty decent choice.
However, my concern is building him up TOO high, expecting miracles and trophies and god knows what else under his stewardship.
If that doesn't happen, how long till we are back here again?
From all that he said initially that ?20m is it. End of.
While that's brilliant compared to what we have now, its not a long term war chest. We'll get a couple of real goes with that.
Fail to take them,and its square one again.
Posted By: megson on December 3rd 2008 at 17:02:35
Message Thread
- MotherFuckingWaghorn latest (NCFC) - Yellalee, Dec 3, 16:09:15
- Good point well made... (NCFC) - Fierce Panda, Dec 3, 16:59:21
- another good article, what's your problem? (NCFC) - Chopper, Dec 3, 16:49:32
- Where, anywhere, did I say I had a problem with it? (n/m) (NCFC) - Yellalee, Dec 3, 16:50:36
- the thread title didn't sound overly supportive (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 3, 16:55:19
- MFW = MotherFuckingWaghorn (NCFC) - blindasabat, Dec 3, 17:04:46
- and why is this reserved for him? (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 3, 17:07:11
- correct - it comes from Wagger referring to his own site as MFW (NCFC) - blindasabat, Dec 3, 17:10:48
- does he run the site? (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 3, 17:13:07
- he does run it (n/m) (NCFC) - blindasabat, Dec 3, 17:17:32
- then my opinion of him (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 3, 17:19:00
- he does run it (n/m) (NCFC) - blindasabat, Dec 3, 17:17:32
- does he run the site? (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 3, 17:13:07
- correct - it comes from Wagger referring to his own site as MFW (NCFC) - blindasabat, Dec 3, 17:10:48
- and why is this reserved for him? (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 3, 17:07:11
- MFW = MotherFuckingWaghorn (NCFC) - blindasabat, Dec 3, 17:04:46
- the thread title didn't sound overly supportive (n/m) (NCFC) - SCC 28, Dec 3, 16:55:19
- Where, anywhere, did I say I had a problem with it? (n/m) (NCFC) - Yellalee, Dec 3, 16:50:36
- MotherFuckingIrritating (NCFC) - Old Git, Dec 3, 16:18:59
- Point 3 is valid though, no? (n/m) (NCFC) - Yellalee, Dec 3, 16:21:23
- No (n/m) (NCFC) - Old Git, Dec 3, 16:23:09
- Fine (n/m) (NCFC) - Yellalee, Dec 3, 16:24:09
- I'm sure it's right that Cullum is now waiting for the car crash (NCFC) - Old Git, Dec 3, 16:32:21
- From a rational, commercial viewpoint - agreed. But (NCFC) - Yellalee, Dec 3, 16:38:40
- No way (NCFC) - Old Git, Dec 3, 16:40:33
- Indeed - short term pain for long term gain (NCFC) - Yellalee, Dec 3, 16:43:45
- Except it won't be, as he's clearly stated the funds he'll put in are limited (NCFC) - megson, Dec 3, 17:02:35
- Oh and now i've read Waggers piece i'm off to top myself. Jesus that was depressing (NCFC) - megson, Dec 3, 17:09:13
- There's certainly a john madjeski style to him (NCFC) - pants, Dec 3, 17:08:21
- Except it won't be, as he's clearly stated the funds he'll put in are limited (NCFC) - megson, Dec 3, 17:02:35
- Indeed - short term pain for long term gain (NCFC) - Yellalee, Dec 3, 16:43:45
- No way (NCFC) - Old Git, Dec 3, 16:40:33
- From a rational, commercial viewpoint - agreed. But (NCFC) - Yellalee, Dec 3, 16:38:40
- I'm sure it's right that Cullum is now waiting for the car crash (NCFC) - Old Git, Dec 3, 16:32:21
- Fine (n/m) (NCFC) - Yellalee, Dec 3, 16:24:09
- No (n/m) (NCFC) - Old Git, Dec 3, 16:23:09
- Point 3 is valid though, no? (n/m) (NCFC) - Yellalee, Dec 3, 16:21:23
Reply to Message
In order to add a post to the WotB Message Board you must be a registered WotB user.
If you are not yet registered then please visit the registration page. You should ensure that their browser is setup to accept cookies.