I think in essence, I (and some others) think the transfers seem odd and are at odds with the stated aims at times.
I.e. Livermore, at the time was hailed as a coup - 'sold [after 2 weeks] to make way for 2 better players'. Mark (and others) "great, improving squad". Hulse sold - no reason given. Reality, we are skint? Mark - "business etc. Funds for players" It's not improving squad in my eyes. It looks like a scattergun approach to signings - something we were told we had to do 2 seasons ago 'to survive'. Take Hulse, when we bought him we were no longer a 'selling club'. We pay £1.1m or so and outbid Sheff Utd. Not 18 months later, we're selling to the same club for something like £0-750k more. That doesn't make sense, at any level to me. The strikers we've bought since buying Hulse aren't, IMO, any better. It seems to me like some people say whatever we do, we do because we have to, or at least, the decisions make sense. They seem to be defended just because we have made that decision. I and others don't and no doubt people think the opposite! For the record, I think KB will be out of a job at Xmas. Hopefully not, as that will mean we're doing well. I just can't see a backline of Gregan/Butler doing well, despite what some people keep chanting. And yes, if you say something often enough, it may come true and this doesn't make you a soothsayer but they're not getting any better. I thought we should have been in the play offs in season 1, automatic last season. For the record. Despite being skint, we're still probably one if not the top puller in this division. _______________________________________________ the Leeds List is an unmoderated mailing list and the list administrators accept no liability for the personal views and opinions of contributors. Leedslist mailing list [email protected] http://list.zetnet.co.uk/mailman/listinfo/leedslist oh alright then :-)
