Hecky's Interview - Here

If you are saying that those were all from "club insiders" posting under nom-de-plumes, and you are saying that you have good evidence that those things were done by club insiders, then of course they were wrong.

Look, I am not wanting to appear to support either side in this argument. I am simply saying that these things should be handled from within.

 

I agree with you RR, and this only makes the situation more alarming. My honest belief is that the club has decided that its long-term survival, specifically in the light of PC's situation, must take priority over competing in the Championship. Whether that has been made clear to the manager appears to be a moot point.

 

In my view, it is far too early to be reaching for the panic button, or drawing conclusions from a very average pre-season. There is still more than a month left of the transfer window, more than a month to acquire the remaining players that we need. I would much rather that we took our time to find the right players. I still shiver when I think of the panic in the transfer markets that coincided with the return of Danny Wilson and I would not wish to see that happen again. It is right that we do our proper due diligence, even if that means that we are not ready for the first match. We are handing out 3 year contracts now and I would rather see a bad two months than a bad three years. Hecky is frustrated by the lack of progress since the appointment of the new CEO, but he should not voice that impatience on Radio Sheffield.

 

What else should he do then? Especially if he's been banging the drum "in private" for weeks?

Especially when it's him that has to come out and defend performances and results and especially when it'll be him that gets the chop.

 

He should continue to bang the drum in private.

He is clearly frustrated by the lack of progress, but that does not necessarily mean that others are not equally frustrated, or that others are not doing their level best to try to make things happen. I have no knowledge about what has caused this outburst. All that I am saying is that these things are far better handled beyond the glare of onlookers. If he is expecting his popularity with the fans to win him the argument. I can tell him that the owner will see his outburst as a challenge to his authority. A public clash between the two people who should be working together as a team is bound to be bad for unity of purpose.

 

What twaddle ST. Some things never change

 

Some of the transfer sums this summer that Championship clubs are shelling out are obscene. I don't think there's a better example than Ashley Fletcher. I think he's a great prospect, but all he's actually done is a good three months in League 1. 16 starts and 8 goals in the league and the paint cup thingy. His time on the pitch for West Ham is negligible, barely worth mentioning. I have absolutely no idea how that makes a £6.5 million player. It doesn't. We cannot compete with that and no one expects us to.

I like the model that we have adopted. Buy hungry young talent for cheap, polish the players up a bit, sell them for a huge profit. But it's not progressing in the way it was sold to me.

We started out with next to nowt, bought players for next to nowt, sold them for big money. We're no longer skint. We've brought £millions into the club over the last 12 months or so. More money than this club has ever seen before. I was of the understanding that when we sold for big money we could then begin signing players that maybe cost a bit more than that original batch we bought. If we find another gem or two in League 2 or non-league then yes, great, we sign those. But we can also sign a couple of players for say a million quid, players that still fit the model of being motivated and young, but maybe have a bit more experience, a few more games under their belt, the ability to come straight into the team and make an immediate impact, to hit the ground running. And we improve them from there.

We've sold Marc Roberts and Alfie Mawson for upwards of £8 million. We've replaced them by spending tuppence ha'penny. You can't do that and hope to compete. There isn't an infinite number of Connor Hourihane's and Marc Roberts out there with whom we can replace, for a shoe string, the players we sell for £millions. It's not that they're difficult to find, it's that they don't actually exist. No matter how good the scouting network is, or the computer software, or whatever system we use, we'll not find the players because they're not there. We found them, we signed them, we sold them. They've gone.

You can sell a couple of players for £8 million, sign a couple more for £3 million, sign another for next to nowt with potential, as back up, and be £5 million in the black, still have a competitive side, and still secure the future of the club.

Or you can sell a couple of players for £8 million, sign a few more for bugger all, be £8 million in the black, have a team not fit for purpose and a manager so frustrated that he commits career suicide on local radio.

I thought the whole idea of the model was that, once we'd started to sell players on at a profit, we would begin to sign players from all levels of football. Still sell for more than we buy, but not be limited to the bargain basement bins for every signing. But it appears we are.

 

It appears that at least one of the four signings we are still waiting for (McBurnie) isn't being released by his parent club yet. I'm not sure what our negotiators are supposed to do about that (other than move onto a different target). Swansea might even be acting awkward because of Yiadom.

 

I have no idea what our budget is for first team player wages, but because we have to have numbers in order to have a discussion, I am going to suggest some. Let us assume that the average wage is £5,000 per week (£250,000) per annum and that our ideal squad is 23 players. With rounding up for contingencies, that equates to a budget of £6m per annum. Let us further assume that that level of budget, along with all other budgets equates to break even on current Revenue projections.

Let us assume we sign 4 players in the £1m price bracket, which we can undoubtedly afford from cash pile as a result of previous player sales. Let us further assume that those players come on 3 year contracts and demand £500k per annum in wages, we are immediately £1m above our annual wages budget. Now that is not so bad, because we have a pile of cash that we can use to subsidise their wages. It is admittedly a smaller pile of cash because we spent £4m to acquire those players, but it is adequate to fund their wages for the length of their contract, so we do not have a problem. Bear in mind that the players we have sold have gone for an average £3m each, so we are not getting the finished article, even at £1m. We are not guaranteed to avoid relegation, even if we spend that sort of money.

But what happens if in spite of our increased investment, we are relegated. What then. Well we now have a players pay budget of perhaps £4m per annum to stay within our revenue budget, but our player's earnings are £7m per annum. They are all on 3 year contracts, so their costs are now burning our cash mountain at the rate of £3m per annum.

These are all made up figures. I wanted to illustrate the way that a small problem can rapidly turn into a large one once the tide turns against us.

 

Who was the ex chairmans son. News to me this one

 

Shepherd's son number one at a guess

 

I've just had the chance for the first time to hear the interview. Its just bloody common sense that Hecky's talking , were miles away at the minute and we all can see that . He's said when we sell the likes of Robbo we need 2 players to compensate because there's every chance one of them won't pay off . If he wasn't emotionally attached to the club he'd have walked before now.

 

Never heard of this before, as we know SuperTyke and reality are strangers at times

 

I think listening to Hecky over the past 12 months, its what he thought as well

 

Spot on. And Im sure thats exactly what Hecky is driving at.

 

We can't really discuss it in such detail because, as you point out, we don't know the correct figures.

Something I do know because it was repeated ad infinitum the last time we were relegated: income streams were down by £5 million per season. Stands to reason the opposite was true when we were promoted: income streams up by £5 million. Although, after the song and dance they made about losing out on such revenue, the club didn't seem to make any mention of our turnover being boosted by such an amount after last season's promotion. But I think it's safe to say it happened. WIth the disparity that is occuring in football, with the gap between the haves and the have nots getting ever wider, our turnover may have been upped by even more.

I'm not advocating we start paying huge wages, but we can afford pay higher wages than we did in league 1 because we bring more money in, so we can afford to target what are considered better, more experienced players.

Nothing any club does guarantees survival. We could sign what are considered better and more experienced players and still be relegated. Something I really do advocate is drawing up contracts with relegation clauses. A players wages drop if we are relegated. For these to be included there would also have to be relegation release clauses, where by a player can leave for a fixed amount if the worst happens, but I can live with that rather than having to pay Championship wages in League 1 to players who have performed so poorly they've got us relegated.

One thing that almost certainly does guarantee relegation is us not signing good players because we're concerned how much they'll cost us if we are relegated. That's a strategy that will always ultimately lead to failure. Let's be the best we can be and build insurance into contracts that doesn't result in the club going under if we don't succeed.

 

I think if fear is your main motivation... then you may as well shut the shop and just pack it all in...#safelittlebarnsley

 

Mountains out of mole hills.

 

This. This is exactly why even those who have previously supported the strategy are now feeling let down. Stage two was supposed to be - albeit cautious and within the realms of affordability - growing investment. Instead there's a danger that people see the rapid disposal of any and all saleable assets simply as an asset stripping exercise to line the coffers; which is frankly what it is if only a tiny proportion of it is used to reinvest.