No what would be the point of that?
How much would you propose the FAI give out to clubs?
What needs to happen is the clubs need to priortise more of their revenue into capital spending, rather then just wages.
Printable View
No what would be the point of that?
How much would you propose the FAI give out to clubs?
What needs to happen is the clubs need to priortise more of their revenue into capital spending, rather then just wages.
yeah i totally agree
but that kind of thing takes a long time and the fai have an obligation to help the clubs as much as possible so them helping to improve infrastructure would be nice, i know its not going to happen thou
on giving it out thou is there any sort of grant application at the moment for clubs?
That's exactly what the salary cost protocol is meant to achieve- albeit it's a difficult one to enforce.
And before we even think of a professional league we need the clubs to grow to sustain that in obvious ways like facilities and community involvement and a million other small ways. That isn't going to happen overnight, but by baby steps. The aim should be to have a professional league off the field, not on it (at least initially). Stuff like the grow your club guide are good- real practical advice based on the experience of the clubs. And ultimately the FAI can only do so much- it's really up to the clubs to make it work.
We need to get away from this idea of looking for a silver budget or aiming for the virtually impossible. Gradual, sustainable development is where it's at. Throwing crazy wages at players when 97% of them would be in the league anyway is just daft.
Well the FAI negotiate with the government to provide sports capital grants for clubs, which has temporarily halted because the countries fecked.
Another thing would be private investment which there is not much of here. And before anyone starts I'm not talking about sugar daddies rather private shareholders in a club who invest in the club. Take for example the german clubs where there always has to be a majority stake from the fans but there can be private invesment aswell. Best way to go imo.
A very interesting argument here and ive often though of local clubs joining but people feel as if there losing something and it would be very hard for the FAI to say you can only have so many clubs in this area so you two have to merge ect.
it will all be fine when i start selling art for millions of when i win the euromillions i promise
Sure it would be hard but if necessary it must be done. Ah god I'm sounding like a Fianna Fail gombeen now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kieran Burke
I can see it nowQuote:
Originally Posted by Riddickcule
Good moring mr private investor Ii was wondering perhaps would you like to invest in our club.
oh and what kind of divident can i expect
eh em none in fact its a bottomless pit but you will have the saisfaction of knowing that your money went down a well intentioned well.
and what exactly do i get for my investment.
head ache chest pains and a angry bank manager.
what a great oppurtunity i was going to invest in shares in bp or aib but your deal sounds so much better
oh and you will proberly get a call from somebody in the fai looking to tap you up as well
Grow up chap :rolleyes:
I would be happy to discuss this logically if indeed you had any logic to your argument but professional league, private investors, youv lost me
oh and before the fai can invest any more on a struggling league of ireland they would require the permission of the general council which giving there dislike of the loi would not be forthcoming.
and real investors only invest when there is a gauranteed return.
bottom line income must met expenditure
To run a professional League means acting professionally. The FAI should only consider funds for clubs presenting serious costed business plans that have a break even prospect (at least in the mid term). Any club abusing/redirecting monies awarded should be banned from receiving funding for two seasons (even if this results in their demise).Quote:
Originally Posted by Riddickcule
Infrastructure should have a business purpose not just "build it and they will come" strategy. To be fair the FAI have invested (or supported clubs investing) in promotional activity, at the end of the day increasing the number of paying customers is where we need to focus.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riddickcule
Riddickule - attack the posts, not the posters. They're making perfectly valid, constructive criticisms of some of your points, and you're just huffing over it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riddickcule
The thread itself is a good one, but posts like that don't help the discussion.
You must take into consideration that a lot of people just want a kick-about on a Sunday morning.Quote:
Originally Posted by culloty82
This should be encouraged in the interest of the general health of the population.
In rural areas you dont have the same access to 5-aside or Astroturf facilites that you would have in larger towns or cities, so forming a 2nd team at some low level junior division makes a lot of sense for many people, partuiclarly when that club has a first team that takes things more seriously, and cant provide an outlet for those who would be older or not particularly good at football, but need an outlet to get some excersize, and then theres the social side of it as well.
*Deep breaths* Riddickcule is right, in that more money should go in at League of Ireland level. However, the focus shouldn't be on the fully pro league, but on building the League of Ireland clubs as the focus for football, feeding out into the community. Enshrine the link between the League of Ireland and the junior clubs and underage clubs. And that would require a sea change in both the League of Ireland as well as the other levels of the game. At present, it would also require more input/ oversight by the FAI, as the League of Ireland clubs can't be trusted.
More like posts like that ruin the thread. Thats like saying Ireland is never going to come out of recession so we should bankrupt ourselves now rather then later.Quote:
Originally Posted by John83
It's like the chicken and the egg question, what comes first? Some people think once the crowds come then the product and the facilites will come. And the people who think once the product and facilities come then the crowds come. I am very much the latter.Quote:
Originally Posted by marinobohs
The only way crowds will flock to the games is if the product and the facilities are there, the matchday experience. Football is part of consumer culture wether we like it or not. Fans are consumers. Demand must be stimulated through supply. etc.
Theres no reason we can't be like most countries these days whereby fans support their local team and their superclub. It happens everywhere. Even somewhere like France which has a strong enough domestic league, you will more likely see a Man Utd shirt then a PSG one.
And of course theres marketing, people need to know the games are on. In the relevant towns/cities with LOI clubs, most of the populace don't even know the game is on.
Anyway enough ranting, the thread is an interesting one and I knew it would be a good discussion. I can't deny whats more important is bridging the gap between all levels of the game here, but I still think the main question needs to be looked at..Are there too many clubs in this country?
not sure if it is strictly on topic but financial prudence should be rewarded by the FAI - clubs who operate less than 55% of the SCP for two consecutive seasons qualify for ground development grant.... or something based on that principle.
for me that would be the best way for the FAI to support clubs who budget properly and prudently. We need to at least get the stadia right first and that is often the last thing that clubs are worried about. Wages, wages, wages.
I won't say it again Riddickule - attack the post, not the poster. John83 posed a perfectly valid question; if you want to address it, do, but don't dismiss it by saying it's ruining the thread with absolutely no back-up whatsoever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Riddickcule
SkStu's reward scheme is an interesting idea though.
Good idea SKSTU, real need to take the focus of LOI clubs away from wages full stop. A model such as you are proposing would benifit clubs that unearth decent young talent (as opposed to the LOI transfer merry go round) and would provide a viable alternative model for clubs unable/unwilling to take part in the bidding war(s) over players each season.Quote:
Originally Posted by SkStu
Would suggest independent verification process would be required to avoid the fudge factor so prevalent with the FAI but certainly the nucleus of a good model there.
The problem with unearthing local talent is that even that is expensive. If you sign a player from a junior or intermediate club they're entitled to compensation, often a few thousand euro. Cheap if the player is good enough, but only a small percentage will make it. Non senior clubs will often choose to waive that to let the player have a chance at better things, but it can be a considerable impediment to getting players aboard. Then there's the joke that is the U20 league.. there are so few games that your young players simply don't get enough football and there is little incentive to leave their junior clubs to go there. Meanwhile it's tough for LOI clubs to compete in local underage leagues because naturally the junior clubs don't want the big boys hoovering up all the talent and winning all the time.
Essentially- it really is quite difficult for an LOI club to develop a decent youth structure because the high quality outlets for the players are so few.
Again, this all goes back to a need to reform the structures of the game and how they interact. And again, the number of clubs is pretty much irrelevant to it.
This is why a system of dual registration of players with senior and non-senior clubs would make such a massive difference.