When we were fairly successful in the league,

We had a group of players that stayed together for a few years,

In the summer we signed 2 or 3 players to improve the squad,

Now it seems we have to sign 10 or 11 players every season,

Then because the manager has not got the right players in, we need to sign 3 or 4 more players on loan,

The last 2 seasons we have made the play offs so you would have thought,

2 or 3 more good signings will see us over the line,

BUT

What happens, 10 in 10 out and more loan signings,

We have to get a settled squad before we can get out of this league imo.

Rant over !

Quoted from grimsby pete

When we were fairly successful in the league,

We had a group of players that stayed together for a few years,

In the summer we signed 2 or 3 players to improve the squad,

Now it seems we have to sign 10 or 11 players every season,

Then because the manager has not got the right players in, we need to sign 3 or 4 more players on loan,

The last 2 seasons we have made the play offs so you would have thought,

2 or 3 more good signings will see us over the line,

BUT

What happens, 10 in 10 out and more loan signings,

We have to get a settled squad before we can get out of this league imo.

Rant over !

Pete, have you lost your prescription for John's happy pills? You're getting to sound as grumpy and cynical as us 'professional moaners'!

I share your view on this but also managers kept their jobs longer so had more time to build and evolve a squad.

Actually this season is one of the best for a while in terms of continuity.  Barring injuries as form, we could well field a side that had McKeown, Thomas, Bignot, Pearson, Disley, Neilson, LJL and Hannah.  

This is a change in football in general though, not just GTFC.

Quoted from LondonMariner43

I share your view on this but also managers kept their jobs longer so had more time to build and evolve a squad.

Actually this season is one of the best for a while in terms of continuity.  Barring injuries as form, we could well field a side that had McKeown, Thomas, Bignot, Pearson, Disley, Neilson, LJL and Hannah.  

Well there's three in that list who we could have happily managed without!

Quoted from Abdul19

This is a change in football in general though, not just GTFC.

You could argue it's a change in employment right across the board for many..."flexible working" etc. means that lots have to take what they can wherever they can so I guess it's not just footballers who have to live for the day :-/

That's a good point foow.

Gone are the days of 3 and 4 year contracts at this level.

Quoted from jimgtfc

Gone are the days of 3 and 4 year contracts at this level.

Exactly, it's the way of the world, especially at our level is shorter contracts. Not sure if Bosman has had an effect too........

As someone else said, football has changed.

Quoted from grimsby pete

When we were fairly successful in the league,

We had a group of players that stayed together for a few years,

In the summer we signed 2 or 3 players to improve the squad,

Now it seems we have to sign 10 or 11 players every season,

Then because the manager has not got the right players in, we need to sign 3 or 4 more players on loan,

The last 2 seasons we have made the play offs so you would have thought,

2 or 3 more good signings will see us over the line,

BUT

What happens, 10 in 10 out and more loan signings,

We have to get a settled squad before we can get out of this league imo.

Rant over !

Not like you at all Pete,, but every word is so true

Quoted from jimgtfc

Gone are the days of 3 and 4 year contracts at this level.

Out in the real world , no hours contracts have become more common,

Bloody Tories !!!!!!!!

Yep, it's the Bosman thing. Most players tend to sign one year contracts these days (sometimes with a 'rolling' option), because they can just walk away at the end of it regardless. Very few players are considered vital enough to be tied down on longer contracts, unless they are cheaper youngsters.

I think that the real top international players are the only ones who get tied down into long contracts so the clubs can get some value for the vast transfer fees paid.

A bit of a shambles all around really. I think the idea that a settled team can improve year on year is probably true but it's a bit of a crap shoot at this level with so many players moving on each season. No continuity at all.

On the plus side, at least we're not giving out 3 year contracts to the likes of Hegarty anymore!

Bosman changed everything. That and ITV Digitial were two massive kicks in the nuts to GTFC. Bosman happened in 1995 when we were more or less at our peak, but affected all small selling clubs. ITV Digital then came in 2002 which began the slow slide, but we were the worst hit. Only Hitler invading Poland when our greatest ever side was broken up ranks alongside these catalysmic events.

Quoted from GrimRob

Bosman changed everything. That and ITV Digitial were two massive kicks in the nuts to GTFC. Bosman happened in 1995 when we were more or less at our peak, but affected all small selling clubs. ITV Digital then came in 2002 which began the slow slide, but we were the worst hit. Only Hitler invading Poland when our greatest ever side was broken up ranks alongside these catalysmic events.

I'm not denying that ITV digital had an effect but it's getting to the time where we have to accept that poor management has had a more enduring effect on our current situation.

Quoted from MuddyWaters

I'm not denying that ITV digital had an effect but it's getting to the time where we have to accept that poor management has had a more enduring effect on our current situation.

I'm not suggesting it is causing us a problem any more, merely that it's impossible to go back to the days where players stayed at a club for many years as the norm, and you flogged one of the better ones every couple of years to balance the books. I still remember the day the Bosman ruling happened, I knew instantly it would massively change the whole game more or less overnight. I must admit I thought many clubs would go under, that hasn't happened, well it sort of has because most clubs have been in administration at least once.

Quoted from grimsby pete

Out in the real world , no hours contracts have become more common,

Bloody Tories !!!!!!!!

You mean zero hour contracts that became prevalent under the labour government? The same government that sat on their hands for 13 years and did intercourse all about it?  

Quoted from 2578

You mean zero hour contracts that became prevalent under the labour government? The same government that sat on their hands for 13 years and did intercourse all about it?  

Stand corrected but they have become more and more common over the last few years.

No need to apologise, Pete.

'Zero hour contracts' certainly came in during the last Labour government (the laws were passed back in 1998), but it wasn't too much of an issue when the economy was doing well, before the financial crash of 2008. Back then, wages were doing OK and growing with the economy so there was plenty of demand for labour (with a small 'L'), and these contracts were acceptable.

Unfortunately, after the crash, this laxity in the employment laws has meant that big companies are shafting many workers and the number of people on these zero-hour contracts has more than trebled, (as far as the ONS is aware). 'New' Labour were to blame for bringing in this neo-liberal bullshit which benefits nobody but businesses and the Tories are, of course, very happy to continue with it.

All in all, a pretty fecking awful idea. No surprise that the productivity of our workers is so awful with such crappy employment conditions applying a million and a half workers (that we know of).

Are we talking about the old 1 sub days and players were more versatile. Liverpool winning the league using only 14 players and everybody knew that the number 3 was generally the left back and the 14 shirt was only used in Europe and Internationals. Happy days  :)

Quoted from MuddyWaters

I'm not denying that ITV digital had an effect but it's getting to the time where we have to accept that poor management has had a more enduring effect on our current situation.

And who is the ever present who signed these managers ?

Anybody thought what may have happened if we had gone into administration like so many clubs did,would we be in this position now.

Quoted from friskneymariner

Anybody thought what may have happened if we had gone into administration like so many clubs did,would we be in this position now.

We could be worse off. Look at some of our fellow-relegated clubs: Rushden, Stockport, Darlington.

We might feel sorry for ourselves but there are plenty worse off than us.

Quoted from Maringer

Yep, it's the Bosman thing. Most players tend to sign one year contracts these days (sometimes with a 'rolling' option), because they can just walk away at the end of it regardless. Very few players are considered vital enough to be tied down on longer contracts, unless they are cheaper youngsters.

I think that the real top international players are the only ones who get tied down into long contracts so the clubs can get some value for the vast transfer fees paid.

A bit of a shambles all around really. I think the idea that a settled team can improve year on year is probably true but it's a bit of a crap shoot at this level with so many players moving on each season. No continuity at all.

Like you think the same eg continuity is key but amongst players there is probably very little loyalty now. Players will do whats best for them and their families and if good enough will go where the money is.Like others have said on here though  the only loyalty comes from fans who are the heartbeat of the club and stick with the club through thick and thin

The point about our situation is that committing the club to a longer contract for a player that, although capable of getting us promoted, might not be good enough in League 2 could prove costly. We are in the situation that promotion is an absolute must in the very short term. If we were in League 2 then we good consolidate our position with players of that level for 2 or 3 seasons therefore longer contracts would make more sense.

Unless mentioned, read buckleys book. Says exactly the same about coming back (mk III) about how times changed in football and how a settled squad couldn't be developed. Great read in my opinion. Also very good points about the way 1 year contracts hamper us is by players not living in the local area so meant a lot of players commuting huge distances.

If you haven't read them, I suggest you get macca's, buckleys and chris Hargreaves' books.

Quoted from Abdul19

On the plus side, at least we're not giving out 3 year contracts to the likes of Hegarty anymore!

I'd be happy with someone of Hegarty's quality over recent years. He had a good rate of assists. And always tried in a team of often half-arses players.

Quoted from Abdul19

On the plus side, at least we're not giving out 3 year contracts to the likes of Hegarty anymore!

When you back at the times we did give out 3 year contracts it does not seem to work,

Newell gave Jones 3 years,

Woods gave one to the wrong player  ;D

S + H gave Hearn a 3 year contract but only fit for one of them

As long as all these one year deals have an option of a second year they are probably the right way to go,

As long as they offer the ones we want to keep another contract before the old one runs out.

Quoted from KingstonMariner

I'd be happy with someone of Hegarty's quality over recent years. He had a good rate of assists. And always tried in a team of often half-arses players.

Yeah that's true, but I don't think not trying is something that could be said about the recent sides. I suppose he maybe had marginally more quality than Joe Colbeck.

Quoted from GrimRob

We could be worse off. Look at some of our fellow-relegated clubs: Rushden, Stockport, Darlington.

We might feel sorry for ourselves but there are plenty worse off than us.

Well if the club as a whole has this attitude no wonder we are still down among the dead men.

And just look at those clubs with a plan, the brains, the will, the infrastructure, the desire and the ability to spend enough money in the areas that matter.

I watched Bournemouth play Watford on the box today. Remember when fenty was carried shoulder high that day at Dean Court as we managed to avoid the drop to non league?

Bournemouth were fighting to avoid the drop as well, and as it happened we were both safe.

Now look at the fortunes of the 2 clubs since. We learned no lessons whatsoever and went into non league the very next season. Little Bournemouth obviously made all the right choices and have gone from strength to strength - some of the players they had playing for them today were quite big names and I am not sure how they have done it. Is it just money, or have they looked at the way the club is structured / run and have hit on a winning formula?

We on the other hand continue to stutter along - our only answer being "well it could be worse"

But it could/ should be so much better.  

Bournemouth have a wealthy Russian beeznessman as an owner. Not sure how much he's spent on the team, but I'd imagine it is a pretty penny.

They've also managed to get their ground redeveloped without too many issues. I'd imagine their local council aren't quite as obstructive as ours. In fact, are any other councils in the country as obstructive as ours when it comes to our local football club? We only ever seem to hear good news stories from elsewhere.