Welcome, Guest.
Please login or register.
Fishy Forum Fishy Boards Archive › Operation survival starts here.
Users Browsing Forum
AdSense, Googlebot and 404 Guests

Operation survival starts here.

  This thread currently has 5,983 views. Print
5 Pages Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next All Recommend Thread
rancido
March 5, 2018, 11:32am

Vodka Drinker
Posts: 7,454
Posts Per Day: 1.25
Reputation: 80.3%
Rep Score: +41 / -10
Approval: +6,448
Gold Stars: 92
Quoted from fleabag1970
What is the point ? We will be relegated next season if not the season after . JF has proved that he can't get success in the FL with his budget constraints so what makes anyone think it will change ? . As a supporter you have to accept that under JF at best we will be a mid table lg2 team .



Maybe you can explain what these budget constraints are or in fact what you know of the playing budget? JF said he set a " competitive budget" for the squad and the amount of signings made last summer seem to endorse this.


The Future is Black & White.
"The commonest thing on this planet is not water , as some people believe, but stupidity ". Frank Zappa
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 30 - 40
lew chaterleys lover
March 5, 2018, 11:41am
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 4,943
Posts Per Day: 1.07
Reputation: 75.9%
Rep Score: +30 / -10
Approval: +10,547
Gold Stars: 231
Quoted from rancido



Maybe you can explain what these budget constraints are or in fact what you know of the playing budget? JF said he set a " competitive budget" for the squad and the amount of signings made last summer seem to endorse this.


None of us know the inner workings do we? However, we can make a perfectly reasonably assumption that Fentys "competitive" budgets are not enough for modern football.

We have had "competitive" budgets for 15 years and we have risen to the dizzy heights of 5th from the bottom of the lowest division in league football, and even that is an improvement on what we have to endure.

He likes a bargain does our John, and shopping in the bargain basement for players has got us into this position.

If as some suggest location is a problem, or the facilities are not up to modern standards because he hasn't invested enough in the infrastructure then you are going to need more than a "competitive" budget to attract the quality players we need whilst bidding against other clubs.

If the board aren't going to invest in the club properly then they are going to get exactly the same result, namely relegation fodder.
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 31 - 40
rancido
March 5, 2018, 12:06pm

Vodka Drinker
Posts: 7,454
Posts Per Day: 1.25
Reputation: 80.3%
Rep Score: +41 / -10
Approval: +6,448
Gold Stars: 92


None of us know the inner workings do we? However, we can make a perfectly reasonably assumption that Fentys "competitive" budgets are not enough for modern football.

We have had "competitive" budgets for 15 years and we have risen to the dizzy heights of 5th from the bottom of the lowest division in league football, and even that is an improvement on what we have to endure.

He likes a bargain does our John, and shopping in the bargain basement for players has got us into this position.
[b][/b]
If as some suggest location is a problem, or the facilities are not up to modern standards because he hasn't invested enough in the infrastructure then you are going to need more than a "competitive" budget to attract the quality players we need whilst bidding against other clubs.

If the board aren't going to invest in the club properly then they are going to get exactly the same result, namely relegation fodder.


Why is it a reasonable assumption that the budget is not enough for competitive football if you don't know the details. Both Bignot and Slade were allowed to have a large squad so there does not seem to be any hard evidence of a budget restraint.
As far as bargain basement players is concerned , it's the manager who identifies the players not JF. I don't think players like Dixon ( reputedly on £2,500 /week ) or Clarke would be classed as " cheap options ". In fact I would imagine that Clarke is on a considerable amount more than Pearson ( who he replaced ) so JF took what is arguably the more expensive option.


The Future is Black & White.
"The commonest thing on this planet is not water , as some people believe, but stupidity ". Frank Zappa
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 32 - 40
Ipswin
March 5, 2018, 12:17pm
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 6,592
Posts Per Day: 1.11
Reputation: 51.24%
Rep Score: +44 / -47
Approval: -3,552
Gold Stars: 89
Quoted from rancido



JF said he set a " competitive budget" for the squad and the amount of signings made last summer seem to endorse this.


What a shame the 'competitive' budget wasn't spent on competitive players



On bended knee is no way to be free - Peter R de Vries

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse.....=public_profile_post
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 33 - 40
rancido
March 5, 2018, 7:33pm

Vodka Drinker
Posts: 7,454
Posts Per Day: 1.25
Reputation: 80.3%
Rep Score: +41 / -10
Approval: +6,448
Gold Stars: 92
Quoted from Ipswin


What a shame the 'competitive' budget wasn't spent on competitive players



Exactly ! Enter " The Nearly Man " into the equation. Slade had the money but totally wasted it.
I'll blame JF for a lot of things wrong at the club but Slade's signings put us into the situation we are now.


The Future is Black & White.
"The commonest thing on this planet is not water , as some people believe, but stupidity ". Frank Zappa
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 34 - 40
Cloudy
March 5, 2018, 7:40pm
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,335
Posts Per Day: 1.15
Reputation: 71.17%
Rep Score: +17 / -8
Approval: +6,431
Quoted from rancido


Exactly ! Enter " The Nearly Man " into the equation. Slade had the money but totally wasted it.
I'll blame JF for a lot of things wrong at the club but Slade's signings put us into the situation we are now.


My take on this is that the board should work out the playing budget and then pass the numbers to the manager. You could go as far as giving a frame work I.e. A maximum weekly wage or even £1200 a week for 2 keepers, 7 defenders at a total £5,500 or whatever.

The board should have no involvement in selecting players, that is why they employ a manager, and to interfere would be crazy and undermining for the football man
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 35 - 40
jamesgtfc
March 5, 2018, 11:02pm
Vodka Drinker
Posts: 5,996
Posts Per Day: 1.16
Reputation: 79.95%
Rep Score: +20 / -5
Approval: +12,813
Gold Stars: 187
Quoted from Cloudy


My take on this is that the board should work out the playing budget and then pass the numbers to the manager. You could go as far as giving a frame work I.e. A maximum weekly wage or even £1200 a week for 2 keepers, 7 defenders at a total £5,500 or whatever.

The board should have no involvement in selecting players, that is why they employ a manager, and to interfere would be crazy and undermining for the football man


I think a manager and the board should share values somewhat as this certainly goes a long way. Managers should be left to build their squad as ultimately their job depends on the success of the squad but I think there should be some loose objectives such as:

Budget of £1.4m
Coaching team of 4-6 people
Playing squad of 20-22 permanent signings
Maximum wage of £1,200 p/w
Staff bonuses for:
Reaching FA Cup 3rd Round and each subsequent round
Reaching League Cup 2nd Round and each subsequent round
Final league position

The bonuses should be set in stone before the season begins.

If the manager goes to a squad of 24 I am not saying he has failed as there may be a valid reason such as injuries or a player becoming available that is too good to turn down but allowing it to get to 36 is criminal.  Bonuses are there as a carrot to motivate all staff and should drive the club forward. The figures I've chosen are random but I certainly think a first team squad of 22 is what we should aim for.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 36 - 40
KingstonMariner
March 6, 2018, 12:41am
Meths Drinker
Posts: 22,096
Posts Per Day: 6.12
Reputation: 79.33%
Rep Score: +42 / -11
Approval: +23,440
Gold Stars: 218
Tend to agree with James. Don't think managers should be given free rein even if they stick to the budget. Yes, they know best and it's their neck on the block, but if given a free rein they could also tie the cub into some longer term commitments that might not be wise. Managers seem so, let's say, idiosyncratic, on what they think are the right players. Two successive managers could have almost opposite views on players. And the culture seems to be less about getting the best out of your staff as it is in most walks of life, than bringing in your own people. It all seems to be too amateurish to leave them to their own devices.

There's also something to be said for inculcating a club culture and set of values that you want upheld. And most matters (probably because of the precariousness of their situation) are too short-termist to build that up without a framework being in place.

So no, I wouldn't let the chairman pick the players, but nor would I give the manager a free rein.


Through the door there came familiar laughter,
I saw your face and heard you call my name.
Oh my friend we're older but no wiser,
For in our hearts the dreams are still the same.
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 37 - 40
Cloudy
March 6, 2018, 6:46am
Whiskey Drinker
Posts: 3,335
Posts Per Day: 1.15
Reputation: 71.17%
Rep Score: +17 / -8
Approval: +6,431
Yes I totally agree about the structure of how the budget is spent is important together with the length of the commitment but the main point I was trying to make was that no board, imo, should decide on individual players. The manager should be able to decide himself on who he wants provided it fits into the budget.

maybe I am too long in the tooth to support the manager being 'just' a coach whilst the board or Director of Football (whatever that means) buys and sells the players
Logged
Private Message
Reply: 38 - 40
rancido
March 6, 2018, 10:31am

Vodka Drinker
Posts: 7,454
Posts Per Day: 1.25
Reputation: 80.3%
Rep Score: +41 / -10
Approval: +6,448
Gold Stars: 92
[quote=1655]

I think a manager and the board should share values somewhat as this certainly goes a long way. Managers should be left to build their squad as ultimately their job depends on the success of the squad but I think there should be some loose objectives such as:

Budget of £1.4m
Coaching team of 4-6 people
Playing squad of 20-22 permanent signings
Maximum wage of £1,200 p/w
Staff bonuses for:
Reaching FA Cup 3rd Round and each subsequent round
Reaching League Cup 2nd Round and each subsequent round
Final league position

The bonuses should be set in stone before the season begins.

If the manager goes to a squad of 24 I am not saying he has failed as there may be a valid reason such as injuries or a player becoming available that is too good to turn down but allowing it to get to 36 is criminal.  Bonuses are there as a carrot to motivate all staff and should drive the club forward. The figures I've chosen are random but I certainly think a first team squad of 22 is what we should aim for.[/quote


Seeing as that is about the average wage for a League 2 player then I think you would find it impossible to attract any quality players to the club.


The Future is Black & White.
"The commonest thing on this planet is not water , as some people believe, but stupidity ". Frank Zappa
Logged Offline
Private Message
Reply: 39 - 40
5 Pages Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next All Recommend Thread
Print

Fishy Forum Fishy Boards Archive › Operation survival starts here.

Back to top of page

This is not an official forum of Grimsby Town Football Club, the opinions expressed are those of the individual authors. If you see an offensive post then click "Report" on the relevant post. Posts will be deleted at the discretion of the moderators whose decision is final. Posts should abide by the Forum Rules. IP addresses of contributors together with dates and times of access are stored. The opinions and viewpoints expressed by contributors to The Fishy are their own and not necessarily those of The Fishy. The Fishy makes no claims that information dispersed through this forum is accurate or reliable. Also The Fishy cannot be held liable for any statements made by contributors of The Fishy.