Nazariy Rusyn


Aye a 15 in 120 games striker would gone down a treat on here
It's not just pure goal output though is it? He's a strong, physical forward who would make space for our other attacking players. Plus, a new club, on a permanent he might start scoring more. He'll be a cracking signing for them, for that price, bookmark it.
 
It's not just pure goal output though is it? He's a strong, physical forward who would make space for our other attacking players. Plus, a new club, on a permanent he might start scoring more. He'll be a cracking signing for them, for that price, bookmark it.
He’d score a load for us. Looked good every time I’ve seen him play. We will just hope to unearth a gem that:
A) Gets injured picking up the pen to sign a contract.
B) Doesn’t play because they are not ready.
C) Is 5 ft 5
D) Isn’t a striker but will waste 15 games playing them up top on their own.
.
.
.
And then wonder why we end up back in league 1.
 
They will be well aware of what their expenditure is compared to the FFP restrictions. There are many clubs now who have been docked points and relegated due to FFP rules such as Reading and Derby. To say that suggesting that FFP doesn't guide spending plans is a false narrative is, itself, false. I am now expert but people are saying that FFP demands 3 year plans or that it is judged over a three year period. Sunderland, like, no doubt, Ipswich will have projections of revenue for the next three years and a three year plan for transfer and wage spending.
It does not take a financial expert to see we are nowhere near the limit of FFP (even discounting the allowed ownership investment which we do not do). It is also a bit disingenious in saying that Chris says he is assuming things (which he did) as it implies it could be that we are close to the limit - he actually says in his workings we could afford to spend another 16 mill each season for the next 3 years before FFP becomes an issue.
 
It does not take a financial expert to see we are nowhere near the limit of FFP (even discounting the allowed ownership investment which we do not do). It is also a bit disingenious in saying that Chris says he is assuming things (which he did) as it implies it could be that we are close to the limit - he actually says in his workings we could afford to spend another 16 mill each season for the next 3 years before FFP becomes an issue.
He admits he is making assumptions which may be incorrect. It is therefore far more disingenuous to say us a figure like £16M each season when he is openly saying his assumptions may be incorrect. He is effectively saying it may be £16M or it may well be an entirely different figure. However, the audience he is speculating for will take £16M as the headline. As I said Grumpy Old Man, who is an accountant and has looked at our accounts in detail, came up with a far more conservative appreciation of where we are regarding FFP.
 
Not in the slightest.

If he came in we’d be told he wasn’t ready for the intensity of the championship. He’d spend a few months on the bench getting the odd cameo here and there like the others we’ve unearthed as unpolished gems from foreign fields.

My thoughts exactly.

Happy to give him a chance and wish him well if he does sign but it’s clear he would need time to adapt as you say and that’s not what we need.

We are desperate for someone to come in and hit the ground running!
 

Back
Top