01 Apr 2016 11:28:07
It has been mentioned elsewhere that Tim Sherwood has been in talks with Steve Morgan. Can only be one reason. Maybe Tim is just playing the field and wants the Derby job?
01 Apr 2016 11:56:11
It is April 1st )
01 Apr 2016 12:49:49
Paul, it was mentioned before 1st April. I know we all want changes at Wolves but Tim could be trying to force Derby's hand by having discussions elsewhere.
I just read on an accounting website that Tata Steel's UK assets are probably zero. That must rule them out as Wolves buyers.
01 Apr 2016 13:14:08
Id be up for givin Sherwood the job! I don't think he'd take it, but if Morgan is lookin for another coach/ manager that is good news! 👍TaTa won't buy Wolves.
01 Apr 2016 13:50:06
no one will buy wolves morgan his staying and that's no joke?
01 Apr 2016 14:32:01
I don't mind him stayin if he changes the manager and gives him financial backin. We could have far worse owners than Morgan? And Definitely better gaffers than JACKETT 👍.
01 Apr 2016 18:19:51
Morgan must be staying, everything has gone quiet. If, and it's just an if, he has talked with Tim Sherwood, then it can only be good. Any good manager/ coach will tell Morgan he must invest sufficiently in order to challenge next season. Nobody will take the job if there is no guarantee of funds.
I think KJ would improve significantly on this season's performance anyway, as he was very unlucky with injuries. But, a new manager/ coach would be an ambitious statement of intent by Morgan, a new leaf if you like. Time will tell.
01 Apr 2016 18:29:16
All due respect to Tim Sherwood, I'm sure he is a decent bloke. But absolutely no way, maybe in ten years when he has learned the job. Jackett has lost his way this season trying to make up for the loss of three key players. But he deserves another season with something like a fit squad.
01 Apr 2016 19:13:21
No he doesn't!
01 Apr 2016 19:28:50
Let's face it Sherwood turned down the Tesco's up the road probably due to lack of investment so I can't see him coming to us and spending even less and not even having a say on who he buys!
I think he's the type of man manager we need but I can't see him working as an understudy to Thelwell! So it's one or the other I think.
02 Apr 2016 07:59:40
What has Sherwood done to suggest he would do a better job than jacket right now? And as for Morgan being a good owner! The man is a coward! He wants to keep the club, without having to take any responsibility.
02 Apr 2016 08:29:44
Who's payin the wages and the upkeep of the club? Bills etc? Morgan! If he decided to walk away without a buyer in place then no more Wolverhampton Wanderers!
{Ed001's Note - that's not true, the club pays them and would continue to exist without him.}
02 Apr 2016 08:31:29
Sherwood certainly wouldn't be a puppet and mouth piece like the bloke we've got not! He sits down to pee!
02 Apr 2016 09:02:45
So ed without an owner in what capacity would Wolves exist and what league would we end up in? Crowds would dwindle, payments from the league would be cut, sponsors would be hard to come by! No Zyro no Party! No owner No Wolves!
{Ed001's Note - you clearly do not understand finances. There is little point getting into it, but it is not that simple.}
02 Apr 2016 09:14:20
Ed u need money to run a football club! If u didn't we could all do It?
{Ed001's Note - you need money to buy the shares and to borrow against to take short term loans out when required. Plenty of clubs prosper under fan ownership.}
02 Apr 2016 09:39:54
At what level are these clubs under fan ownership playin? That's my point! There's none in the Prem!
{Ed001's Note - because it is too expensive to buy shares.}
02 Apr 2016 09:52:54
Paul,
Morgan owns the club 100%. It is his current policy to run the club as a profit-making business. The club is paying its bills from cash flow, not from Morgan's hand-outs, and there are no hand-outs. So, the club could survive comfortably without Morgan. Of course, most fans want Morgan to put money into the club to sign players, but he won't.
02 Apr 2016 10:27:03
Cash flow from ticket sales and merchandise will dwindle wirhout buys as there will be no success on the pitch. Then where will the revenue come from?
02 Apr 2016 10:29:14
The Wolves are entirely separate business to Morgan's and as far as we are aware is financially stable on its own. If there were any problems the players would be sold to keep the club going before he put money back in. We have no debts and can survive on gate receipts, sponsorship etc. the loans needed to buy players are now not being guaranteed by Morgan that's the difference.
It's just that this year we are not adding to the revenue bought in hence the reason Afobee and Stearman sold and a number going out on loan.
02 Apr 2016 10:34:54
Wolves can keep going without an owner I know that but in what division will they end up? No quality players as wages won't be there to pay them, half empty ground minimal tv revenue not a good future without an owner?
{Ed001's Note - the owner does not put any money in, the wages are paid by the club. The club does not need owner input for wages or to keep running.}
02 Apr 2016 10:49:39
We're going round in circles ed! Without money u can't get quality players so no success on the pitch! No success on the pitch means less fans going so less revenue to run the club and pay players! Hence lower league football as that is the budget level u can compete at! Teams who achieve success have rich owners! The others are canon fodder!
{Ed001's Note - if you say so butnyou know nothing about running a business, clearly.}
02 Apr 2016 10:58:55
Without money in football u achieve nothing! Tell me that's wrong? U need a rich owner if you want success!
{Ed001's Note - if you say so. Pointless having a discussion about this with someone who does not understand how a club finances itself even. Wasting everyone's time with this.}
02 Apr 2016 12:00:36
Paul, you say Sherwood wouldn't be a puppet, that's exactly what he was at villa. He said he had the final say on players coming in and took the flack, now everyone knows he didn't sign half the players. This is what is happening at wolves, do you really think jacket signed mason? Byrne? And a number of others. The structure at wolves is all wrong at the moment if the manager or head coach can't sign the type of player HE wants, then it doesn't matter whos in charge.
02 Apr 2016 12:44:19
Paul we are run as a self-sufficient club so if Morgan didn't put money in we could run as a business which we are doing now. Take a look at the only other club run like this down the road and they are 11th in prem. They slag their chairman off but we are probably the only 2 clubs I can think of that run at a profit. Profit is then put back into the club for new players etc so in that respect yes Morgan is screwing us over at the moment but having said that he and Moxey are the ones that have got us running at a profit in the first place. Not defending these two but we could be in a lot worse position than we are.
{Ed001's Note - Arsenal run at a profit, as do Southampton.}
02 Apr 2016 13:33:54
Southampton sold a lot of their assets Clyne llanaWalcott chamberlain luke shaw plus they've got a billionaire owner! Arsenal have two billionaire owners! Without rich owners your nothin in football but as is bein shown on here people's ambition levels for our team differ! In life in general money talks bull---- walks!
{Ed001's Note - what has the owner's wealth got to do with a club being run for a profit? You really are not getting this at all.}
02 Apr 2016 13:43:27
If u think football teams can achieve Without a rich owner u r mistaken! Without money in football your just makin the numbers up! In Wolverhampton now so signin off, thanks for the debate ed but we will have to agree to disagree!
{Ed001's Note - again you are missing the point, the clubs make their own money, they do not need the owner to provide it.}
02 Apr 2016 14:32:51
But my point is without a rich owner u can only get so far?
{Ed001's Note - why? If the club makes a profit you can build on what you have. Barca, Real Madrid and Bayern do not have rich owners as such, they do ok.}
02 Apr 2016 14:42:46
Isn't Perez who's a billionaire in charge at Real Madrid?
{Ed001's Note - he is the president not the owner.}
02 Apr 2016 15:00:39
Still a money man! Without Morgan who's the money man?
{Ed001's Note - he is not the money man, he does not input money to buy players etc. The club funds itself.}
02 Apr 2016 15:44:20
When u borrow off the bank it helps if your guarantor is a billionaire.
{Ed001's Note - this is pointless}
02 Apr 2016 16:00:28
Agree)
02 Apr 2016 21:11:00
If we made it to the prem (through the playoffs) without spending any money next season. Why would we need to borrow from anywhere when you get 100 million from sky sports? Why would having a millionaire owner make any difference?
02 Apr 2016 22:19:50
Jtwolf did u go today? Have u been to many games this season? Play offs? With JACKETT in charge! 😂😂😂.