Did MAF leave us without a paddle?

[Lighthouse]

filled the team with free transfers and out of contract players.

Hardly.....From Summer 2010
Spent Money on

Stekelenburg
Riether
Kasami
Berbatov
Richardson
Dejagah
Pogrebnyak
Ruiz
Riise
Gecov
dembele
Halliche
Salcido


Free
Diarra
Boateng
Amorebieta
Karagounis
Rodallega
Petric
Pogrenyak
Grygera
Sa
Sidwell
Senderos

That list of players, only one cost 10 million plus, the rest we could have saved the small fees on the old players and put them together to make a few better signings. We all know where our problems were for years and trying to say because Petric and the like cost money we were spending is frankly missing the point about investment in the team.

[MGBadrock]

Where would we be without MAF?  I'll say it again........Where would we be without MAF?

I can't describe how baffled I get whenever I see anyone question the man.  It makes me cringe and feel horrible.

[TonyGilroy]

Too many of the players we've acquired have failed badly but even if transfer fees weren't involved you can be sure that the Bosmans got large signing on fees and lucrative contracts. Most would have gone to the highest bidders.

We've mostly bought badly and/or been unable to use players effectively. That's a management failure and questions need to be asked as to who chose the targets.

We could have spent more obviously but the key problem is the duffness of the players we brought in. Every one of the summer acquisitions has been woeful but how predictable was that and how much because of what they found at the training ground.

A lazy disorganised manager will find that he has players who reflect that.

[MJG]

filled the team with free transfers and out of contract players.

Hardly.....From Summer 2010
Spent Money on

Stekelenburg
Riether
Kasami
Berbatov
Richardson
Dejagah
Pogrebnyak
Ruiz
Riise
Gecov
dembele
Halliche
Salcido


Free
Diarra
Boateng
Amorebieta
Karagounis
Rodallega
Petric
Pogrenyak
Grygera
Sa
Sidwell
Senderos

That list of players, only one cost 10 million plus, the rest we could have saved the small fees on the old players and put them together to make a few better signings. We all know where our problems were for years and trying to say because Petric and the like cost money we were spending is frankly missing the point about investment in the team.

Its not so much the amount spent because look at Norwich, they bought a £12M striker who's done sod all. Its how you spend the budget you have. Last summer from day one was a disaster.
Wrong players targeted and signed. A limited budget spent on the wrong type of players.

I'm just responding to your claim that the team was made up of free's. And frees are not that anyway and also there is nothing wrong with getting those type of players at times. Schwarzer..some would say was the best GK we ever had..free.
Diarra..how much has he cost in fees in the past
Sidwell..free again.

We invested but in the wrong places. Look at the wages totally out of control last season (and this) given our turnover.

[WayneKerrins]

He took dividends out whilst running down the squad. then got his money back on the sale. As I said absolutely his call but why he would put so much at risk that he had built when he already has 2 billion and is a grand old age for 20 or 30m baffles me.
There's no benefacting going on, just a bloke who had a load of fun, plenty of lauding, and a bit of glory and who then spent 2 years totally focussed in squeezing every penny out with seemingly zero concern over what that might do.

Really amazed how so many sane fans can't see this and only focus on the largely very good earlier years of his reign.

[Logicalman]

He took dividends out whilst running down the squad. then got his money back on the sale. As I said absolutely his call but why he would put so much at risk that he had built when he already has 2 billion and is a grand old age for 20 or 30m baffles me.
There's no benefacting going on, just a bloke who had a load of fun, plenty of lauding, and a bit of glory and who then spent 2 years totally focussed in squeezing every penny out with seemingly zero concern over what that might do.

Really amazed how so many sane fans can't see this and only focus on the largely very good earlier years of his reign.

I agree that for the last couple of seasons he seemed to lose the once obvious keen interest he had on building Fulham up. It did coincide with Roy leaving us, perhaps he felt he no longer wanted to play?

In any case, he did us a favor in removing our 'debt' to the tune of 187 Million, ensuring we did not fall foul of any possible financial rules, and then sold us, all of which is his right, and for the benefactor he was for over a decade beforehand, I can not hold any grudge towards the man. God bless him.

[WayneKerrins]

He took dividends out whilst running down the squad. then got his money back on the sale. As I said absolutely his call but why he would put so much at risk that he had built when he already has 2 billion and is a grand old age for 20 or 30m baffles me.
There's no benefacting going on, just a bloke who had a load of fun, plenty of lauding, and a bit of glory and who then spent 2 years totally focussed in squeezing every penny out with seemingly zero concern over what that might do.

Really amazed how so many sane fans can't see this and only focus on the largely very good earlier years of his reign.

I agree that for the last couple of seasons he seemed to lose the once obvious keen interest he had on building Fulham up. It did coincide with Roy leaving us, perhaps he felt he no longer wanted to play?

In any case, he did us a favor in removing our 'debt' to the tune of 187 Million, ensuring we did not fall foul of any possible financial rules, and then sold us, all of which is his right, and for the benefactor he was for over a decade beforehand, I can not hold any grudge towards the man. God bless him.

Mate this is exactly the type of thinking that I struggle with. The debt equity conversion was a standard technique when preparing us for sale. The wasn't an ounce of altruism in there. It simplified the transaction and meant khan was paying for the positive net assets of the club plus goodwill (which can be capitalized and amortized over time).

The is no escaping the conclusion that in the last 2 years all mo wanted to to sell the club for the highest price. He did the bare minimum to stay in the prem and clearly didn't give a flying f.ck about running down the squad whilst he squeezed out dividends from player sales. If he needed 20m fair enough but he was already worth c 2 billion at the age of 90.

This is a fact based analysis and to me it absolutely tarnishes a lot of his legacy.

[Craven Mad]

He took dividends out whilst running down the squad. then got his money back on the sale. As I said absolutely his call but why he would put so much at risk that he had built when he already has 2 billion and is a grand old age for 20 or 30m baffles me.
There's no benefacting going on, just a bloke who had a load of fun, plenty of lauding, and a bit of glory and who then spent 2 years totally focussed in squeezing every penny out with seemingly zero concern over what that might do.

Really amazed how so many sane fans can't see this and only focus on the largely very good earlier years of his reign.

I agree that for the last couple of seasons he seemed to lose the once obvious keen interest he had on building Fulham up. It did coincide with Roy leaving us, perhaps he felt he no longer wanted to play?

In any case, he did us a favor in removing our 'debt' to the tune of 187 Million, ensuring we did not fall foul of any possible financial rules, and then sold us, all of which is his right, and for the benefactor he was for over a decade beforehand, I can not hold any grudge towards the man. God bless him.

Mate this is exactly the type of thinking that I struggle with. The debt equity conversion was a standard technique when preparing us for sale. The wasn't an ounce of altruism in there. It simplified the transaction and meant khan was paying for the positive net assets of the club plus goodwill (which can be capitalized and amortized over time).

The is no escaping the conclusion that in the last 2 years all mo wanted to to sell the club for the highest price. He did the bare minimum to stay in the prem and clearly didn't give a flying f.ck about running down the squad whilst he squeezed out dividends from player sales. If he needed 20m fair enough but he was already worth c 2 billion at the age of 90.

This is a fact based analysis and to me it absolutely tarnishes a lot of his legacy.

I think the simplest thing to consider is "are we better now, after Mo, than we were before?".

Mo took us from the edge of existence, into a team competing in the Premiership. Yes, we may now be relegated to the Championship, but that still puts us in a significantly better position that we were before MAF. I think that everyone can see your argument that Mo had been lining up a sale for a couple of seasons, but disagree that this - in any way - tarnishes his legacy. Mo built an asset, funded it to the tune of hundreds of millions, then sold it; can you blame him?

Mo MADE the modern Fulham. Why on earth would I hold anything against him?

[TonyGilroy]

Maybe it's unrealistic to expect the club's owners to be benefactors pouring their own money into the club with the only motive being pure love.

The motive doesn't have to be money - it might be prestige or enjoyment - but unless the benefactor is a life long fan who happened to get super rich the motives will always be selfish ones.

What should matter to us is the good (or bad) that they do and for me MAF is massively in credit.

[westcliff white]

when he bought the club as an earlier poster did say he said the club would stay in his family for ever, however he also said it was the love his son had for the club that persuaded him, that son was Dodi. So maybe in the end he decided the best for him was to sell and retire> There is not much I would ever blame MAF for, he came in when we needed him too, he put money into the club and saved us. Under his ownership we went from almost conference to the premier league, I know I for one thought we were never going to see the championship (back then division 2) ever again. I hope he enjoys his retirement and I thank him for the good times he gave us.

[AlexH]

The club kept banging on about sustainability but I don't get why the club saw sustainability as 'Buy a bunch of old guys and loans' as opposed to 'Buy some players with potential in their early-20's then sell them once they succeed' ala Dembele.

[WayneKerrins]

Guys because in my view the obvious desire to squeeze the pips out of the club in pursuit of that extra 20m tarnishes Fayeds legacy it doesn't destroy it.
Of course he was hugely beneficial for us and I'm as grateful for that as the next man.
However for someone who claimed to love the club he was evidently prepared to put adding 1% to his wealth above its security.
I find that incongruent and very disappointing and not something that can be overlooked.

[Berserker]

Maybe he wanted Fulham getting in the Prem, and staying in the Prem,  as his achievement only.

[WayneKerrins]

If you love something that is a limited expression of it: very limited.

[Robbie]

Well said RaySmith - lets face it NO BRIT wants to own a football club anymore !!!

[Tonywa]

As Louis XV said 'Apres-moi, le déluge!'

[HatterDon]

As Louis XV said 'Apres-moi, le déluge!'

King Louis invented the luge? Cool!