The Strategy vs Immediate Success

My issue is with the model itself and whether it promotes either business (increased revenue) or club success. In league 1 we may get away with it but we lost our championship status due to a lack of experience and recruitment of potential. Unless the model is tweaked if we go up, we will be back in this position again a year later.....where the owners lose revenue, have to offset with player sales and we run the risk of disrupting the team and hindering it's success. I fear we will miss out on the top 2 due to lack of experience also. Other competing clubs are adding such to their squads. We will have missed a huge opportunity given the squad of players we have at this level. Had we not tinkered with the "plan" last time we would not have been promoted and even could have been relegated to league 2. Think there has been some improvement, such as longer contracts etc....but the balance still isn't right in my view.

 

Well written, interesting and intelligent post.

But it's a model that requires we consistently sign good young players capable of developing. We won't.

Last season the quality we signed wasn't good enough for the league we were in and we were relegated.

The same will happen in this division if we continue to sell our better players.

And it will happen in the league below too.

If every asset is always for sale, the future is down not up.

 

You have a way of wording everything so well and can see why other people will have misgivings. Another eloquent post.

 

I agree that the model requires us to consistently sign good players and to develop them further. The options to do this are to increase our success rate or to sign more players - if we get it right the majority of the time then the model works. As we become more financially sustainable we can negotiate from a position of strength, something we didn't have the luxury of in the past.

I agree that the wholesale changes made in the previous season were probably the key reason for relegation, but that just highlights to me that we need to build a better pipeline and give players longer to develop. It suggests the model should be altered, not scrapped altogether. I also think that those alterations have generally been made.

 

I think that's why we need to be promoted. I'd like to see a transfer window in preparation for a Championship campaign to truly gauge my opinion.

 

Off the top of my head the only quality player we have ever had who has chosen to turn down substantially better offers from elsewhere is Ronnie Glavin.

 

Didn't Hammill turn down another Championship club in order to sign his new deal after promotion?

 

I recall Darren Barnard turning down a move to Southampton. Also, when attending 'An Evening With Bobby Hassell' at the Lamproom, Bobby said he'd turned down lucrative moves to Leeds United & Sheffield Wednesday.

 

Good point. I'd say Ronnie had offers that were more substantial improvements but you're right.
That's why Adam is up there in my top five all time faviurites.

 

Will you shut up you're completely demolishing my argument!

 

Sits back with expression of smug satisfaction on face.

 

Ye can go off people ye know!

 

I'm a sad, pathetic, little wimp of a man.

 

a) We havent sold Kieffer Moore?
b) We did sell Bradshaw. I'd say the Woodrow signing on a 2.5 /3 year deal is a more accurate representation of the replacement we sign.

 

That's uncanny! Do you know my girlfriend too?!

 

Like I said to the other poster, what other strategic option do we have? Which club would you like us to model ourselves on and why?

 

It depends. Does she like men who wear wrestling leotards round the house?

 

I've got to say I've really enjoyed reading this thread by the Op and subsequent replies. Somewhat of a refreshing change.

I like our model. It suits us. Whilst rather frustrating at times I'm well suited with the fact that we'll always have a club to support. As opposed to living beyond our means with a lot of clubs plans that seem to involve pumping money they don't have in pursuit of the 'holy grail' . Resulting in transfer imbargos, large fines etc. Reckon one day one club will push it that big further and deducted points will be turned into relegation or a clubs disappearance.

As for our 'plan'. Buying low, developing and selling high. I'd ask people to read Plymouths forum when we signed Connor. Then the previous clubs of Winnall, Scowen, Mason, Roberts etc when we signed them. People with misgivings might realise it's just where you are in the food chain that determines how you have to operate.

 

Whatever the system, is it making money for the club or the owners? How are the profits split? After the squad was sold last time we went up the club was left with nothing. Now in league one where we are not a small club is there still a blackhole eating the transfer fees?

 

According to the accounts we don't have a blackhole in the finances. The sale of the club paid back to the debt to the Cryne family (completely justified in my opinion) and left us with no debt - please correct me if that's wrong. Shareholders of the club can take dividends on the profit the club makes but you don't buy football clubs to take dividends from minor profits. Instead you're more likely to utilise a successful business model to increase the value of the club. The two key ways to do this are promotion to the premier league and using the cash injection in the club from TV money...or by showing other investors your successful model and selling the club at a handsome profit. I'm quite sure that Gauthier said that we were banking the money we've earned over recent seasons to ensure we have an adequate budget to compete for promotion to the Premier League. However, the majority of this money would be spent AFTER we get promoted to the Championship. Is that lacking ambition?