Much as I love MAF is he partly to blame for our current woes

[GloucesterWhite]

In order to strengthen the balance sheet to prepare our club for sale, spending on new players has been virtually non-existent in the last couple of years of MAF's reign. The club never divulge transfer fees, but the BBC calculate that since Jol has been manager the club has made a profit of £10M on transfers. That IMHO is the root of our current problems. Yes, Jol's tactics have made matters worse, but selling Dembele, Dempsey, Zamora, AJ, Smalling and replacing them with freebies, loan players, and 30+ has-beens is a recipe for disaster. MAF got his sale and we now have Khan who has yet to open his wallet. Unless he does so in a big way during the upcoming window it doesn't matter who the manager is, we're stuffed.

If and when some of the current crop of promising youngsters mature and develop enough to play for the first team, maybe the club can be run on a sustainable basis, but without a successful 'grow your own' youth system I suggest the only way any club can stay in the top division is for the owner to plough funds into the team. Forget trying to balance the books when the likes of Norwich and Southampton are spending £30M plus a year. Either spend, and spend big Mr Khan; or get ready to watch your team play the likes of Doncaster and Middlesbrough.

[JBH]

Somw people have shot memories

[GloucesterWhite]

Somw people have shot memories

Not at all. I shall be forever grateful to MAF. But turning off the funding started the rot. It's not terminal yet. All I am saying is the club has to spend big money in January.

[Furby]

To answer your main question, no I don't think Chairman Mo is to blame at all.

He put his hand in his pocket for players like Ruiz at £11 million, Stekkers for £5 million and Parker £3 million. I think MAF was a bit dubious splashing out huge fees for players due to having his fingers burned with the likes of Marlet, Johnson and now Ruiz. So I blame only Jol for (in my opinion) our worst situation in my lifetime. (37)

[GloucesterWhite]

To answer your main question, no I don't think Chairman Mo is to blame at all.

He put his hand in his pocket for players like Ruiz at £11 million, Stekkers for £5 million and Parker £3 million. I think MAF was a bit dubious splashing out huge fees for players due to having his fingers burned with the likes of Marlet, Johnson and now Ruiz. So I blame only Jol for (in my opinion) our worst situation in my lifetime. (37)

Everyone blames Jol (and I agree he should go), but what other manager has had to make a profit over 2 years and compete with other teams that are spending tens of millions?

Maybe my lifetime is longer than yours;: I remember when we were relegated from the top division to the third in two seasons.

[Denver Fulham]

To answer your main question, no I don't think Chairman Mo is to blame at all.

He put his hand in his pocket for players like Ruiz at £11 million, Stekkers for £5 million and Parker £3 million. I think MAF was a bit dubious splashing out huge fees for players due to having his fingers burned with the likes of Marlet, Johnson and now Ruiz. So I blame only Jol for (in my opinion) our worst situation in my lifetime. (37)

Everyone blames Jol (and I agree he should go), but what other manager has had to make a profit over 2 years and compete with other teams that are spending tens of millions?

Maybe my lifetime is longer than yours;: I remember when we were relegated from the top division to the third in two seasons.

This past summer, Jol spent something like 13m in fees between transfers and loans, and sold Frei for 2m. He also has helped assemble a roster that the club's financial statements show is basically up against the FFP limit without Khan spending extra above that, as allowed in the short term.

But let's not let facts get in the way of defending the buffoon. Maybe if he hadn't fallen out with Dempsey, he'd still have the guy. Dembele had a release clause. Boohoo, that's how life works.

[GloucesterWhite]

To answer your main question, no I don't think Chairman Mo is to blame at all.

He put his hand in his pocket for players like Ruiz at £11 million, Stekkers for £5 million and Parker £3 million. I think MAF was a bit dubious splashing out huge fees for players due to having his fingers burned with the likes of Marlet, Johnson and now Ruiz. So I blame only Jol for (in my opinion) our worst situation in my lifetime. (37)

Everyone blames Jol (and I agree he should go), but what other manager has had to make a profit over 2 years and compete with other teams that are spending tens of millions?

Maybe my lifetime is longer than yours;: I remember when we were relegated from the top division to the third in two seasons.

This past summer, Jol spent something like 13m in fees between transfers and loans, and sold Frei for 2m. He also has helped assemble a roster that the club's financial statements show is basically up against the FFP limit without Khan spending extra above that, as allowed in the short term.

But let's not let facts get in the way of defending the buffoon. Maybe if he hadn't fallen out with Dempsey, he'd still have the guy. Dembele had a release clause. Boohoo, that's how life works.

I've no wish to defend Jol, but as you want to talk facts, he may have spent £13M but Dembele was sold for £15M, then there's Dempsey and, as you say, Frei. Which underlines my point that our problems are twofold: 1) Jol; AND 2) underfunding. Merely replacing Jol isn't enough.

[Burt]

We have two options.

Live within our means, be self-sustaining, and balance our books. This should mean a sensibly ran club that will live off (primarily)the premier league sponsorship income and whilst never being a force to be reckoned with (i.e. consistent top 6) we should be a strong mid-table club, who may occasionally flirt with Europe or with relegation.

Spend beyond our means and live on debt. I would argue that this would not result in drastically better fortunes in terms of league position etc. and would run the added risk of us "doing a Leeds" without the winning the league bit.

[GloucesterWhite]

We have two options.

Live within our means, be self-sustaining, and balance our books. This should mean a sensibly ran club that will live off (primarily)the premier league sponsorship income and whilst never being a force to be reckoned with (i.e. consistent top 6) we should be a strong mid-table club, who may occasionally flirt with Europe or with relegation.

Spend beyond our means and live on debt. I would argue that this would not result in drastically better fortunes in terms of league position etc. and would run the added risk of us "doing a Leeds" without the winning the league bit.

Your first option sounds good but how many clubs manage to do that? Show me another club that has made a profit on transfers in the last 2 years. Maybe we can be self-sustaining once the 'grow your own' policy bears fruit. But until then I think we have to spend. What's the point in having a rich owner of he isn't going to 'throw away' some of his money on his hobby/toy? Leeds is an extreme example, there is middle ground.

[epsomraver]

What is the point of making money on transfers then missing out on £80 million by going down?

[Logicalman]

But let's not let facts get in the way of defending the buffoon.  Maybe if he hadn't fallen out with Dempsey, he'd still have the guy. Dembele had a release clause. Boohoo, that's how life works.

.. and so why isn't Demps still playing in the Prem?  Or for a Champion League side in Europe? Couch how you like, he was on his way in any case, Liverpool, Spuds, now in the MLS, anyone that would give him the payday he finally wanted, he was never going to get that with Fulham. You talk of facts that we cannot have any idea of being true. I don't know, and neither do you, that's the only fact that has some basis.

[Forever Fulham]

What is the point of making money on transfers then missing out on £80 million by going down?

Totally agree.  Penny foolish.