Shrimpsvoices

I mentioned it another thread but think it's worth its own.

Is the club in a better or a worse position today than it was when Lemos failed to provide any funds and couldn't run the club?

Discuss.

BerlinWaller wrote:I mentioned it another thread but think it's worth its own.

Is the club in a better or a worse position today than it was when Lemos failed to provide any funds and couldn't run the club?

Discuss.

Depends on what metric you want to use. If financially, the "net assets" on paper per the accounts are a lot worse because of the ensuing years of losses meaning we now have higher loans and fewer assets.

If on attendances, then better because we have higher attendances.

If on performance, then worse because I don't think we've ever been nailed to the bottom of the league table for so many weeks before.

As Ken said. Looking at via attendences, better.

Budget wise. Worse. As I mentioned on another thread, excluding the loans. How many players would get into other League 2 sides. Stott? Adam Lewis? Edwards? IMHO this is the worst squad we've had in my time support them and it's all down to one man.

If we'd, for example been mid-table at Xmas, then lost half-a-dozen games on the trot, would that be any different. Let's give it a while, it's a brand new team, obviously lacking quality in areas. What can we do, other than be as supportive on the Terraces as we can. That's on the field.

Off the field.....feck knows.

lancaster shrimp wrote:As Ken said. Looking at via attendences, better.

Budget wise. Worse. As I mentioned on another thread, excluding the loans. How many players would get into other League 2 sides. Stott? Adam Lewis? Edwards? IMHO this is the worst squad we've had in my time support them and it's all down to one man.

I think that 'worst' is too strong a word to use.

Scouseport_Shrimp wrote:If we'd, for example been mid-table at Xmas, then lost half-a-dozen games on the trot, would that be any different. Let's give it a while, it's a brand new team, obviously lacking quality in areas. What can we do, other than be as supportive on the Terraces as we can. That's on the field.

Off the field.....feck knows.

We've got more or less the same record starting this season as we had finishing the last. 7 points from our last 11 last season and 7 from our first 12 this year. We've actually lost less of the games this season and conceded 17 in comparison to 25 in those comparative run of fixtures.

Beating Accrington and Barrow really papered over the cracks that we'd completely fell apart around March. We looked truly horrendous in most of those games, if Ged had stayed and we'd kept most of that team together, I think we'd look even worse this year than we already do.

My response from the other thread, with an additional comment at the end:

I think it is a good, and interesting question. Personally, definitely, I don't think we are in a better position.

But are we worse?

I don't actually think we are in a 'worse' position as such, just 'closer' to the edge. We've been rolling down a hill, towards the same cliff-edge for the whole time. Our direction hasn't changed. The difference is, the amount of time available to apply the brakes, or change direction is getting less. We've been passed from one utter shambles to the next, repeatedly.

The one thing that I do feel aggrieved by, which in reality, is no difference to back then... ...I believed when we moved from Christie Park, that ALL of the new arena, including car park etcetera, was covered by the Christie Trust. It was only later that I found that numerous parcels of land were hived off. That makes us far more vulnerable.

The sale of Christie, the purchase of the land on Westgate and the building of the new ground all needs looking in to for me. Do the sums add up? Did we spend all the money from the sale on the new ground? How were Directors able to slice land off for themselves?