- This topic has 166 replies, 31 voices, and was last updated 3 months, 2 weeks ago by
.
-
1 user thanked author for this post.
And on the flip side of that I’ll avoid where ever it is your living wondergoals with a 7 day working week!
Agree Apollo, think it’s been offered so we can announce his departure as ‘rejected terms’ as opposed to him just been ‘released’. If the Mrs B post is accurate then it wasn’t a serious offer.
Quite a calculated move and not a good look for the club. Should have just released him and owned up to that decision.1 user thanked author for this post.
BTW, 414 – if Butterfield is 34 in June, he is then entering his 35th year.
Anyone know how many times JB failed to complete a match and was subbed around 70 minutes?
It’s one heck of a pointer.1 user thanked author for this post.
Says 65% pay cut but what is 100% ?
Got to tell all the figures if you are accusing the club. Substantial cuts were warned before season end.
No alternative for me need to get the debt as near zero as possible.4 users thanked author for this post.
Butterfield fitness levels increased as the season went on played 90mins in 10 out of the last 13 matches.
1 user thanked author for this post.
I remember reading something by the owner/chairman of Bishops Stortford when they were unhappy about being placed in National League North.
He said a big problem was clubs actually in the north could sign decent part time footballers for about £500 a week whereas clubs in the south had to pay about £800 a week for the same quality.
If that is anything close to being correct then offering arguably the best footballer in the league last season less than £500 a week as a full timer would be insulting if true.
I agree with Lesgeo that footballers salaries are best kept confidential but if this is Butlers way of saying he doesn’t want Butterfield in his team then I hope he learns to be more honest in the future.
… if this is Butlers way of saying he doesn’t want Butterfield in his team then I hope he learns to be more honest in the future.
More likely that Butterfield had been on utterly ridiculous ‘Disney money’ for this league last season and was then offered a wage commensurate with Division 6 football, and reasonable on the club’s part.
Perhaps Butler and the Club believed Butterfield would ‘see sense’ and accept, realising that the previous high wage was an unrealistic ‘one off’.
My guess (based on the ‘fraction more than minimum wage’ comment from his wife on social media) is he has been offered about 30k and had previously been on about 75.
1 user thanked author for this post.
Butler clearly hinted he wants a more solid and fit team. Last season we were over run by fitter more robust part time players and how many times did we come back from a goal down ?
We need a more robust team with more energy and stamina. Clearly Butterfield wasn’t the top of Butler’s list and was offered what he thought he should have been offered, he’s decided not to take it so we move on.
Butterfield was way above this level, but when he started to markedly slow down in the second half of the season he used to get overpowered and overrun and Butler would have noticed it. We’ll need to sign a tidy ball player though to replace him.
Scales
Beestin “if he signs”
Shrimpton
ClunanAdd another to those possible four already here and we’ll be ok. Moving away from Butterfield it’s great news Barrows has signed on again. Clearly loves the club and always did say he was a better all around RB than Ogle. Barrows doesn’t have the acceleration of Ogle, but his delivery is better and is a better attacking option than Ogle. Barrows is a better passer of the ball as well.
2 users thanked author for this post.
It’s not summer until Wonder Goals brings out his list of players scouted from the latest version of Football Manager.
1 user thanked author for this post.
In the meantime many Iron fans are optimistic about a productive summer ahead…
I reckon the reason Butterfield was less effective in the second half of the season was that opposition managers had sussed him out. Or more likely Dean’s reliance on him as the kingpin of the team.
Disappointing we couldn’t keep hold of him but if this is an indication that Butler’s managerial style is not going to be the same as Dean’s then it could be a positive.
I think we all knew that we really needed to bounce straight back at the first attempt. We didn’t, and unfortunately this is what happens when you don’t!
2 users thanked author for this post.
if that’s all we can afford then better we go part time.
That’s not all we could afford. Butler clearly wants to go in another direction and he was offered what they believed he was worth. 2nd half of the season at times he was a luxury player and as soon as teams stuck close to him and got at him, he was pretty ineffective.
Butterfield would be a year older, a year slower and all teams would do is just do the same again. If Butterfield was still here naturally the players on the pitch would mostly go through him and it would take away from the other players. #
Butler maybe doesn’t want us to be as heavily reliant on one single player and is going towards a more collective effort for next season. When you actually take a step back and think about the clubs decision on Butterfield, it’s completely understandable.
1 user thanked author for this post.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.