Previous Message

Let's start with the obvious misunderstanding you lot seem to have.

I NEVER SAID ABLETT WAS CRAP. He was an average player at that level. And I had forgotten we actually recouped half of his fee when he moved on which makes the deal a lot better than I remembered.

But my argument was never about Ablett specifically. I thought I made that pretty fucking clear but apparently not. Nevin, Cottee, McCall, Keown, Newell, Beagrie, Rideout etc. all did a job (feel free to correct, we didn't get many matches per year back then on the telly).

Issue was they were replacing league winning players. How many players of that caliber did we actually sign between 1988 and 1994? Beardsley? Whiteside probably would have been one without his injury. Stuart was pretty good and Hinchcliffe eventually really good.

Putting the downfall all on the ban and Harvey can't be the whole picture. First, ban didn't stop RS from winning the title in 86, 88 and 90. And they never fell as far from the top as we did even at their worst. Yes, we lost players, but we got good money for many of them. Issue was who we replaced them with. WHICH IS MY ORIGINAL POINT.

And yes, Harvey couldn't emulate what Kendall did which is kinda the point. But neither could Kendall in his second stint. He paid 1.5m for Mo Johnston and 1.1m for Mark Ward. Those were the two biggest signings he made during his second spell. He did still have an eye for a player in case someone thinks I say something else. Parkinson for 250k and Stuart for 700k were excellent deals. Beardsley was a masterstroke.

As for Leicester, their situation was completely different. They have never been more than a provincial club while we were still one of the big five back then. Leicester made some great signings prior to that and pretty much all of their players had a career season at the same time. A real unicorn season in European football. They still did some good deals after that but obviously repeating that was impossible.

Could someone please explain why having a different view here leads to a fucking pile-up, though? Like I'm ready to change my mind but do you lot really think I will if you just call me names? Unless of course you do when that happens. At times this feels like a school playground.

Finally, comparing Ablett to Soucek isn't very accurate. Ablett was 26 when we signed him. Soucek is 30. Nowhere have I said we can't sign some "rejects". Grealish is a City reject surely? Not against that. KDH wasn't exactly first choice at Chelsea, I think he might be a very astute signing. Ndiaye was pretty much a reject in France. Etc.

Soucek isn't a reject either, he played 35 matches last season. And for about the fourth time I wouldn't mind someone like him _on a free_. He wouldn't elevate the squad but he could do a job for couple seasons. Just like someone like Doucoure did for most of his time here.