QuoteWhy should other clubs and what they can spend on wages dictate what your club can afford to spend on wages?Originally Posted by Nesta99
What apart from other clubs
What apart from other clubs
Why should other clubs and what they can spend on wages dictate what your club can afford to spend on wages?What apart from other clubs
Because you're in a very competitive industry competing to sign the best from a very small pool of talent.
And because all football clubs want to win.
So the more other clubs pay, the less attractive your club becomes to the 'talent' and the further down the competitive rankings you fall. And that loses you fans, sponsorship etc etc, which means you have less money to spend on players, yeddah, yeddah, yeddah.
I can't believe I'm having to explain this...
Doesnt dictate what a club can afford to spend but it can dictate what a club does spend!
All well and good having short term success until you have to produce 400k to the High Court by noon tomorrow or else your club is out of business
Can't believe I'm having to explain this either
And therein lies the problem with this jokeshop of a league
It's the clubs you need to explain it to - not me.
It's the problem football faces the world over - the dream is all intoxicating.
P.S. Bar the Setanta Cup win at home against an IL team, what is the 'short-term' success you're speaking of that Cork have had for their £400k exactly...?
I dont disagree! Dodge saying that there is nothing stopping clubs from lowering wages while technically true is hardly the reality(as yet) until clubs come up with some agreement, now maybe im wrong but wasnt there a wage cap during the 70s or so by which clubs like Dundalk got around by paying players cash not unlike Bohs and their best paid Bar staff in the country
Wasn't talking about Cork as a club, more using what has happened to them as an example of a club throwing money they don't have aroundIt's the clubs you need to explain it to - not me.
It's the problem football faces the world over - the dream is all intoxicating.
P.S. Bar the Setanta Cup win at home against an IL team, what is the 'short-term' success you're speaking of that Cork have had for their £400k exactly...?
It is a problem that faces football the world over, but that doesn't mean clubs should still risk their entire future on getting a better player than their rivals does it?
You left out tea-bags there dodge you silly billy.
If the FAI wanted to help then why dont they reduce the cost of officials.
We played Dundee United to a crowd of 200-250 and got landed with a bill for the officials at well over €600.
We then played Newry City and at least one official was only qualified to officiate junior league football. Cost nearly €550. These were supposed to be fund raisers for us and not the FAI.
Crowds are down and sponsorships are more and more difficult to find yet referees bills stay ridiculously high.
Im not going to mention the fine of €50 for not having 'lucozade' on one of the medical bags...
Lower the cost of officials, and you'll have fewer doing it, which will result in poorer officials.
Surely the bigger question is - why have 'fundraising' friendlies against clubs of the calibre that only attract 200-250 fans.....?
Dundee have attracted poor crowds to every game they've played in Ireland this year. Newry have never been a draw for anyone - not even in Newry...
Last edited by dcfcsteve; 31/07/2009 at 1:23 PM.
A centralised system will never work because too many clubs have delusions of grandeur and want to be able to split off and do their own thing. Witness the attempts of a couple of basket cases trying to form an All Ireland League... no interest in anything other than personal gain.
Did you know that the NFL is the most commie organisation in the world? Most revenue is shared equally across the clubs...
The salary cap is also a team's even share of a percentage of total League revenue as opposed to a percentage of their own income as we have it today.Under the system, every NFL owner starts the year on a level playing field, with nearly $100 million from NFL broadcast rights, national NFL sponsorships with companies such as Gatorade, and a redistributed portion of ticket sales. This all-for-one-and-one-for-all spirit, its supporters say, has been the backbone of the NFL's economic and competitive success, since it spreads the wealth and helps give every team, from the Packers in tiny Green Bay, Wis., to the Giants in metropolitan New York, a shot at winning a title -- and turning a nice profit.
But, like I say, any such system couldn't work here because of selfishness and the belief of some clubs that they are intrinsically superior to the others, despite almost every senior club suffering from some kind of financial crisis in recent memory.
I agree that the savings on purchasing may be small, however the clubs could do well by engaging a single sales team for gound advertising, programme advertising etc.
The first argument that Shams should earn higer rates than UCD for example could easily be got around by a distribution system based on attendances and tv audiences for telivised games etc..therfore the clubs with the highest attendances would get a larger slice of the cake. This sales team could have an allocation of X% of ground advertising spots and pages in the programme etc.
Fair Play died Nov 18th 2009, Stade Francais.
Most of the advertising secure is local - you don't need a joint efort to pop down the road and get a local pub to sponsor you, and it's arguably best done through local contacts anyway.
Bottom line is that most clubs in the league have bigger issues to worry about right now, than have the luxury to tinker with securing fringe improvements to purchasing or income.
Maybe Cork and Bohs could club together to reduce their supreme court appeals expenses.
#NeverStopNotGivingUp
wellsorry but we are not cutting our budget because other clubs cant match us
I wish i did not know then what I dont know now
Show me where I said they should show up for nothing???
Im making a point that the FAI dont show any help when even a club tries to help itself.
Players, managers etc are all effected by wage cuts so why not the officials.
I wouldnt expect anybody to work for nothing!!!!
The cost of the officials isnt shared out amongst them. The FAI take a lump out first. A little leeway would be nice.
Organising a friendly that attracts 200-250 people could hardly be viewed as trying to help yourself though. And it's not the FAI's job to do you a favour if you've organised an unappealing fixture in an effort to make money.Show me where I said they should show up for nothing???
Im making a point that the FAI dont show any help when even a club tries to help itself.
Players, managers etc are all effected by wage cuts so why not the officials.
I wouldnt expect anybody to work for nothing!!!!
The cost of the officials isnt shared out amongst them. The FAI take a lump out first. A little leeway would be nice.
If the difference between a friendly being a financial success or a failure is the cost of the match officials, then you should really be questioning whether such friendlies should be organsied in future - not whether the FAI can help save you €100.
Did the club make any money out of the Dundee game anyways ?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks