• We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website. Read more here

Randell Williams joins Exeter City from Watford

fred binneys head

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
22,188
Location
Loving the boy Stanno
They do say “the proof is in the pudding”, but they should say “the proof of the pudding is in the eating”.

I feel I’ve really helped in this debate.
 

The Proper Chap

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Nov 20, 2016
Messages
6,774
FAO Grecian in Guzz and anyone else who cares.

First team squad numbers taken from each clubs official website:

Stevenage - 23

Oldham - 25

Crawley - 28

Carlisle - 28

Exeter City - 32

Mansfield - 26

Forest Green - 24

Bolton - 26

All squads include young players.

Those are the exact figures, I have not altered them, we have more than any other club.

What are you saying ?
 
Last edited:

DB9

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
24,694
Location
Hampshire. Heart's in N Devon
I offer the following evidence of League 2 clubs transfer activity so far (https://d3d4football.com/league-one-two-transfers/ )for you to digest and comment upon.
Based on transfers in my initial analysis of the data, given that there have been no crowd revenues since March 2020, indicates that clubs like BOLTON, CARLISLE, STEVENAGE, OLDHAM, CRAWLEY, FGR, have recruited 10 or more new players in the close season leading to my hypothesis that owners (including Sugar Daddies) are indeed splashing their cash in the hope that they 'buy' success th is season (a bit like Roman did for Chelski in the Premiership) or they have come across monies illegally (unlike ECFC whose 'Sugar Daddy' is the Academy).
Some teams like MANSFIELD have carried on where they left off last season.
Sadly we can't rely on our 'Sugar Daddy' windfalls and I fear that the majority of the named teams above will fail unless their Sugar Daddies come up with the loot to beat Covid crisis shortfalls - the good news is that those in control of our 'Sugar Daddy' are unlikely to live beyond our means (once bitten twice shy) and our future is as Covid resilient as it can be. (Long Live The Trust)
As they say 'the proof is in the pudding' and I will not be able to probably corroborate my opinion until end of year accounts / insolvency notices are made public by which time I hope to be able to read (& write of cawse)
UTC
I think you should take into account those teams that have recruited a lot of players the numbers released from last season, They have to replenish their squads, Bolton for example would only have about half dozen first teamers to start the season so they needed a shed load and i don't think they actually paid for them as they're still under embargo? Hardly any teams in our division actually pay a fee for a player, They either get them on loan or on a free where they can get a decent wedge because the club has not paid a transfer fee for them. Also saying "Or they have come across their monies illegally" You have proof of this i hope as you've mentioned it on a public forum?

Most clubs aren't like us and we have to accept that, They're not "Sugar Daddies" they're owners, Whether they are good or bad owners they are still owners who are able to have the finance of their own to build a squad or have a board to dip into their pockets too, Just like any other business. Our Academy is a great sense of pride for us and as shown this week invaluable, The best thing about the early days of the Trust was the foresight to see if we invest in the Academy it will pay off.
 

The Proper Chap

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Nov 20, 2016
Messages
6,774
Looking at Bolton's squad, they have two good strikers, the rest of their squad looks very average.
 

i8cornwall

Active member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
2,745
They signed Doyle from L1 Swindon on a silly wages. The Swindon manager said they were no where near competing with what Bolton offered, and Swindon were playing silly money last season.
Transfer embargo states we can’t pay more then 1.5k a week on wages which to be honest isn’t silly money, maybe for Swindon it is.

Now his rumoured promotion bonus is a different story!
 

Grecian2K

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
32,975
Location
Busy knitting muesli
Transfer embargo states we can’t pay more then 1.5k a week on wages which to be honest isn’t silly money, maybe for Swindon it is.

Now his rumoured promotion bonus is a different story!
£1.5k plus "add-ons"??
 

i8cornwall

Active member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
2,745
£1.5k plus "add-ons"??

very much so, there seems to be a couple of loop holes to embargo’s and ones our new owners have apparently taken advantage of. In all fairness if it gets Bolton back up into the championship in a safe way then I’m happy.
 

WXF

Active member
Joined
Apr 2, 2004
Messages
1,283
So Brentford use their windfall to buy Ivan Toney from Peterborough to replace Ollie, and Peterborough go bite us on the arse using the money they’ve made. Had naively hoped the Watkins transfer would strengthen, not weaken us!

£200k for our best player in the final year of their contract, when we didn’t need to sell. Not sure about that one
 

DB9

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jun 19, 2005
Messages
24,694
Location
Hampshire. Heart's in N Devon
So Brentford use their windfall to buy Ivan Toney from Peterborough to replace Ollie, and Peterborough go bite us on the arse using the money they’ve made. Had naively hoped the Watkins transfer would strengthen, not weaken us!

£200k for our best player in the final year of their contract, when we didn’t need to sell. Not sure about that one
Just the way it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WXF

jimbo-gould

Active member
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
1,055
A lot of people take pride in us being an attractive option for a player, allowing us to get players like Williams and Stockley. The second we start standing in player's way, the less desirable we are to a young pro.
 
Top