Neil Lennon..*ALL CHAT HERE*

McGeady didn't leave til 13th August - most of our players had been bought by then.

We spent that summer:

Juarez - Reported between 2-3mil
Hooper - 2.4mil
Murphy - 1mil
Stokes - 1mil
Izzy - 500k
Kayal - 1.5mil
Mulgrew - Free
Ledley - Free
Forster - Loan
Maj - Free
Cha - Free

Expenditure - prior to McGeady's sale = 8.4-9.4mil

Now, assuming Lenny was given an original buget of say around 8mil (as had been the norm for Strachan/Mowbray in previous seasons) then that leaves an overspend prior to McGeady's sale of around 500k-1.5mil. McGeady was sold for 9.5mil plus add-ons. Lawwell then promised that the sale of McGeady would be reinvested back in the side. So assuming Lenny's budget was the norm then that leaves around 8mil of McGeady money available. Even if you include the 2 windows after that (Jan 11 - spent 300k) (Summer 11 - spent 3.1mil) then there is still 4mil left from the sale of McGeady. Funnily enough our debt went down for around about the same margin. Therefore I'd suggest it wasn't reinvested in the side at all.

 

Agree! Lennon sometimes opens his mouth and says the first thing on his mind without thinking of the repercussions.

 

You have just contradicted yourself you said he had nowt to spend that summer then you say he had an £8m budget

 

Was it enough investment to win us the title? Could more money have been invested to give us the chance we needed? Clearly there could have been. Ok I meant his net expenditure was nowt, in fact the club made money.

 

In my opinion it was enough investment to win the league. We didnt lose the league coz we were a man short or anything it was stupid slip up by the players. I really believe that come january we will get a couple of quality players maybe on loan but i think mr desmond knows he has to put his hand in his pocket.

 

Our defence had the gran total of 500k spent on it when everyone, including Lennon, knew it wasn't good enough. Extra money may have mean Lenny could further strengthen said position. It would certainly have made all the difference - we were close to winning the title - we were one man short from being winners. I really don't expect us to spend much this window.

 

You always try and make the best out of Lennon don't you.

What he came out and said is disgraceful, shows he's still got the mind of a NED. It clearly shows his inexperience, when has slating your players publicly ever worked? He needs the boot asap, after that interview i am starting to not like the man. He needs to leave before others feel the same and retain his legend status as a player!

 

Surely though if lenny knew he had a budget of say £8m its up to him to decide how much to spend on each area of the team.

 

True and he did spend it on each area but 8million is absolutely nowhere near enough to rebuild a side to challenge the huns who were streets ahead of us in terms of quality.

 

And that's why he shouldn't be manager.

 

With all the talk about lenny having lost the dressing room and the clear problems at parkhead just now would people on here be happy for lenny to be given a decent amount of money to spend in january or do you think the problems are to big for him to fix.

 

I don't think he should be our manager for Sunday's game let alone be given backing in January but if we get to January and have at least closed the gap to 9 points or less then the chequebook needs opened - something I don't think will happen personally.

 

To be honest, he needs to go.

Anytime he's had a big match up against the huns or in europe he's always turned to WGS or MON for advice on what to do. WGS landed him in it once on tv by saying Lennon called him to ask what advice he could give on the huns game when we won 2-0 with a Samaras double and WGS told him shove sammy up their himself.


Any manager who needs to turn to others for advice on big games is a disgrace.

He annoys me week in week out, when were losing it takes him a while to stand up take notice and motivate the team, and those late subs when it's too late to make an impact annoy the * outa me.

 

everybody knew our defence was shaky, what do rangers do, spend £3000,000 on a centre half, what do we do, get a free and wait 6 months. lennon should have spent more of his 8 million on the defence.

also, if he spent 8 million on players, he probably spent a 20 million budget. These players dont get paid peanuts. Some of you need to remember the salaries when you go on about how much Lennon has spent.

 

Transfer budgets and salary budgets are a seperate entity.

 

Its ludacris to be honest, they were skint and spent £4mill on Jelavic and now look at him hes a quality striker and scoring for fun. We spent £2mill on Hooper and he's lazy and not interested at the moment.

The board need to spend money and need a manager who will spend it wise.

 

£8 million is actually a generous estimation, I think we actually spent less than that, Lennon is on record saying the most we spent on a single player was £1.6 million and that was on Hooper. The media blew the Juarez transfer in particular out of all proportion as he was signed for nowhere near the reported fee of around 3-4 million.

 

nonsense - we have a finite amount of cash - if Lennon gets 10 free players and pays them 1.5 million each are you stating that his transfer pot will not be impacted, nonsense.

Lenny would rather have 30 players on 5k to 15k than 10 players on 30 to 40k

 

Lennon is given an annual transfer budget and given an annual wage budget - it is seperate.

 

so when our board is chasing the annual january marquee free loan signing on 3 million per year, it comes out the salary budget, there is 3 million sitting there. No accountancy is required to move the 3 million from one pot to the other.

nonsense.