BerlinWaller wrote:Carlisle are looking to reduce their playing budget and want a Manager able to bring players through rather than expensive signings.
marky No.1 wrote:BerlinWaller wrote:Carlisle are looking to reduce their playing budget and want a Manager able to bring players through rather than expensive signings.
Perfect for Jim then, cutting their budget would probably give him 50% more than he has now, how he must wish for that here
redrobo wrote:Who would in their right mind travel nearly 3 hours or 6 hours a day sometimes 5 times a week to get to Carlisle from the Wirral? I understand that he wants to better himself, but Carlisle? Especially over Shap in the middle of winter.
BoroRedShrimp wrote:Why would it matter if Carlisle offer Jim far more than we can offer him on his current deal. He goes we move on its simple. We have done before and will do again.
NPL Daze wrote:BoroRedShrimp wrote:Why would it matter if Carlisle offer Jim far more than we can offer him on his current deal. He goes we move on its simple. We have done before and will do again.
Nothing like a bit of sentiment is there.
NPL Daze wrote:Nothing like a bit of sentiment is there.
black morse wrote:Might be wrong but I feel Jim wouldn't be too keen on Carlisle, with the extra travelling, unless he felt there was no chance of extra money to spend on players here. In that case, if he goes, the signs are not good.
As I say, might be totally wrong.
Ntini wrote:black morse wrote:Might be wrong but I feel Jim wouldn't be too keen on Carlisle, with the extra travelling, unless he felt there was no chance of extra money to spend on players here. In that case, if he goes, the signs are not good.
As I say, might be totally wrong.
How much do people genuinely believe we're going to get to spend on players from the new owners? We currently run at a pretty big loss each year and we know there are outstanding debts. With no obvious increases to revenue in the foreseeable future, how can we increase our costs further? Surely any injection of funds would cover operating losses and pay off debts? That is a good thing in itself and is hugely welcome. However, there's no indication yet that there will be a significant increase in the playing budget that people seem to be mooting. I'd love to be wrong but I don't see it.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 11 guests