"Budget Could Make It Impossible To Run Team"

**akearins** · 28/01/2009, 11:40 AM

Budget could 'make it impossible' to run team

**pineapple stu** · 28/01/2009, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by Paul Cook

“Personally speaking, at the end of the season I think it would be more important to have a trophy in the cabinet than money in the bank.

The league in a nutshell.

**Rovers Maniac** · 28/01/2009, 12:21 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

The league in a nutshell.

But you do have to ask what is the point in having a team just to make a profit, we have the base of a decent team. If i was Cook i would be very frustrated with the way this has gone on.

**gufct** · 28/01/2009, 12:22 PM

every other team is in the same boat and Our own Budget has been cut almost in half to make sure we survive. The likes of Cork,Pats,Dundalk and Rovers seem to have the biggest budgets and with both Pats and Cork having serious financial troubles this year I can one of these clubs hiiting troubles early this season.

**brianw82** · 28/01/2009, 12:27 PM

One of the problems I can imagine is if our budget is 8,000 per week for example, with 5,200 for player wages, and we have 8 players from last season signed up at 500 per week, that's 4,000 of that 5,200 already used up.

Do we then sign 3 players at 400pw? 4 players at 300? 5 part-timers at 240pw?
The only alternative then is to re-arrange existing contracts for less money, which isn't likely to go down well with players.

**Dodge** · 28/01/2009, 12:28 PM

Originally Posted by gufct

every other team is in the same boat and Our own Budget has been cut almost in half to make sure we survive. The likes of Cork,Pats,Dundalk and Rovers seem to have the biggest budgets and with both Pats and Cork having serious financial troubles this year I can one of these clubs hiiting troubles early this season.

Pats haven't had any financial troubles this year. We budgeted for a loss, and actually made less of a loss than we planned for.

This yer, they're not planning on such a big loss.

Maniac is right. Winning trophies is the only thing a football manager should think about. Surviving, and developing, is what a board should think about. I'd rather win the league and breakeven than make €100k in profit and finish 2nd

**Mr A** · 28/01/2009, 12:37 PM

I had great respect for Paul Cook, but to be demanding more money in the current climate, after Sligo having to do what they did last year, is irresponsible. It's incredible that so many people seem incapable of learning anything from what has gone on around the league.

**pineapple stu** · 28/01/2009, 12:39 PM

Originally Posted by Rovers Maniac

But you do have to ask what is the point in having a team just to make a profit,

Was a profit budgeted for? If it'll lose, to make up a figure, E5k a week to run the team per the original budget, then the FAI are right to veto it. Long-term, the club has to break even, otherwise you have a club winning the league one year and being gone the next.

Can understand Cook wanting more money, for Dodge's reasons. But you have to imagine he at least understands the board's view (or in this case, the FAI's view). Presumably he's asked quietly for more money before deciding to go public?

Where was the article originally? Or who was he talking to?

**passerrby** · 28/01/2009, 12:42 PM

I agree i have great admiration for cookie and any managers sole concern must be winning but to make a statement like it should be more important to have throphies in the cabinet than money in the bank is to say the least very niave

**red bellied** · 28/01/2009, 12:50 PM

Originally Posted by passerrby

I agree i have great admiration for cookie and any managers sole concern must be winning but to make a statement like it should be more important to have throphies in the cabinet than money in the bank is to say the least very niave

He never said he wanted to bankrupt Rovers. He doesnt understand the mentality of 100,000 in the bank and finishing trophyless. Breaking even and wining a trophy sounds better. As Cookie says less budget means ordinary players compared to better players. This will have knock on effect on the crowds and possibly other incomes as well.

**noby** · 28/01/2009, 12:52 PM

Surely there's a difference between running a team and winning trophys. Then again " ‘make it impossible’ to run team" doesn't appear to be a direct quote from Cook.

Of course, you could also say "Budget Could Make It Impossible To Run full time Team".

**Schumi** · 28/01/2009, 12:55 PM

Originally Posted by red bellied

He never said he wanted to bankrupt Rovers. He doesnt understand the mentality of 100,000 in the bank and finishing trophyless.

That makes perfect sense but where did the idea of there being 100k in the bank come from? I'd assume that the approved budget aims at breaking even or paying off any remaining debts rather than racking up a (pretty considerable) profit for the year.

**pineapple stu** · 28/01/2009, 12:55 PM

Originally Posted by red bellied

He doesnt understand the mentality of 100,000 in the bank and finishing trophyless. Breaking even and wining a trophy sounds better.

The article doesn't mention £100,000 in the bank or breaking even though?

**neutrino** · 28/01/2009, 1:02 PM

I'm sure the Rovers board would love to break even and compete for trophies, so its not a question of holding onto money. In fairness to the MC, they have always try to make the maximum amount possible available to the manager. Our budget is what it is becuase that's what the club can realise financially over the course of next season. Maybe we have found our level now instead of over budgeting. Cook making these comments is fine if there was x amount more lying about but there's nothing extra in the coffers so a bit pointless as there's no more money. If the club did make more money during the season than anticipated then i've no doubt they will give it to Cook.

The club being stable and not weighed down with debt is most important thing. There should be a focus on bringing throug young players to supplement the squad now. I still think we can do well next season, but that would depend on being very lucky with injuries and suspensions.

**red bellied** · 28/01/2009, 1:04 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

The article doesn't mention £100,000 in the bank or breaking even though?

Its a generalisation, obviously thats what he is getting at. Read no where that he wanted to bankrupt the club either, unlike some think on here.

**Dodge** · 28/01/2009, 1:05 PM

However its very possible that a club could have access to thousands, but not be allowed spend them on wages under the 65% salary protocol. Nothing wrong with that IMO (and out of the Sligo board's control too)

**pineapple stu** · 28/01/2009, 1:06 PM

Originally Posted by red bellied

Its a generalisation, obviously thats what he is getting at.

100k profit is a remarkbale generalisation. I'd doubt any club in the league's history has ever made that in one year without selling their ground. I very much doubt Sligo have budgeted for it either, which is why people are asking where it came from in the first place.

Complaining about making 100k profit is grand; complaining about breaking even isn't. That's the query being raised - which is he complaining about?

Originally Posted by Dpdge

out of the Sligo board's control too

Given the Sligo board's budget was rejected by the FAI, it seems fair to say they're not 100% calling the shots at present.

**brianw82** · 28/01/2009, 1:24 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

Given the Sligo board's budget was rejected by the FAI, it seems fair to say they're not 100% calling the shots at present.

The most recent budget was approved. I think that's the one he's complaining about.

**red bellied** · 28/01/2009, 1:30 PM

Originally Posted by pineapple stu

100k profit is a remarkbale generalisation. I'd doubt any club in the league's history has ever made that in one year without selling their ground. I very much doubt Sligo have budgeted for it either, which is why people are asking where it came from in the first place.

Complaining about making 100k profit is grand; complaining about breaking even isn't. That's the query being raised - which is he complaining about?

Given the Sligo board's budget was rejected by the FAI, it seems fair to say they're not 100% calling the shots at present.

Two budgets rejected by the FAI both well down on last years. Its a generalisation by me, probably should of worded it better but thats what Cook is getting at.

**Rovers Maniac** · 28/01/2009, 1:47 PM

Originally Posted by Mr A

I had great respect for Paul Cook, but to be demanding more money in the current climate, after Sligo having to do what they did last year, is irresponsible. It's incredible that so many people seem incapable of learning anything from what has gone on around the league.

A bit rich from you, as you have stated you "hope Sligo Rovers crash and burn" on your Harps forum, your shoulder must be in pain carrying that big chip on it.

Ya if he was looking for 10k a week extra but i would say Cook is looking for an extra couple of thousand a week over the course of a season that is minute. Would love to know how exactly the FAI calculate each budget as there seems to be some budgets calculated more on expectations tahn others.