Current Avatar:
No Avatar image uploaded
No Avatar image uploaded
Wolves Rumours Member Posts
Deep Throat's Profile
Deep Throat's Posts and Other Poster's Replies To Deep Throat's Posts
To Deep Throat's last 5 rumours posts
To Deep Throat's last 5 banter posts
To Deep Throat's last 5 rumour replies
To Deep Throat's last 5 banter replies
Deep Throat's rumours posts with other poster's replies to Deep Throat's rumours posts
17 Aug 2023 14:26:07
We're linked with Josh Brownhill of Burnley.
1.) 17 Aug 2023 15:41:23
God I hope not, bang average player. I'd sooner see Hodge or Jordao play to be honest! ?
2.) 17 Aug 2023 16:29:46
See Paul merson predicts Brighton win he always goes against us plus he says we can't and won't score he talks out his ass h.i never had liked him I go for a wolves win 3-1
3.) 17 Aug 2023 17:15:01
I’d rather us sign Josh Burnley, from Brownhills.
4.) 17 Aug 2023 17:22:50
Paul Merson keeps whistling the same old boring tune. Wolves 'don't score'. Therefore we will never score, right? Wrong! A team that never scores would not have stayed up last season. He may not have noticed that we finished very comfortably in 13th place last season in spite of VAR errors for which we have received several apologies. And he gets paid for writing this drivel? My prediction?
Wolves 2, Brighton 1.
5.) 17 Aug 2023 17:30:08
Deep, I’ve gone for a 2-1 win on me Super6. We can’t both be wrong, surely not
6.) 17 Aug 2023 18:43:13
He isn't a bad player to have for depth tbf but given the source it's come from I think a rumour is all it is mate.
7.) 17 Aug 2023 19:08:46
Who knows we're could run riot.its about time we battered a team
8.) 17 Aug 2023 19:41:59
Let's see guys as wolfy46 says we could run riot but it's still early days.
9.) 17 Aug 2023 20:31:57
We may not score many but we still managed to beat Liverpool, Chelsea, Spurs, Brentford and Villa at Molineux last season. Let Merson say what he wants and when we don't lose or get relegated, watch him, Gabby and Chris Sutton all suddenly say that they always felt Wolves were a decent side.
10.) 18 Aug 2023 10:04:47
Liverpool are sniffing around for Lamina, well they can think again and keep their grubby little hands off him, unless they plan to pay £200m for him and in cash not instalments. that's what I think.
11.) 22 Aug 2023 20:43:37
Liverpool so called only paid £5 million out of 45 million in Jota deal.
31 Jan 2022 11:11:26
Apparently we are favourites ahead of Rangers to sign Aaron Ramsey. He is going to take a massive wage cut, and Juve will pay him to leave. As for Rangers, they can sign Gordon Ramsay for all I care! Might improve the half-time pies in Glasgow!
1.) 31 Jan 2022 11:44:19
According to his autobiography, Gordon did play for Rangers.
2.) 31 Jan 2022 11:53:40
According to The Daily Record, a deal between Rangers and Juve for AR has been agreed upon. Would've been a great addition, I'm going to be a negative Nelly and reiterate we will have no incomings today (sadly). Happy to be wrong though!
3.) 31 Jan 2022 12:03:23
I hope you are wrong Debbie else we will be looking at a third Jan in a row when we have ended the month in a similar or more likely worse position to where we started it! Fosun keep telling us there's no deals to be done, let's see shall we cause other teams seem to be managing?! ?
4.) 31 Jan 2022 13:07:38
Do we really want a overpaid injury prone midfielder?
Whether juve subsidised Ramsey's wage he's still not a good addition in my book.
I would like to see a extra striker come in but with hwang to come back I think we should have enough to cement a top ten finish.
5.) 31 Jan 2022 13:16:50
Jas, an update on the illustrious footballing career of Gordon Ramsay:
According to his autobiography Ramsay played "a couple of non-league matches as a trialist for Rangers."
He has since admitted that the exact ins-and-outs of his time at Rangers are "hazy" and according to a Rangers spokesperson he was given a trial during a testimonial match and trained with them for a few months.
6.) 31 Jan 2022 14:09:27
@ Deep Throat and Jas M - The News Of The World debunked Gordon Ramsay's claims about being a Rangers player. HE wasn't released by the club, he had trials for two weeks. This is the only time I can praise NOTW.
It all came about when Ramsay claimed on a TV program that was "released as a 17-year-old and was crushed, that is how I ended up becoming a chef" (I remember watching it) it even had Rangers legend Ally McCoist recalling GR as a young player. Hilarious, egg on both their faces.
7.) 31 Jan 2022 14:59:33
Debbie, amazing how high-achievers still feel the need to cheat! We see it in football all the time with Sterling/Kane etc diving. That tennis player banned from Aussie Open made multiple false statements.
8.) 31 Jan 2022 16:07:56
Deep Throat - I think this boils down to the ruthless "win at all costs mentality" it is drilled into athletes through all disciplines at an early age.
Look at some of the best forwards, they were very crafty. Bergkamp, Shearer, Henry or more recetnly Jota. They didn't cheat but knew /know how to draw a foul and stick in some strong challenges of their own.
9.) 31 Jan 2022 16:19:07
Strange how we’re favourites to sign players but as soon as another Club throws their hat in the ring Wolves pull out, not even willing to compete with Rangers for Ramsay.
10.) 31 Jan 2022 17:54:00
Wolves transfer strategy this window seemed to be younger players. Hoping the gamble pays off.
11.) 31 Jan 2022 18:15:44
Sorry Debs but a 'gamble' would suggest money has been spent, whereas all Fosun seem to be doing it saving pennies where ever they can! Unless of course its lining Gestufutes pocket as they seem very happy to do that (at the expense of our own transfer budget I might add)!
We lose one of our best players and replace him with a player who's only up to being sent to Grasshopper?! People will say that Fosun are being clever and they'd be right, fifth highest average season ticket in the league and replacing our best players with kids! You can call it clever I call it shameless ?
12.) 31 Jan 2022 19:55:06
Well that's it for this window according to Sky News.
25 Apr 2020 13:24:40
Olympiacos about to be banned for match fixing according to a report today. Oh dear, we have unfinished business with them at Molineux. I wonder if a ban would affect this?
1.) 26 Apr 2020 05:56:11
I saw that. Saying they are likely to be relegated to the Greek second league. I imagine they will also be blanket banned from all comps. With us going straight through.
2.) 26 Apr 2020 19:00:34
Funny old world if we went through to quarter finals that way. Not half as funny as Alan Pardew being saved from relegation, miles from safety, and all because the Dutch league has been declared null and void. Pardew claims he is not taking his bonus for avoiding relegation. Would have paid for a few taxis in Barcelona!
3.) 26 Apr 2020 23:58:29
This is probably academic anyway (as it could all be cancelled) but would it come into force this season then? Surely any punative measures they got would happen for the next tournament? Otherwise it wouldn't be fair on those teams they've already knocked out of the tournament? 🤔.
4.) 27 Apr 2020 08:41:35
Got a point there TBF bullys. Man City wouldn't get immediately kicked out of the CL for their mishaps. We will find out I'm sure. The resumption in August for european tournaments has been banded around a lot.
07 Jul 2016 16:54:52
today. Don't know if it is just Kenny keeping his hand in, or is it from Robin Li's side?
Real Betis, Aston Villa and Wolves are all interested in signing Chelsea striker Patrick Bamford on loan.
1.) 07 Jul 2016 18:54:15
Decent player but hopefully we'll not need loan captures soon! This waiting's tough, you could cut the atmosphere with a 'boing boing'. Talking of which, maybe we could buy WBA, flatten the Hawthorns and turn it into a car park for away fans whom we could transport to Molineux by High Speed Tram?
2.) 07 Jul 2016 20:39:57
I'm new to this site guys . Been watching all the posts from the last few days though. Really hoping for good news very soon. FWAW.
09 May 2016 18:27:35
To all you takeover conspiracy theorists, I can add something new and factual. This info is from banking contacts: The Lone Star chairman, John Grayken, is moving back to Boston in the USA. That implies he is less likely to be buying Wolves. Lone Star own The Money Shop.
Of course, you can live in the USA AND own an English football club.
1.) 09 May 2016 19:28:42
Ellis Short owns Lone Star and Sunderland FC. Is he allowed to control 2 clubs in the same country?
2.) 09 May 2016 20:22:35
I think Ellis Short is just his partner and owns Sunderland himself, rather through Lone-Star, Grayken isn't involved in Sunderland so could buy Wolves (maybe in his own right, or through Lone-Star, or through it's subsidiary Dollar) .
There's only circumstantial evidence linking Grayken anyway, but that's the same for every buyer suggested, and it is by far the largest amount of circumstantial evidence out of those rumoured. And, the rumours about him buying were about long time before Moneyshop (his Company) became main sponsors (which no one seemed to expect and is highly suspect, because it makes the club less saleable to anyone but Moneyshop, and it could be a trick allowing them to beat FFP) .
3.) 09 May 2016 23:46:17
The club is being sold to Bob Laslett, how many more times doi need to tell you?
4.) 10 May 2016 09:39:02
I know, but then that makes Moxey's Moneyshop deal make no sense all, because if Moneyshop aren't buying and the sponsorship was just ordinary business, then it harmed the clubs reach and potential for no good purpose and made it significantly less saleable.
I'd imagine Laslett would have had to have known about the sponsorship and either agreed it wouldn't deter him buying and he'd keep it (and so suffer the fan rebellion about it) , or agreed he'd pay to have it cancelled, which I have serious trouble believing. I also have trouble believing Morgan would walk away at this point, with Moneyshop engaged, as his reputation and legacy is currently in tatters and will be for $$$$ if he doesn't stay and put some of it right.
So until it's definitely announced I remain sceptical, both that it is Laslett and that if so, it's automatically a good thing. We shall see :-)
5.) 10 May 2016 10:30:38
Just a thought but I might be wrong, remember a lot of the newcastle players went on strike when they announced a deal with WONGA due their religion. Could us being sponsored by the money shop have the same affect on any buyers from say the middle east/ far east?
6.) 10 May 2016 11:26:53
That's a very good point, I think it could be seen as usury, which is a no-no in original Christianity and so probably in much of Africa. I guess though you could say the same about gambling or alcohol sponsorship with Islam, but then they'd be anti-usury too. So yes - it would rule out a buyer from a lot of other religious cultures and probably more than any other product sponsored would.
This religious aspect would also have a bearing on WWFC's supporter reach as it makes Wolves unsupportable to some cultures, making it an even worse fit for Wolves considering it's culturally diverse region.
Definitely the biggest hit though will be what the English middle class and rural will think. If we were Baggies, it wouldn't matter so much, because like Newcastle FC with Wonga, their identity is already working class and urban, so while still ugly, Moneyshop wouldn't change their identity and lesson their reach.
Wolves though had a glamorous inclusive identity that is conflicted by class limited and urban Moneyshop, Wolves does traditionally have big middle class and rural support (eg Elgar ) , many of whom won't tolerate Moneyshop as part of their identity. So Moneyshop is going to harm Wolves current support and will kill it's reach and so potential to be a properly big club again.
If Moneyshop aren't buying and if they haven't paid Wolves many many millions for this sponsorship, Moxey is a crazy whose sold Wolves out way too cheap. If he's not sacked for agreeing Moneyshop at all, he should be sacked for getting Wolves fleeced by them by agreeing the deal way too cheap.
7.) 10 May 2016 11:37:41
Banbury.
I hear you. You're either completely right or completely wrong. Bob Laslett would be infinitely preferable to Money Shop as a buyer. As Ulf says above, the Money Shop deal doesn't make sense if Laslett is buying in. And yes, a potential player from a Muslim background would have objections to a Wonga-type sponsor.
8.) 10 May 2016 11:57:43
Honestly religion now! Whens the Pope postin! If someone wants to invest in our club accept it with both hands! We were in The Money Shop stand at Forest! I couldn't hear anybody moanin! The high street is full with money lenders and bettin shops! Wakey Wakey its 2016! I bet not all abromovics money at Chelsea hasn't come by legit means? Can't hear Chelsea fans moanin!
9.) 10 May 2016 12:04:07
@Banbury - any idea when the sale will be announced?
10.) 10 May 2016 12:21:37
The funny thing is about Notts Forest Moneyshop stand, is Moneyshop is a Nottingham based company, it's where their head office is, and where they employ hundreds of people. So why hasn't Notts Forest agreed a special relationship with that major local employer and let them on their shirts instead of Wolves?
Cuz Notts Forest is a glamorous inclusive club like Wolves, that includes middle class and rural support, and who wouldn't brand themselves Moneyshop for anything as they know it would change their identity and kill their reach and potential to be big again. A sponsored stand makes no difference, it's just advertising space, shirts are different though, it's the clubs identity. Forest probably have pro marketing consultants who told them what a suicidal idea it would be, unlike Wolves who rely on totally amateur and incompetent Moxey.
And re religion, I'm guessing the Pope is going to be a fan next season, considering our green hoopy socks making us look like Black Country Celtic.
Honestly, if this was a Viz comic strip it would be too unlikely to be funny.
11.) 10 May 2016 12:47:23
If that's the case they want to go and ask Money Shop for a loan as their ground is lookin tired and could do with a makeover!
12.) 10 May 2016 13:13:02
I agree, Forest does look tired, but I guess they know their heroic identity and it's potential reach is their biggest asset by far, and they're worth much more with that protected and intact, than with it sold out for money that might make them look more flush for now, but would lose them all their future potential to be something again.
Like, apparently, you can tell a gentlemen / well off person by if they have good shoes, they can otherwise wear total tat. Moneyshop is like the shoes, bad cheap shoes, wear a Saville Row suit with bad cheap shoes, you're still a scrub, only an embarrassing one trying too hard :-) lol, we should check out Moxey's shoes (although I doubt he's seen his own feet for decades) .
13.) 10 May 2016 13:20:26
Paul T,
It's not just religious objections to money-lenders. It's also the fact that some companies prey on vulnerable people. That's beyond doubt and has been discussed fully on this forum already. It's not just moneylenders. The Russian owner of Chelsea seems to have made his wealth by getting hold of publicly-owned assets at a fraction of what they were worth. That's stealing from the Russian people. The breweries and tobacco companies etc could also be held to account. Where do you draw the line? I don't know. If John Grayken, the Lone Star guy, buys Wolves, I won't like the way he has made his money but I will give him a fair hearing at Wolves and hope it works out for all concerned.
14.) 10 May 2016 13:28:23
But if moneyshop and it's like is so despised by anyone from a Muslim background why would forest have a moneyshop named stand?
Are they not owned by a Muslim businessman?
All this b****x about it ruining the clubs wider appeal is frankly outdated.
The great majority don't care where the money comes from as long as it brings success.
Just ask Chelsea and Man City fans.
15.) 10 May 2016 13:50:00
To an extent I agree Deep Throat, especially about Abramovich, saw a BBC doc about the poor who live in the Russian regions he's Governor of - takes their oil and gas resources and spends it on his own super luxury and on Chelsea, while those Russian poor live in Siberian conditions, in draughty sheds without heating, having to drink vodka 24/ 7 as anti-freeze to stay alive. Sickening. Grayken's money is much better than that, but there are other concerning things about Grayken.
He took Irish citizenship, but according to their press, is best known in Ireland for buying portfolio's of distressed mortgages and evicting people, in Ireland he's apparently known as Mr. Bailiff. We have good support in Ireland. Then there's the involvement he had in South Korean banks, that led to a criminal investigation (although don't know what findings were and not implying he was guilty) , but where he apparently made significant financial pledges in Court, that having left the Country he apparently never honoured. And, was apparently quite happy to leave some of his colleagues there to go to jail for it. Then there's what official rich analysis reviews in America claim, that almost everyone who has worked with him and trusted him has regretted it. That's just from half an hour googling foreign press reports.
So there's a definite trust issue, he could promise the Earth about good intentions but who knows. He may well want to buy the club, push a load of money into it around FFP via sub-prime Moneyshop sponsorship, get promoted by buying league (maybe £40m, + £30m to buy club) , then sells Wolves as Prem club for £100m, fast turn around big profit, exactly as per all his other vulture fund businesses. But to get fast sale and most money, he'd probably sell to anyone and that could be awful. Mind you, as long as we were Prem, that may be good enough for some supporters.
But in principle, I agree, I have my own moral issues with Moneyshop that make me very unhappy the club is partnered with them. But my biggest concern is how it will damage Wolves identity, reach, and potential. If Grayken is buying and Moneyshop sponsorship will be seen in hindsight as just a temporary trick to get a load of investment round FFP, so it's a wrong to beat a bigger unfair wrong (FFP rules) , and if we did get to Prem Moneyshop sponsorship was dropped so we weren't branded to the Nation as that, it could work out ok. Roller coast ride with big fear, but at least there'd be some hope too.
16.) 10 May 2016 14:05:09
Ulf your clearly hung up on class issue, well sorry mate but get real please class does not come into it neither does your rural theory. I would also hazard a bet that out of the 13000 on line signitures against the Money Market are not even Wolves fans.
17.) 10 May 2016 14:16:53
Re Bigcheese, the word sponsorship is overused and abused. Stands aren't really sponsored at all, it's just poncy jargon the clubs use to try and increase the perceived value of what they're selling. Stands are inanimate objects not involved in the competition, so they can't be sponsored, they're just advertising space. Exactly like the crash barriers and bridges on F1 circuits, just background scenery, don't reflect on teams like sponsors names on cars that are competing do.
That's all Forest (and us with John Ireland Stand, now SJH stand since May15) did having Moneyshop pay for their name to be on them. It doesn't reflect on or affect the identity of the club in anyway. But main sponsor, sponsoring the shirt (worn by the players who are competing) , worn by the fans who support them, with Moneyshop named as our sponsor-partner, we'd be actually playing for Moneyshop. We're being asked to support Moneyshop. That's a massive change in identity and a massive barrier that lose Wolves support and revenue, like stand advertising never could.
18.) 10 May 2016 14:43:52
Ulf.
If Grayken is buying us you could be right about Money Shop being a temporary ruse to get round FFP, with MS eventually being dropped. The rumour about re-locating Wolves to a new build site could also be part of an old pal's agreement with Morgan to develop Molineux for housing. As unsettling as all of this is, it can only really work with us being established in the PL. The ends could justify the means.
If Banbury Wolf is right and we get Bob Laslett, where does that leave the Money Shop sponsorship? I don't know.
19.) 10 May 2016 14:51:39
First of all Notts Forest is owned by a Muslim. Fawaz al-Hasawi so sorry that out with what you are saying about a stand at the City Ground.
Now Moxey that nice ratbag of a CEO of ours takes Money Ship as a main sponsor. This will rule out potential buyers from the middle East and Asia for obvious reasons, that small point will have some bearing on his decision rest assured of that.
Ulf please stop this sociological wishy washy stuff it's really tedious and I do not believe it is accurate either. So rural Salop has more Wolves fans than the working class West Midlands? Never in a million years. I accept your point of view is your right but enough please.
20.) 10 May 2016 14:58:05
Forgot 2 points
1 Money Shop sponsorship is £1.5 million maximum may be a bit less, so hardly affects selling price
2 KJ took over Wolves on 31 May so his 12 month contract still valid and running. Aha but I forgot if they say good bye still have to pay him 1 years money anyway, so forget I spoke as just talked myself out of what I was about to say to Paul T! Lol
He ain't going mate I an telling you.
21.) 10 May 2016 15:01:22
Ulf call it what you like they are basically the same thing if you think that it offends a Muslim based regime so much why would forest have it all over there stand?
You and a few others on here are getting your knickers in a twist over nothing in my opinion.
The club needed a sponsor/ advertiser call it what you will and moneyshop have payed what the club wanted. Job done in my opinion.
I think your premice that we become a tainted brand because we have moneyshop on our shirts is in this day and age is laughable.
They may not be the most appealing name for our shirt but the neither was Doritos.
Now there was a branding error!
22.) 10 May 2016 15:15:22
There's a reason I'm hung up on it, identity and meaning is where my head is naturally stuck at (along with Wolves, so it's a bad collision) . Always has been, which is why I ended up working at a reasonably high level in marketing, because I can only do what I can naturally do. And I know from how my head naturally is, from working in marketing (including brand marketing and on Man U and Newcastle FC credit cards) , and from later on working in marketing for football pools, this is how the English football scene, and English culture and market is.
The modern World, England and Mid/ North Wales, is increasingly without class, more an artisan meritocracy where individuals transcend class (it's how rural has been for ages) . They want to associate with things that are attractive by being real and having integrity but are still exciting, like they want to be seen as. Wolves glamorous inclusive heroic heritage (and the regions original grass roots artisan / small and medium sized business and enterprise heritage) naturally fits that perfectly, it's hugely attractive, like Man U's but as a seed. The urban working class clubs though, like Baggies, Everton, Brum, don't fit the modern world, if they want to have more support and be bigger clubs than just their urban locals, they need to evolve and be more glamorous and inclusive, less class defined. And most of them are trying to.
With Moneyshop though, Moxey is taking Wolves into being working class and urban (when we aren't) , and it's exactly the wrong direction for the modern World. It will harm Wolves current support but won't kill Wolves, it will though give them a glass ceiling and make it much harder to ever be a big club with big National support ever again. It will hurt a small amount forever, be a brick wall ahead and add up to serious damage.
Fingers crossed Moneyshop gets cancelled, or is just a FFP trick that will get us to Prem then be dropped, and be seen in hindsight as a maverick heroic 2 fingers up at the establishment to beat their unfairness :-)
(and it doesn't matter if they're not Wolves fans. Deduct the Newky fans who have their own chip and allegiance, the rest are indicative that Wolves are a much less attractive, inclusive, and supportable club because of Moneyshop. Current Wolves fans aren't the biggest issue, it's the potential for more, our reach that Moneyshop really kills and that the petition volume suggests) .
23.) 10 May 2016 15:22:46
Molineux CANNOT be developed, Wolves took out a 999 year lease on the stadium plot. The council also put a clause it to say it will always be a football stadium. They chose not to give Wolves/ Morgan a free hold, because they feared he would do exactly as you said.
24.) 10 May 2016 14:51:39
First of all Notts Forest is owned by a Muslim. Fawaz al-Hasawi so sorry that out with what you are saying about a stand at the City Ground.
Now Moxey that nice ratbag of a CEO of ours takes Money Ship as a main sponsor. This will rule out potential buyers from the middle East and Asia for obvious reasons, that small point will have some bearing on his decision rest assured of that.
Ulf please stop this sociological wishy washy stuff it's really tedious and I do not believe it is accurate either. So rural Salop has more Wolves fans than the working class West Midlands? Never in a million years. I accept your point of view is your right but enough please.
25.) 10 May 2016 14:58:05
Forgot 2 points
1 Money Shop sponsorship is £1.5 million maximum may be a bit less, so hardly affects selling price
2 KJ took over Wolves on 31 May so his 12 month contract still valid and running. Aha but I forgot if they say good bye still have to pay him 1 years money anyway, so forget I spoke as just talked myself out of what I was about to say to Paul T! Lol
He ain't going mate I an telling you.
26.) 10 May 2016 15:01:22
Ulf call it what you like they are basically the same thing if you think that it offends a Muslim based regime so much why would forest have it all over there stand?
You and a few others on here are getting your knickers in a twist over nothing in my opinion.
The club needed a sponsor/ advertiser call it what you will and moneyshop have payed what the club wanted. Job done in my opinion.
I think your premice that we become a tainted brand because we have moneyshop on our shirts is in this day and age is laughable.
They may not be the most appealing name for our shirt but the neither was Doritos.
Now there was a branding error!
27.) 10 May 2016 15:15:22
There's a reason I'm hung up on it, identity and meaning is where my head is naturally stuck at (along with Wolves, so it's a bad collision) . Always has been, which is why I ended up working at a reasonably high level in marketing, because I can only do what I can naturally do. And I know from how my head naturally is, from working in marketing (including brand marketing and on Man U and Newcastle FC credit cards) , and from later on working in marketing for football pools, this is how the English football scene, and English culture and market is.
The modern World, England and Mid/ North Wales, is increasingly without class, more an artisan meritocracy where individuals transcend class (it's how rural has been for ages) . They want to associate with things that are attractive by being real and having integrity but are still exciting, like they want to be seen as. Wolves glamorous inclusive heroic heritage (and the regions original grass roots artisan / small and medium sized business and enterprise heritage) naturally fits that perfectly, it's hugely attractive, like Man U's but as a seed. The urban working class clubs though, like Baggies, Everton, Brum, don't fit the modern world, if they want to have more support and be bigger clubs than just their urban locals, they need to evolve and be more glamorous and inclusive, less class defined. And most of them are trying to.
With Moneyshop though, Moxey is taking Wolves into being working class and urban (when we aren't) , and it's exactly the wrong direction for the modern World. It will harm Wolves current support but won't kill Wolves, it will though give them a glass ceiling and make it much harder to ever be a big club with big National support ever again. It will hurt a small amount forever, be a brick wall ahead and add up to serious damage.
Fingers crossed Moneyshop gets cancelled, or is just a FFP trick that will get us to Prem then be dropped, and be seen in hindsight as a maverick heroic 2 fingers up at the establishment to beat their unfairness :-)
(and it doesn't matter if they're not Wolves fans. Deduct the Newky fans who have their own chip and allegiance, the rest are indicative that Wolves are a much less attractive, inclusive, and supportable club because of Moneyshop. Current Wolves fans aren't the biggest issue, it's the potential for more, our reach that Moneyshop really kills and that the petition volume suggests) .
28.) 10 May 2016 15:22:46
Molineux CANNOT be developed, Wolves took out a 999 year lease on the stadium plot. The council also put a clause it to say it will always be a football stadium. They chose not to give Wolves/ Morgan a free hold, because they feared he would do exactly as you said.
29.) 10 May 2016 16:01:07
Sorry, double post?
Anyway, I could go on for ages referencing things to justify it but it's boring, I don't mind people don't see it and don't agree, but it doesn't stop it being true. I've no agenda at all other than what's best for Wolves long term (club and region) .
(and I never suggested Shropshire had more Wolves supporters than urban West Mids at all. But do you really think Wolves are best placed to compete in that urban West Mids market as an urban working class club (effectively same identity as Baggies have traditionally) , against the Baggies who are that but Prem and way ahead of us? Or at the other end of the market, against Villa, who are glam and inclusive / not-class-defined (like Wolves were upto Moneyshop) , and more Prem than us, and more likely to be Prem again sooner than us? As Moneyshop Wolves, we lose to both Baggies and Villa. And with West Mids market is exhausted (portions already won by whichever club and with all shifts away from Wolves) , where else are Wolves going to get new support from to be a big club again? Newcastle have a working class identity and are in a perfect position to exploit their region (so isolated it's effectively a monopoly) . But their working class identity gives them a glass ceiling, will never be bigger than they are, because they appeal to no one but their own. Unlike Newcastle (or Everton, but like Liverpool or Man U) , Wolves were a heroic glam inclusive everyman's club, Moneyshop risks ending that.
30.) 10 May 2016 16:33:16
Re Derbywolf, not sure but I think the £1.5m figure was from trade press speculation, I don't believe WWFC disclosed the amount - they may have hinted but I wouldn't trust them if it's big and they're trying to keep it quiet to stop transfer fee inflation.
And even if it is only £1.5m, it might be another bit in compensation to Moneyshop to cancel, plus if shirts and merchandising stuff already printed, wasted stock and replacement - maybe £2m to £2.5m total (and possibly too late to get other sponsor to make up loss and hassle with getting new clean merchandising stock) - that's a player fee, a meaningful dent in FFP spend, and a nasty hit for a new owner or Morgan to take (getting on for 10% of the actual total club sale price) .
And real problem is once Moneyshop has gone live and is established it will change WWFC's identity, reduce its attractiveness and inclusivity, and so reduce its reach and potential. So if we don't sell this Summer and Moneyshop does go live, then Wolves would be less of a good investment and less saleable going forward.
I wouldn't be worried, Moneyshop sponsorship is so crazy I'd assume it must be a clever FFP trick and will work out ok. But I remember that Moxey has previously always identified Wolves with Everton, when that's wrong in the same way as this. Wolves are the regions glamorous heroic club like Liverpool FC, Baggies are like urban working class Everton. I suspect we have Moneyshop, simply because Moxey is a marketing wannabe / amateur who doesn't understand the clubs true identity or potential.
31.) 10 May 2016 17:14:06
I asked the religion question just to see peoples thoughts, my personal opinion is had wolves been promoted this season or at least got in to the play offs I don't think a lot of fans would have an issue with the Moneyshop deal and I think due to the season we've had it's another good reason to have a go at the club, I do however think the deal does damage our image and I most likely won't be purchasing the kit for my own reasons ( don't suit v necks or green) but were clearly a club that puts money before the fans these days so I just hope we get a new owner who changes that.
32.) 10 May 2016 17:27:55
ULF did you kick up a fuss when Sporting Bet was announced? Isn't gambling against Muslim values and I'm sure gambling has been more detrimental than any money lenders.
I don't believe for one minute that the Moneyshop owners are remotely interested in owning Wolves and see the 3 year sponsorship as meerly a commercial deal. As stated so many times we are the last to know on everything. Let's look at it did anyone foresee the Moneyshop sponsor NO it was leaked a few hours before and now a contract has been signed it will not be changed. The same as news on new owners, Jacket leaving and transfers. It has made me laugh in the past some of the rumours but it's getting all a bit childish and throwing toys out of the pram!
33.) 10 May 2016 17:38:57
Deego Wolf.
Good point about the freehold having to be a football ground. However these things can change by agreement. The old St George's Hospital on Hyde Park Corner in London had a wonderful location, world class. The lease had a clause saying it always had to be a hospital, otherwise it would revert to the freeholder, the Duke of Westminster. Guess what? The hospital is long gone and on the site is the mega-expensive Lansborough Hotel! In other words, clauses can be broken!
34.) 10 May 2016 18:02:50
Deego I don't think that Morgan would wish to involve himself in a development dispute over the Mol. But if he did and appealed to central government to build residential properties and move the ground to an out of town site he would probably win. Appeals like this are overturning Local Authority decisions all over the country. Its all linked to the housing shortage. Mr Morgan has all the people in place and knows exactly what buttons to press.
35.) 10 May 2016 19:06:08
Ulf,
I like the analogy of Liverpool and Everton compared to Wolves and Albion. Spot on. About time we got back into the top flight to prove the point. The steps we are taking now are very significant for our future, and are not to be taken lightly. This is a great club. I have much more faith in Morgan to understand this rather than Moxey. Morgan must now act in the best interests of Wolves, rather than for strictly commercial reasons. That may even mean retaining ownership and re-investing. I'd like to see Moxey out, and I would consider hiring someone like the Norwich CEO who honourably resigned this week.
36.) 10 May 2016 20:23:24
I agree Deep Throat, I have faith in Morgan, I'd be happy if he stayed. And good shout on the Norwich CEO - the best people make mistakes, take the hit and learn from them, and by that improve and become better than others - perhaps like the Norwich guy has and like Moxey never seems to.
Re Darbo. Sportingbet sponsorship wasn't a big deal because betting is a natural part of football, so it didn't change our identity and lesson our potential (relative to anyone else) . And not like sportingbet are a bookie of last resort, like Moneyshop are a lender to the desperate. So it's not as exploitative, and critically, not at all down market. It wasn't great, we should have taken less money and a better quality name, but not a disaster. I did hate it though because of the colour clash, like Dorito's, spoiled a couple of shirts I desperately wanted.
And those bad colour clashes are another example how Moxey has been completely incompetent with Wolves identity - he just slaps it around like it doesn't matter when actually it's our greatest asset. But I guess no surprise he treats the shirt like it's a cheap made up basketball franchise (he did used to run one) .
Re Wolvesfan03 - I think actually if we'd got promoted and Moneyshop were announced for next season in the Prem, there'd be much more aggro about it not less, because with Prem revenue there'd be no justification at all that we're desperate for the money, and it would be a disaster if we were in Prem as Moneyshop, would destroy Wolverhampton's reputation to the Nation like Wonga did Blackpool, whole region would be on WWFC's back about it, not just the football fans. Who wants to go shopping to, or live in, or move to a place branded to the Nation as a pay-day loan society? Would harm the regions regeneration.
Deep Throat's banter posts with other poster's replies to Deep Throat's banter posts
22 Apr 2025 19:31:45
Apparently, VP's record at Wolves, if replicated from the start of the season, would have us in fifth place at the moment.
1.) 23 Apr 2025 08:27:11
And from a standing start - i.e. no preseason to get to know/drill the team. Yerson will also be back to strengthen the defence.
It makes you think that if we kept the team together we could be a successful side next year and maybe even challenge for Europe/trophies.
But Jeff has persuaded Cunha and seemingly lots of the fans that we aren't a team that wins things. Sadly therefore in part also due to his financial incompetence we will not keep the team together and thus almost certainly won't win things.
Guess Jeff will be right after all!
2.) 23 Apr 2025 09:56:36
Come on TFIOG1 that post is really negative. Who knows what will happen in the summer, but one thing is pretty certain we will find out Fosun's intentions. VP has put himself in an incredibly good position. As you point what a turnaround to our season from a standing start. He only has 12 months of his contract remaining so my guess is it wouldn't cost that much for interested parties to buy it out if Fosun don't back him this summer and that includes not selling our best players. Why on earth would he allow that to happen without himself walking, hence why I'm saying we'll know Fosun's intentions in the summer. Regarding the sale or proposed sale of Cuhna I know he almost single handedly saved us from certain relegation under GON, but VP has created a team ethic now and not just a one or two player outfit. I can understand why Cuhna only signed that contract with what is an incredibly low release clause for his calibre of player. My guess is he was so frustrated about GON's style of management, selection, and overall team performance and lack of team discipline. Don't forget Cuhna did cost us a place in the Semi's of the FA cup. Another source of income!
I'm not even sure he'll go to MU and if he does we get other players in who want to play for us. There's always another Cuhna out there!
I know you keep bashing Shi and you're far more knowledgeable in the financial area than me, but from what I read MU can really only afford Cuhna based on selling some of their player such as Rashford. Villa might be able to afford his transfer fee, but not I would think his reported wages. Also Sancho, Anthony. All over paid failures or cause unrest in team moral so maybe Shi isn't that bad afterall. With a bit of luck and if reports are accurate we'll offload our Deadwood in the summer. Another reason to be optimistic.
3.) 23 Apr 2025 10:33:47
We're at a very real crossroads in the history of our club I think, and it's Jeff in the driving seat!.
Where does he want to go? Is he simply a Sunday afternoon driver? Does he have a destination in mind? Does he want to travel as far as he can, or just park up?
Come on Jeff let us belted in passengers know what the rides likely to be.
4.) 23 Apr 2025 13:00:54
Interesting, how positive our conversations now are about how we would like our future to be, compared to how it would have been in the Championship.
5.) 23 Apr 2025 13:30:49
Some good points Blackfords and a great analogy Abbey so let's just hope Jeff's destination isn't sh*t creek again.
I think those of us who follow matters both on and off the pitch all realise that this Summer will be the best indicator of Fosun's ongoing intentions for the club.
6.) 23 Apr 2025 17:15:25
Black - sorry yes it is.
Some of you know that after retiring from a career in finance and education I now run a walking business based on history.
I am therefore very interested in history and the Wolves situation reminds me of a brilliant quote from Churchill. Paraphrased it went something like - "if you don't learn from history you keep making the same mistakes".
For the last 2 years we have sold our best players: Neves and Neto and despite the losses clearly hurting the team I have no faith that we won't do the same thing again this year and lose Cunha - which in my opinion will hurt the team badly.
Will he learn from that?
I have no faith he will ever learn and eventually it will be fatal for the club!
Now that is dark!
7.) 23 Apr 2025 18:56:10
One man never makes a team, Tfig. I'm not worried about Cunha chasing medals and cash, if, and it's thr proverbial if, the money recieved is allowed to be spent on VP's choices.
If Jeff wants the dosh then expect j gomez, samedo, RAN, Sa, Hwang possibly Andre and ultimately vitor to go. That would break the club tho and to be honest I can't see Jeff
doing that.
It may well be the stale prem survival approach he takes, wouldn't it be great to think he'd support VP, give him the necessary to build something special tho, but I think you'll be right in the quote tfig, history is likely to repeat it self.
8.) 23 Apr 2025 21:01:33
History will repeat itself this Summer, no doubt but the acid test will be who they sell and who they bring in.
Now that might sound blindingly obvious but if players want to go it's hard these days to stop them, however, some may be convinced to stay if VP wants them. Sarabia would be one for me but on £90K per week Jeff will want him off the books for sure.
As I've said before it's absolutely vital that they don't alienate VP as they've managed to do to previous incumbents of that job. That's one lesson from history I prey they have learnt.
9.) 23 Apr 2025 21:27:24
Churchill certainly made a lot of mistakes to learn from.
10.) 24 Apr 2025 08:19:40
The song remains the same WO, not all led zep songs were good, but what a band they were.
08 Apr 2025 11:20:11
It was strongly rumoured in the January transfer window that Conor Coady would be back at Wolves in a swop for Dawson. We've moved a million miles on from that. Against Newcastle last night Coady's BBC match rating was 3.37. He looked as awful as our defence was before VP took over. We dodged a bullet, sadly for Conor, a great servant for Wolves. I met him once when we played Fulham at Craven Cottage and he was really chatty and interested in why a Londoner like me supported Wolves. Lovely bloke.
1.) 08 Apr 2025 11:36:45
To be fair to him the team he is in is awful. I think Cody would have been brought back for his leadership around the ground, in training, in the dressing room etc. he would not be playing every week.
2.) 08 Apr 2025 12:11:47
I guess Coady could be valuable in a motivational role at Wolves. In fact at the end of his brief international career he was highly praised for leadership even though he was not selected to play for England. He could prove to be a valuable link for Wolves to the early glory days under Nuno. His future will probably be in coaching or even in an ambassadorial role at Wolves like Steve Bull.
3.) 08 Apr 2025 13:13:40
I would personally like to see him back at the club in some capacity, as much to right a wrong so to speak. I suspect he will end up back with Nuno. If we can successfully transition to 433 under Vitor fine, but I feel we will be playing a five for a while yet, so as a squad player Conor would still have a role from the bench.
4.) 08 Apr 2025 15:16:11
Sorry guys. Not for me. He was a great ambassador and captain for our club, but we have cover in that area now and he was never great against big strong centre forwards such as Woods and Tony. They bullied him. There's no doubt he'd be a great asset at maybe a championship club pushing for promotion, but we need to move forward IMO.
10 Mar 2025 17:36:28
Word is that Manchester City might be docked 60 to 100 points by Easter. If so, they would finish bottom and be one of the three teams relegated, easing the pressure on us!
1.) 10 Mar 2025 17:51:46
I hope its true, but feel it's more likely just paper talk. I can't really see them getting much more than a slap on the wrist.
2.) 10 Mar 2025 22:08:48
It will surely have to include a significant points deduction if proven, we are talking about circa 130 breaches of one sort or another. If so, will it apply this season or next, is my question, one that I'm sure Leicester and Ipswich would also like answering?
I don't think the Premier League and before them EUFA would have spent so long on this without believing they were right and therefore any potential punishments will be severe, they will have to be.
3.) 10 Mar 2025 22:56:26
Oh how I wish I could belive that Deep, problem is I just don't see it being in the Prems interest to lose City from the table. As always it'll just come back to the money, they might well dock um points but I seriously doubt it will be enough to relegate um ?
4.) 11 Mar 2025 07:01:03
City have deeper pockets than the Premiership, hence have the best Legal Team available.
Whatever the result, there is an Appeals opportunity for either side.
Even if City lose some or all of the charges, they can drag it out even further and continue to drain the Premiership of funds.
Feels like there will be some sort of compromise allowing both Parties to claim a victory of sorts.
Maybe just a few million quid fine, which would mean nothing to MC.
Modern football is not the game (business) it once was.
5.) 11 Mar 2025 09:48:43
60 points would mean the maximum that they could finish on would be 17 points, probably enough to finish above Southampton leaving one place to fill, however based on the Everton case last year I suspect that would probably be reduced on appeal.
6.) 11 Mar 2025 09:57:07
If that happens Rugeley then I'm pretty much done with football, what's the point if the deepest pockets are allowed to break the rules and win everything?
Clubs have been docked points for far fewer breaches so the punishment, if proven, should be commensurate. Still given the appalling standards applied in many walks of modern life around the World these days, you may well be right.
7.) 11 Mar 2025 16:05:57
Sorry to have such cynical view Long.but the genuine "beautiful" game is being transformed in to just a commercial exercise.
Latest example.Club World Cup June 14 to July 13, 2025.32 teams. Players for those Clubs with just too little recovery time between seasons.
8.) 11 Mar 2025 18:43:06
Add to that, the 2030 World Cup being expanded to 48 teams.
9.) 12 Mar 2025 09:07:53
2026 is 48 Wandering, I think it's been proposed to go to 64 in 2030.
10.) 12 Mar 2025 10:19:21
I stand corrected. So it will be harder to not qualify than to actually qualify.
11.) 13 Mar 2025 20:11:05
Regarding city.the prem should follow suit with other examples.ie:rangers/juventus.both relegated to the bottom division.so do the same.slap em down to compete with walsall.anything other is a disgrace
08 Feb 2025 17:17:22
Harry Maguire's winning goal against Leicester last night at Old Trafford was bang offside. But no VAR in operation. Man U enjoyed the VAR-free years at Old Trafford, and it wasn't until VAR was introduced that a penalty was given to the away team.
1.) 08 Feb 2025 22:06:49
5 man u players offside deep throat, and not by a knee or an elbow, all quite clear to everyone but the linesman and ref. Makes you think dosnt it?
08 Nov 2024 17:13:15
I see that Chris Wood is Premier League player of the month for October. I know it's not on Fosun but how many times did we try to buy him? What is on Fosun is sacking Nuno, our greatest coach of the modern era. Nuno is surely to be credited with the form of Chris Wood.
1.) 08 Nov 2024 18:05:00
I have to be honest here Deep I've never rated Woods. But there's no denying what you say and I think your bang on with him and the 'Nuno affect' because it's excatly what he did with Raul. When you look at Jimenez goal numbers before coming to us they were pretty poor. What Nuno seems to do VERY well is build an attack around a target man and some how get the absolute best return out of them! Oh what I'd give to have Nuno here now! ?
2.) 08 Nov 2024 18:34:16
Can someone enlighten me, what has happened to Andre assuming he's not injured
3.) 08 Nov 2024 20:03:38
News now says Hwang is on 70k a week! No wonder we are short of finance, what a waste. They say he is back on the training ground, oh dear!
4.) 08 Nov 2024 20:58:59
There are more questions and no answers Ray, hwang expected on the bench tomorrow at the expense of who? R.Gomez, Forbes, both of whom I'd prefer to see.
5.) 09 Nov 2024 14:37:01
Why would we be at all interested in Rob Edwards, boro have just thrashed them 5-1. Hope we can break our duck today, going for 3-0, do it for my dear brother who passed away on Thursday after a 11 year battle against the dreaded C. RIP and bring us luck today
6.) 09 Nov 2024 17:53:14
Condolences willowwolf
7.) 09 Nov 2024 21:12:16
Sorry to hear that Willow please accept my condolences.
8.) 09 Nov 2024 21:27:11
Sorry for your loss Willowwolf, and he has indeed given us the luck we needed.
07 Apr 2025 19:12:56
Luxury, pure luxury, LongmyndWolf.
22 Mar 2025 16:58:48
Jota is playing at least 10 video games a night, Ed? Unbelievable! He should be giving his all to football. No wonder he's slipping from past career highs.
{Ed001's Note - he has his own eSports team as well, which he often jets around to support, even midseason.}
22 Mar 2025 13:51:25
Jota doesn't look very robust to me. He's never filled out physically like many top players do. Maybe that's the problem.
{Ed001's Note - it is all his hours playing videogames every night that is his problem. He is one of the highest ranked FIFA (EAFC now) players in the world and he maintains that high ranking by playing at least 10 games a night. Not healthy for a professional athlete.}
17 Mar 2025 15:46:23
Jota might be of interest to a top six PL team, unless Europe or Saudi. No way is he worth the £55mil quoted if Cunha's release clause is just £62mil.
16 Mar 2025 09:15:30
Tammy Abraham? We have as much chance of signing Tammy Wynette.
25 Apr 2025 13:37:56
He was always happy to stab them in the back, Ed001? He wasn't above stabbing them in the front either! Let's howl him off the pitch tomorrow.
{Ed001's Note - very true.}
25 Apr 2025 10:52:22
As much as we seem to dislike Vardy, who amongst us would rather have signed him from non-league when Mad Mick wanted to, for just £1mil? Jez Moxey apparently vetoed that signing! Vardy went on to turn down a move to Arsenal for mega money. Massive mistake by Wolves not to sign him.
24 Apr 2025 19:05:17
I'm a great believer in always playing the strongest team, normally. But this is not a normal situation. Cunha has been publicly courted by Man U and wants to jump into bed with them. What if we play him and he gets a bad injury, like out for a whole season? That's the £62mil deal in jeopardy! No Cunha next season and no money!
Rest him and wrap him in cotton wool until he is Man U's property and we have our money.
24 Apr 2025 13:12:48
Does Jeff want 'success'? Depends on your version of success. Man City are facing possibly very serious penalties. Is that success? I'm sure Daniel Levy at Spurs wants success, but it doesn't look like success to me, for all they have spent. Man U - don't get me started, what a joke! Is that success? Chelsea nearly as bad as United. I don't think Jeff fancies these versions of success. He probably has the Brighton or Brentford models in mind in my view, or even Forest.
22 Apr 2025 16:13:14
It's musical chairs sometimes, Bully. Clubs are often waiting for other clubs to cough up. You may be right about Rashford, it's not a given that he will move to Villa. All that has been proven is that he was probably sulking at Man U and not trying as hard as he should. Would Villa take a chance on him for next season, at his crazy wages? Is his resurgence temporary or permanent? I wonder. And Ed001, I wouldn't put it past Cunha's agent to reveal the payment plan, as it might flush out clubs prepared to offer higher wages, and we just get the same release fee.