| A Question .... 21:29 - Mar 24 with 3699 views | mikehunt |
I am trying to get my head around as to just when and how we became so financially strapped.
This has been alluded to in numerous threads but I have never seen a satisfactory explanation.
When did it go so horribly wrong?
I remember, not that long ago, being so proud that we owned all our players.We were always one of the handful of teams in all the leagues that finished a season in the black. Ok, so we were touted as the team with no ambition but we balanced our books and played within our means.
Then we got cup runs and sell ons; higher remuneration from being promoted and, almost overnight, the club is crying poverty (and this is before Covid!)
I remember DB being interviewed before a “money-spinning” cup tie and him saying, the fans aren’t going to like this but the money from this tie will barely cover us for 2 months”. What?!!! How? This was a substantial amount of money we hadn’t budgeted for: How the hell have we been keeping afloat if that was the case?
Things just don’t seem to add up. Is anyone able to explain what I have missed? |  |
| The worm of time turns not for the cuckoo of circumstance. |
| |  |
| A Question .... on 21:55 - Mar 24 with 3618 views | dale1968 |
I fully understand your post and cannot even begin to try and answer it.
But what I would say is that Lockout of fans and a massive loss of everything that goes into running a professional club, matchday catering,hospitality etc.
Will have drained our meagre funds.
Wages and running costs will still have to have been paid.
I am sure we can turn it around? |  |
| |
| A Question .... on 22:32 - Mar 24 with 3527 views | 49thseason |
Hence the slashed wage bill at the start of the season and the release of almost a complete team.... I think the problem probably started when Hill started to increase the size and cost of the squad, recognising that to compete against clubs with much bigger fans bases he needed more bodies and more quality. This was clearly a challenge for the Board which was manageable as long as the occasional windfall cup tie turned up. Take away the fans and the Cup ties and the revenue falls off a cliff, especially when the largest slice of the costs still have to be paid i.e. wages and PAYE. Add into that a new pitch a collapsing Lottery and a relatively small payout from the EFL and you are in the perfect storm. Exactly not the time for a weakened Board or to be paying off contracts early. |  | | |
| A Question .... on 22:46 - Mar 24 with 3502 views | judd |
| A Question .... on 22:32 - Mar 24 by 49thseason |
Hence the slashed wage bill at the start of the season and the release of almost a complete team.... I think the problem probably started when Hill started to increase the size and cost of the squad, recognising that to compete against clubs with much bigger fans bases he needed more bodies and more quality. This was clearly a challenge for the Board which was manageable as long as the occasional windfall cup tie turned up. Take away the fans and the Cup ties and the revenue falls off a cliff, especially when the largest slice of the costs still have to be paid i.e. wages and PAYE. Add into that a new pitch a collapsing Lottery and a relatively small payout from the EFL and you are in the perfect storm. Exactly not the time for a weakened Board or to be paying off contracts early. |
Interesting that we had a slashed playing wage bill and then lumbered it off field whilst disregarding the primary purpose of the professional football club. |  |
| |
| A Question .... on 22:58 - Mar 24 with 3476 views | judd |
Inadvertently marked down - apologies | |
| |
| A Question .... on 23:24 - Mar 24 with 3452 views | Hopwoodblue |
| A Question .... on 22:46 - Mar 24 by judd |
Interesting that we had a slashed playing wage bill and then lumbered it off field whilst disregarding the primary purpose of the professional football club. |
And tie ourselves to another 12 months for someone who may get us relegated, what happens if we end up in league two and find ourselves struggling come Oct / Nov time can we afford to pay him off ?
I’m sorry but if the board panicked because he was being touted elsewhere then I would have let him go. To offer a manager another 12 months on his contract with the state the club is in, then plead poverty at the forum is absolute nonsense.
The board have clearly lost the plot and are basically making it up as they go along, hoping for a miracle to save the club from certain oblivion. |  |
| |
| A Question .... on 06:31 - Mar 25 with 3297 views | dingdangblue |
| A Question .... on 23:24 - Mar 24 by Hopwoodblue |
And tie ourselves to another 12 months for someone who may get us relegated, what happens if we end up in league two and find ourselves struggling come Oct / Nov time can we afford to pay him off ?
I’m sorry but if the board panicked because he was being touted elsewhere then I would have let him go. To offer a manager another 12 months on his contract with the state the club is in, then plead poverty at the forum is absolute nonsense.
The board have clearly lost the plot and are basically making it up as they go along, hoping for a miracle to save the club from certain oblivion. |
'To offer a manager another 12 months on his contract with the state the club is in, then plead poverty at the forum is absolute nonsense'
Maybe BBM is the cheap option? Surely bringing another manager in on a 2 year contract would cost the club more? |  |
| |
| A Question .... on 08:06 - Mar 25 with 3218 views | dawlishdale |
| A Question .... on 06:31 - Mar 25 by dingdangblue |
'To offer a manager another 12 months on his contract with the state the club is in, then plead poverty at the forum is absolute nonsense'
Maybe BBM is the cheap option? Surely bringing another manager in on a 2 year contract would cost the club more? |
Whilst agreeing that BBM is probably the lowest paid Manager in L1 (unless he has been awarded a secret payrise to go with his secret contract extension) It is rare these days to offer Managers more than a 12 month deal at clubs of our size.
However; it is absolutely no use having a low paid Manager when backroom staff costs are rising at an alarming rate,. Any money saved by employing a higher paid Manager is more than swallowed up by employing several other non playing staff and announcing that we are looking for a Director of football.
As CD is rumoured to have said "I can't work with idiots". And I don't think this was referring to BBM.
We have plenty of problems...but the biggest of them is not BBM. |  | | |
| A Question .... on 10:19 - Mar 25 with 3071 views | 49thseason |
| A Question .... on 22:46 - Mar 24 by judd |
Interesting that we had a slashed playing wage bill and then lumbered it off field whilst disregarding the primary purpose of the professional football club. |
It was probably easier to pull the plug on out-of-contract players than full-time club employees who would have been due to receive redundancy payments. Equally there was an expectation that we would have crowds back by now so they took the easier decision to use the Scouting Software and bring in some cheaper / less experienced players. In retrospect, there were too many players not offered new contracts and coupled with a shortened pre-season following a longer than normal lay-off leading to injuries, we were left short of players in key positions and got off to a poor start. Add in the almost mandatory mid season, dark nights, slump in form (such as it was) and we are where we deserve to be.
Could some back office staff have been cut back? Lee Iacocca, the man who saved General Motors, reckoned that any competent CEO could easily find 10% of savings across the board no matter how well-run the business so dumping the likes of Henderson and allowing Camps to leave probably loked like an easy way out. Some of the office staff should have gone too, but thats a decision that takes guts and a clear eyed view of what needs to be done. Keeping and even expanding staff right now is an act of folly at best, crass stupidity at worst.
If we get as far as next season, albeit in L2, we will need to run on the least off-field staff humanly possible, even if that involves fans stepping in to lend a hand. But if it does come to that, I would also expect the rest of the current board to step down once they have put the house in order. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| A Question .... on 10:42 - Mar 25 with 3028 views | AtThePeake |
| A Question .... on 10:19 - Mar 25 by 49thseason |
It was probably easier to pull the plug on out-of-contract players than full-time club employees who would have been due to receive redundancy payments. Equally there was an expectation that we would have crowds back by now so they took the easier decision to use the Scouting Software and bring in some cheaper / less experienced players. In retrospect, there were too many players not offered new contracts and coupled with a shortened pre-season following a longer than normal lay-off leading to injuries, we were left short of players in key positions and got off to a poor start. Add in the almost mandatory mid season, dark nights, slump in form (such as it was) and we are where we deserve to be.
Could some back office staff have been cut back? Lee Iacocca, the man who saved General Motors, reckoned that any competent CEO could easily find 10% of savings across the board no matter how well-run the business so dumping the likes of Henderson and allowing Camps to leave probably loked like an easy way out. Some of the office staff should have gone too, but thats a decision that takes guts and a clear eyed view of what needs to be done. Keeping and even expanding staff right now is an act of folly at best, crass stupidity at worst.
If we get as far as next season, albeit in L2, we will need to run on the least off-field staff humanly possible, even if that involves fans stepping in to lend a hand. But if it does come to that, I would also expect the rest of the current board to step down once they have put the house in order. |
It's been said several times before, but both Camps and Henderson were offered contracts. They would have left the club anyway. |  |
| |
| A Question .... on 10:51 - Mar 25 with 3003 views | nordenblue |
| A Question .... on 10:19 - Mar 25 by 49thseason |
It was probably easier to pull the plug on out-of-contract players than full-time club employees who would have been due to receive redundancy payments. Equally there was an expectation that we would have crowds back by now so they took the easier decision to use the Scouting Software and bring in some cheaper / less experienced players. In retrospect, there were too many players not offered new contracts and coupled with a shortened pre-season following a longer than normal lay-off leading to injuries, we were left short of players in key positions and got off to a poor start. Add in the almost mandatory mid season, dark nights, slump in form (such as it was) and we are where we deserve to be.
Could some back office staff have been cut back? Lee Iacocca, the man who saved General Motors, reckoned that any competent CEO could easily find 10% of savings across the board no matter how well-run the business so dumping the likes of Henderson and allowing Camps to leave probably loked like an easy way out. Some of the office staff should have gone too, but thats a decision that takes guts and a clear eyed view of what needs to be done. Keeping and even expanding staff right now is an act of folly at best, crass stupidity at worst.
If we get as far as next season, albeit in L2, we will need to run on the least off-field staff humanly possible, even if that involves fans stepping in to lend a hand. But if it does come to that, I would also expect the rest of the current board to step down once they have put the house in order. |
We shouldn't need to sign too many players next season anyway,we've a decent sized squad number wasted in the office waiting to fill the gaps should the need arise..... | | | |
| A Question .... on 11:31 - Mar 25 with 2936 views | judd |
| A Question .... on 10:19 - Mar 25 by 49thseason |
It was probably easier to pull the plug on out-of-contract players than full-time club employees who would have been due to receive redundancy payments. Equally there was an expectation that we would have crowds back by now so they took the easier decision to use the Scouting Software and bring in some cheaper / less experienced players. In retrospect, there were too many players not offered new contracts and coupled with a shortened pre-season following a longer than normal lay-off leading to injuries, we were left short of players in key positions and got off to a poor start. Add in the almost mandatory mid season, dark nights, slump in form (such as it was) and we are where we deserve to be.
Could some back office staff have been cut back? Lee Iacocca, the man who saved General Motors, reckoned that any competent CEO could easily find 10% of savings across the board no matter how well-run the business so dumping the likes of Henderson and allowing Camps to leave probably loked like an easy way out. Some of the office staff should have gone too, but thats a decision that takes guts and a clear eyed view of what needs to be done. Keeping and even expanding staff right now is an act of folly at best, crass stupidity at worst.
If we get as far as next season, albeit in L2, we will need to run on the least off-field staff humanly possible, even if that involves fans stepping in to lend a hand. But if it does come to that, I would also expect the rest of the current board to step down once they have put the house in order. |
Office staff were made redundant.
The point I am making is that subsequent off field appointments will not directly affect the possible results on the pitch this season, when we need them most, other than taking up financial resource that should have been given to the manager to be used on our primary function. | |
| |
| A Question .... on 13:07 - Mar 25 with 2836 views | 49thseason |
| A Question .... on 10:42 - Mar 25 by AtThePeake |
It's been said several times before, but both Camps and Henderson were offered contracts. They would have left the club anyway. |
Offering a contract is one thing, offering a contract that the players felt able to accept is entirely another. If you were determined to get the highest paid, out of contract players out of the club, a low ball offer is the way to go and in the final analysis gives the person offering the unacceptable contract to insist that "a contract was offered and the player rejected it... not our fault, we did the best we could." | | | |
| A Question .... on 13:19 - Mar 25 with 2821 views | Hopwoodblue |
| A Question .... on 06:31 - Mar 25 by dingdangblue |
'To offer a manager another 12 months on his contract with the state the club is in, then plead poverty at the forum is absolute nonsense'
Maybe BBM is the cheap option? Surely bringing another manager in on a 2 year contract would cost the club more? |
Depends on what league your in and the standard of football your playing.
If he takes us into league two we lose tv money, 5 / 6 large away crowds could be more looking at the bottom of the championship. If we then struggle in league two we probably only have season ticket holders turning up so match day revenue will be virtually non existent.
If that’s on going for two or three years and the board are pleading poverty now
then how can they possibly hope to sustain the football club. Would be interesting to know if there was a clause in his extension regarding a pay cut if we get relegated.
The only plus side is the wage bill might be lower but it’s probably one of the lowest already even by league two standards. Also it has a knock on effect for the hospitality trade in Rochdale when the big teams come to town. Many stay over night locally and spend money in the pubs.
I understand that’s not RAFC’s concern but it helps the town out. | |
| |
| A Question .... on 13:56 - Mar 25 with 2760 views | ChaffRAFC |
Agree with much of that.
The bit that says injuries aren't anything BBM can control though? Lets face it, Jimmy Ryan, Paul McShane, Ryan McLaughlin and Matt Lund ALL had very well known injury issues when they were signed (and then re-signed in McLaughlin's case) and all, bar McLaughlin's latest deal, were signed on two year deals.
Is it unfortunate that they're all out? Absolutely. Is it something we couldn't forsee? Absolutely not.
This post has been edited by an administrator |  |
| If I hadn't seen such riches, I could live with being poor |
| |
| A Question .... on 14:29 - Mar 25 with 2718 views | James1980 |
| A Question .... on 13:56 - Mar 25 by ChaffRAFC |
Agree with much of that.
The bit that says injuries aren't anything BBM can control though? Lets face it, Jimmy Ryan, Paul McShane, Ryan McLaughlin and Matt Lund ALL had very well known injury issues when they were signed (and then re-signed in McLaughlin's case) and all, bar McLaughlin's latest deal, were signed on two year deals.
Is it unfortunate that they're all out? Absolutely. Is it something we couldn't forsee? Absolutely not.
This post has been edited by an administrator |
What involvement do the medical staff have when it comes to signing players? Did they advise BBM that the players mentioned should be able to play sufficient games to make signing them worthwhile? | |
| |
| A Question .... on 18:34 - Mar 25 with 2466 views | AtThePeake |
| A Question .... on 13:07 - Mar 25 by 49thseason |
Offering a contract is one thing, offering a contract that the players felt able to accept is entirely another. If you were determined to get the highest paid, out of contract players out of the club, a low ball offer is the way to go and in the final analysis gives the person offering the unacceptable contract to insist that "a contract was offered and the player rejected it... not our fault, we did the best we could." |
Either that or we wanted to keep them and Salford and Fleetwood have a lot more money to offer than us. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.