League position yes but it doesn't excuse us from making progress off the field in various areas. We've clearly made some and more is to come, hopefully.
Dint realise they were mutually exclusive - thanks for pointing that out to me. Tell thi' what Marc, tha'll do for Cryne. Anyone wanting a bit of progress or wanting a bit of what other clubs have is a ****, eh?
Don't get the arsey response. We're outperforming all those clubs you mentioned and to many people, this will be the best it's ever been as a Barnsley fan. I just don't get the comparisons, sorry.
What relevance does on the field performances have to the points I raised? Can we not have a scoreboard as good as the one Cheltenham are getting AND have a decent team?
The whole you must be either happy with everything because we have won a few games argument is a bit **** isn't it? If we lose a few will the things that weren't **** when we were winning suddenly become **** or will they remain ignored in the hope we start winning again...
I'd personally say it's very relevant. We have one of the lowest player budgets in the Championship, and every penny we spend off the pitch, is money we don't get to spend on it. I'm not privy to how much things cost, but yes, if we spend money on one thing, it means we can't spend it on something else. Specifically on the subject on the scoreboard, personally I don't really care. We've got a scoreboard, it works. Yes Cheltenham's is bigger. It's also bigger than the ones at Anfield and Old Trafford. We've got a bar, and the guys in Redfearn's do a brilliant job. The Burton example is an interesting one, and kind of proves my point. They are probably the only team with a lower budget than ours, and are also living within their means. So yes, they've made a slight profit. They also have a stadium that isn't a patch on ours, and currently sit 3 points above the relegation zone. We can improve in every department, but we can't have everything, all at once. Sometimes, fit for purpose has to do.
So we can't spend £45,000 on a scoreboard that will make money in the short to medium term, but Cheltenham with 10% of our turnover can? Ok. Apparently Burton have a bigger budget than us according to Hecky. God knows how that works. I agree that we have a better stadium than Cheltenham. Don't see the relevance of that though as the ground developments are NOTHING to do with this regime. They're just overseeing it's decline.
i think this sentence is probably where we just have to agree to disagree. we're well on target to finish top 10 in the champ, on a bottom 3 budget and a huge turnover of players over a 12 month period. i don't agree that anything is in decline.
Come on Marc the stadium is definitely being left to its own devices. Even free paint jobs are turned down
The ground is in clear decline. Part of one of the stands is closed and will be closed for the foreseeable future with no word on when or if it might open again. What has been done on the pitch is nothing to do with this.
13% of the ground is condemned under this regime and you don't think this is a decline? Incredible. The top 10 finish is down to the superb manager. The bottom three budget down to the board. I'm talking about the stadium and infrastructure though so again, I've no idea why this is relevant.
Local media piece ........ http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co....ce_of_Bantams_season_ticket_deal/?ref=mr&lp=3
Chief operating officer James Mason said: "Other chief execs do call and ask how we've done it. There is no rocket science, it's very simple." Chuff me sideways... if it's that simple we've got no feckin chance then. Step number one, get a Chief Exec.