Supporters forum Tuesday 30th August (3 Viewers)

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
Funnily enough, I don't know any councillors and don't know anybody from SISU or the club. (I met Labovitch once along with a few other people on here to try to facilitate some fans asking questions, I switched off when he ordered a Tomato Juice and watched a football match over his shoulder).

There is no glass house or irony.
Get the story right Nick it did have Worchester sauce in it.🤣
 

eastwoodsdustman

Well-Known Member
I think there is more to the "model" problem than first team players being able to be sold on at a higher fee.

My understanding was that a big chunk of the "model" was developing our own players to a point that they come in to the first team and develop further but are capable of holding down a place on merit, then we sell them to wash rinse repeat. Make money.

What i am seeing is a first team made up of players we have bought or bring in on loan (other peoples talent we develop) and some youngsters on the bench who get a few minutes every so often maybe because there is no one else.

its all well and good saying we need to build the club but isnt that done from bottom up not top down. But i suppose if they haven't invested in the 1st team why would i think they would elsewhere. The investment should have been a couple of years ago of course to reap rewards now

I know its more complicated than that, but cant help feeling the 1st team squad is 13 or 14 players we have bought or on loan or free and the rest are just there to make up the numbers because they are too young or not good enough. Why is other clubs talent good enough to loan to us and straight in the first team but ours doesn't seem to be used. Why haven't we got a core of capable youngsters with a couple stand outs (Tavares, Howley i guess are those) that provides competition and solid base to move forward (team wise but also financially)

Maybe i am seeing this all completely wrongly, i am sure there are others here who will have better knowledge of that process. Just feels like poor planning and not following any real model and hoping for the best to me

When we were in league 1 and 2 we had more young players coming into the squad as the standard was lower and they had more chance to get game time, develop and gain experience. That isn't quite the same case now with the standard being higher and quicker and so less are coming through as first team regulars. Unfortunately its one of the problems of us being in a higher league and probably what Lord Tim refers to when he says the model wont work in the Championship. I think there is a will from the management to get the younger players through but as we saw against Bristol in the cup, the step up is too big for some of them at the moment especially putting a few in at the same time, If they were playing against lower league teams then that might not be the same.
 

HuckerbyDublinWhelan

Well-Known Member
Would go down badly with our fans but I suspect a more realistic option than anything else.
To be fair whilst I would love to see Wasp demise, if a collaboration under 1 owner were to take us forward I’d take it.

under the current circumstances re: stadium and owners -our ceiling is to be Rotherham. I suspect owning both entities would require Deep pockets and sporting ambition
 

KenilworthSkyBlue

Well-Known Member
I think there is more to the "model" problem than first team players being able to be sold on at a higher fee.

My understanding was that a big chunk of the "model" was developing our own players to a point that they come in to the first team and develop further but are capable of holding down a place on merit, then we sell them to wash rinse repeat. Make money.

What i am seeing is a first team made up of players we have bought or bring in on loan (other peoples talent we develop) and some youngsters on the bench who get a few minutes every so often maybe because there is no one else.

its all well and good saying we need to build the club but isnt that done from bottom up not top down. But i suppose if they haven't invested in the 1st team why would i think they would elsewhere. The investment should have been a couple of years ago of course to reap rewards now

I know its more complicated than that, but cant help feeling the 1st team squad is 13 or 14 players we have bought or on loan or free and the rest are just there to make up the numbers because they are too young or not good enough (if you are good enough can you be too young CCFC usually dont break through till 20+ it seems to me).

Why is other clubs talent good enough to loan to us and straight in the first team but ours doesn't seem to be used. Why haven't we got a core of capable youngsters with a couple of stand outs (Tavares, Howley i guess are those) that provides competition and solid base to move forward (team wise but also financially)

Maybe i am seeing this all completely wrongly, i am sure there are others here who will have better knowledge of that process. Just feels like poor planning and not following any real model and hoping for the best to me

The model in L2/L1 was built upon two key components: bring in players on a minimal outlay, develop and sell for profit, and to fast track talent from the academy/U23s into the first team to develop and sell.

The model in the Championship now doesn't really work firstly as due to the increase in standards, academy graduates are finding it increasingly more difficult to break through to the first team. We can't now rely on selling a Cian Harries or Bayliss to plug the gap if graduates aren't getting game time.

Secondly, as we remain in the division longer there is a hidden inflationary cost equated with being able to compete in the division in the medium term re. wages, operational costs and transfer fees. To a point, the longer we remain in the league the more costly it inevitably becomes. With commercial, ticketing and sponsorship revenue only scratching the surface when attempting to compete financially in this division, inevitably that has a baring on the amount of re-investment from sales made available to the management staff to use to bring in the next line of talent.

If that re-investment stops, or is significantly reduced, it makes it much more difficult for the management staff to be able to bring in players with potential sell-on value, rendering the entire 'model' essentially redundant. And that of course has a knock on effect as to cover operational costs a sizeable sale or multiple sales are needed in order to cover the shortfall each season. Which as you know this will be the club's foremost priority under the current operation.

I think as well just to add, the likelihood of the club getting a return on free agents is now incredibly unlikely due to the competitiveness of the market in this division. Any free agent in the EFL for instance who is half decent will likely go elsewhere due to us being unable to match wages/signing on fee offered by the best part of 90% of the league. Yes we signed O'Hare but that is like finding gold at the end of the rainbow. The free agents signed seemingly are Championship vets with zero, or very minimal, value.
 
Last edited:

Hobo

Well-Known Member
Sisu are allegedly a high risk investment portfolio worth a few billion - them perhaps

Well considering SISU are never in the top performing hedgefund lists and Joy never gets in the UK's richest womens list - I do think some fans think both parties are more flush than they actually are?
 

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
To be fair whilst I would love to see Wasp demise, if a collaboration under 1 owner were to take us forward I’d take it.

under the current circumstances re: stadium and owners -our ceiling is to be Rotherham. I suspect owning both entities would require Deep pockets and sporting ambition

Why should we be Rotherham though? They’ve spent most of their history in the lower two leagues, their all time average gate is 7.5k compared with ours at more than twice that (17k)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Happy_Martian

Well-Known Member
People have mentioned comparisons to the Brentford model and what our "beloved" owners hold as their idea of a working model. I'm starting to wonder if they settled on the Wycombe model. Hosted the Wasps for 12 years, given just enough income to survive week to week, sell the clubs best assets but still expect bouncing between L1 and the Champ every other year. <<grumble>> At least Wycombe own their own ground <<grumble>>
 

djr8369

Well-Known Member
Why should we be Rotherham though? They’ve spent most of their history in the lower two leagues, their all time average gate is 7.5k compared with ours at more than twice that (17k)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Income from attendance is a much lower percentage of overall income in the days of TV money and mega rich owners.

History or fan perceptions of club size are irrelevant really.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Income from attendance is a much lower percentage of overall income in the days of TV money and mega rich owners.

History or fan perceptions of club size are irrelevant really.

How many championship clubs have mega rich owners? Do Preston I have no idea?
 

Old Warwickshire lad

Well-Known Member
Thanks for the update SBP

I normally support Boddy but agree with your comment regarding the timing of the club update on the offal and disingenuous to the supporters group discussion. Not great timing !

I really sense some loss of momentum and frustration behind the scenes. Going to be am interesting few weeks.

A couple of wins are needed to lift spirits and get COH fit and back in the team

Going to be a nervous 36 hours on any outgoings. I fear Gyokores will be gone tomorrow. Replacements lined up for him and Hyam i understand.
Yes with last comment, you are likely to be called a bedwetter and putting everyone up for sale.
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
What combination is it Pete? Just the Direct debit ones paid in instalments or a % of all of them? I'm genuinely interested to know how my ST money is paid to the club.
Me too and I still don’t know
Db initially didn’t understand the question
Then the teams link was poor so he couldn’t hear it
Then said it’s a combination
I asked why it was a combination and was it dependent on credit card payments he said probably and it’s a combination

For me it’s got to be that but I’m surprised they don’t get some up front and the rest incrementally. Given other conversations it wasn’t the most banal discussion in fact almost interesting

Didn’t get any more than that
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
You are wrong about the 17% budget increase by the way.

By saying the club is putting an additional 17% into the club suggests almost a 5th extra investment into the playing squad.

We have signed one player - Palmer

Three loans - Panzo Doyle Adaramola

Exits are

Shipley, Pask, Jones and now Hyam

Loans out Maatsen and Clarke-Salter

He is including standard wage increases in contracts, extended contract wage values (purely done in the case of Hamer and O Hare to increase sale value) and the management team increases. Its classic spin to look good when it actually is just standard. The loans are cheaper and we have signed one player
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
By saying the club is putting an additional 17% into the club suggests almost a 5th extra investment into the playing squad.

We have signed one player - Palmer

Three loans - Panzo Doyle Adaramola

Exits are

Shipley, Pask, Jones and now Hyam

Loans out Maatsen and Clarke-Salter

He is including standard wage increases in contracts, extended contract wage values (purely done in the case of Hamer and O Hare to increase sale value) and the management team increases. Its classic spin to look good when it actually is just standard. The loans are cheaper and we have signed one player
Into the playing budget
 

Frostie

Well-Known Member
By saying the club is putting an additional 17% into the club suggests almost a 5th extra investment into the playing squad.

We have signed one player - Palmer

Three loans - Panzo Doyle Adaramola

Exits are

Shipley, Pask, Jones and now Hyam

Loans out Maatsen and Clarke-Salter

He is including standard wage increases in contracts, extended contract wage values (purely done in the case of Hamer and O Hare to increase sale value) and the management team increases. Its classic spin to look good when it actually is just standard. The loans are cheaper and we have signed one player

How is it spin when that is literally what it says?

"The playing/football budget for the season has increased compared to last season, by 17% – driven by contractual uplifts to players and extended contracts for players and football staff."
 

SBAndy

Well-Known Member
It’s mentioned about the fact that academy players can’t bridge the gap to the first team as easily in this league, but have we done much work on developing our academy side? I’m sure there would be some 16-18 year olds released by Premier League clubs who could improve the quality of our setup. I know we signed Cashman and Lusala but can’t immediately think of any others.
 

KenilworthSkyBlue

Well-Known Member
It’s mentioned about the fact that academy players can’t bridge the gap to the first team as easily in this league, but have we done much work on developing our academy side? I’m sure there would be some 16-18 year olds released by Premier League clubs who could improve the quality of our setup. I know we signed Cashman and Lusala but can’t immediately think of any others.

Given the lack of investment gone into the first team this season I'd suggest investment into our academy set-up is probably equally as scarce if not more so.
 

Liquid Gold

Well-Known Member
I suspect we never really expected to get promoted from League 1 and put a load of clauses in basically every players contract that gave them a massive jump in wages on promotion then every year we stayed up there.

Now we're in year 3 of Championship football those legacy players are costing us an arm and a leg.

The strategy to me looks like muddle through this season and then next summer is a big squad overhaul with sales of Vik, Cal & Hamer, maybe Sheaf, lots of expired contracts and then a big churn in of new players on more modest contracts that we will try to progress.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
How is it spin when that is literally what it says?

"The playing/football budget for the season has increased compared to last season, by 17% – driven by contractual uplifts to players and extended contracts for players and football staff."

Its being implied its a benefit - its another example of poor management at the top
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
It’s mentioned about the fact that academy players can’t bridge the gap to the first team as easily in this league, but have we done much work on developing our academy side? I’m sure there would be some 16-18 year olds released by Premier League clubs who could improve the quality of our setup. I know we signed Cashman and Lusala but can’t immediately think of any others.
Takes time doesn’t it and time we don’t have time
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
I think you're reading into something that's not there. There is nothing implied, it's clearly stated unequivocally what it includes. If people choose not to read the statement that's up to them.

Of course it is - Pete said in his summary player budget up 17% - no caveats. Its rubbish. If you have a business that has to honour wage increases thats got to be included in the budget planning process as a baseline. On that basis we will be weakening our squad every season as we cannot afford contractual obligations.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Don’t know whether it’s being described as a benefit it’s a fact that the playing budget currently is 17% higher than last year

But thats the reality of every business as people get paid more every year. Businesses would (or should) factor in pay rises before any budget increase. Has Robins had 17% more money to transact deals this season?
 

Frostie

Well-Known Member
Of course it is - Pete said in his summary player budget up 17% - no caveats. Its rubbish. If you have a business that has to honour wage increases thats got to be included in the budget planning process as a baseline. On that basis we will be weakening our squad every season as we cannot afford contractual obligations.

I see, I thought you were referring to the statement rather than Pete's summary of last night.
I can't speak for @Sky Blue Pete but I assume his post was just an outline summary for brevity & there will be more 'meat on the bones' in the actual minutes unless there were literally only 30 words stated all evening?
 

Sky Blue Pete

Well-Known Member
I see, I thought you were referring to the statement rather than Pete's summary of last night.
I can't speak for @Sky Blue Pete but I assume his post was just an outline summary for brevity & there will be more 'meat on the bones' in the actual minutes unless there were literally only 30 words stated all evening?
It was hard for anyone to get a word in with one person going off on one. Passionate but completely missing the point regarding what the call was about. However maybe I’ve got it wrong and the time Is for us to give a history of the club, why we are so big, why we should sign players etc etc etc

I really thought it was questions and follow up questions to the answers given

Maybe grendel and ksb are correct it’s pointless and what we need is regular club updates on questions received from fans through social media

I don’t know
 

KenilworthSkyBlue

Well-Known Member
It was hard for anyone to get a word in with one person going off on one. Passionate but completely missing the point regarding what the call was about. However maybe I’ve got it wrong and the time Is for us to give a history of the club, why we are so big, why we should sign players etc etc etc

I really thought it was questions and follow up questions to the answers given

Maybe grendel and ksb are correct it’s pointless and what we need is regular club updates on questions received from fans through social media

I don’t know

What's the structure of the forum? As it's something that I don't really have any knowledge on.

Are questions/responses open to all or are certain people designated as speakers and the rest who join simply listen in and perhaps send in questions through Teams chat for example?
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
I see, I thought you were referring to the statement rather than Pete's summary of last night.
I can't speak for @Sky Blue Pete but I assume his post was just an outline summary for brevity & there will be more 'meat on the bones' in the actual minutes unless there were literally only 30 words stated all evening?

No I see in my business I’d include standard increases in a plan for the following year and factor that out of budget spend.
 

Frostie

Well-Known Member
It was hard for anyone to get a word in with one person going off on one. Passionate but completely missing the point regarding what the call was about. However maybe I’ve got it wrong and the time Is for us to give a history of the club, why we are so big, why we should sign players etc etc etc

I really thought it was questions and follow up questions to the answers given

Maybe grendel and ksb are correct it’s pointless and what we need is regular club updates on questions received from fans through social media

I don’t know

Who was that out of interest?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top