Boo Khaki Posted January 12 Share Posted January 12 1 hour ago, Yenitit said: Not sure where the lack of funding is coming from. From the outside we look like we’re easily the team with the biggest budget in the league. The problem lies with the shite the previous manager signed and has our finances tied up in. Come the end of January if there is little activity through the IN door at Dens then I will be a bit peeved that the Rangers cup game and the Cummings World Cup money hasn’t been reinvested into the 1st team, not on what has been invested so far this season. Sensible hat on…they’ve covered enough losses over their time here to feel like additional money like mentioned above goes into their hipper. Who in their right mind would give Chapman and McGinn the rumoured 5k between them in wages this time last year. That investment could’ve and should’ve made a huge difference 12 months ago if used properly. Doubt even many of us on here would’ve signed those 2 if you’d saw them play this time last year. McPake said on Twitter to a Dundee fan that he’d saw Chapman play, beggars belief he then signed him. Only real justification I can see for that is they might have felt that if overpaying a couple of players kept us in the Premiership then that was a gamble worth taking. It failed, so they're not willing to do the exact same thing this January in order to gamble on getting back up there. Irrespective of what any fan thinks of McPake and the players he signed, at that particular point in time he was the manager that Nelms had appointed, so it's reasonable for Nelms to take the view that the manager knows best and back him to sign the players he says he needs. Given that faith wasn't repaid, then I can see why they will be reluctant to do the same thing all over again even though it's with a different manager. TBH, I know I've said plenty of times on here that it galls me a bit that Dundee FC appear to be one of the teams that is pathologically incapable of living within it's own means, so as much as a lack of signings is frustrating in terms of what it might mean for results on the pitch, there's a part of me that would actually respect some leadership at the club deciding that the continual cycle of huge losses and underwriting a playing budget that the club can't support off it's own back needs to be brought to an end. I doubt that the yanks thought for one moment that 9 years on from appointing Paul Hartley the club would be in pretty much an identical league position to where they were at that point. There was a lot made about their plan for us becoming a self-sustaining club. Clearly it hasn't gone as intended on the pitch and that no doubt has consequences for the progress elsewhere, but I don't think it changes the ultimate intent of turning a continual loss-making venture into one that pays for itself, it's just a question of exactly when that becomes reality and what level the club stabilises at. Even if I had Keyes' level of wealth, and my life-long affinity for the club, I wouldn't just indefinitely swallow the losses either, not because I couldn't afford it or because I don't care to, but because it doesn't actually benefit the club long-term. As soon as I'm gone there's no guarantee there's going to be anyone else around to pick up the slack. It's kinda like the commitment parents make when having kids. Sure, you expect to have to parent them for a while, but not still housing, feeding, clothing, and wiping their arse for them when they are middle-aged. 6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.