Greg Florimos Boots wrote:
Well said.
To have ambition you need money in this sport and we do not have anyone who can set fire to say a million pounds, we do have people who dig very deep compared to their own wealth and probably over stretch themselves for our club. Would people rather take Fev's approach where we spend money that we have not got in the hope of something happening? If Fev would not have made the top 4 this season they would have been crippled financially, do we really want to go down that root and risk the future of the club?
GFB,
Obviously you have access to our (Fev's) financial plans and much more information than I do. Could you let me have a copy of these so that I could be as informed as you are?
Seriously I am 100% sure that we (Fev) had a business plan for the year (2016) which was realistic based on projections and was based on NOT making the top 4, i.e. projected attendances, sponsorship central monies, bar takings, etc. This incorporated having a squad of 22 players in 2016 rather 35-40 players at certain other clubs (thinking about one of your neighbors here rather than Fax). Whether we hit this business plan is a different matter. Again based on this business plan I am sure there was never any intent of the club (in your words) of "...spending what we have not got in the hope of something happening". Personally I would rather have 22 quality (relative to other teams in our comp) on the books, rather than 35-40 that turn out to be average.
The issue with a small squad is that injuries can cripple you and they did for us at certain points in the season. This Fev supplemented with DR where possible, but given Leeds' injury list this again wasn't possible at times. To this end in 2017 Fev are going with a squad of 24 players (based on having slightly more central funding in 2017.
So GFB which was the better business plan the one that Fev had or the ones that Fax & Bulls had last year? I am not saying the one Fev have is the best thing ever, but I am sure if you ask the Bulls fans they would have been happy to have 8-10 less players on their books so as to add a couple quality signings I know what the answer would have been.
FYI
- I think that what Fax have done with the "reserves" is excellent and I believe that the RFL should force all clubs in SL and our league to run one as part of their RL license. However until this happens why run a team that costs @£50,000-£100,000 that could be used to bring in 2-3 quality signings?
- Fev stuck with the "reserves" when other clubs didn't, until last year. In this space the Bosman ruling has a lot to answer for IMO since after it was implemented in RL it has meant that transfer fees except for the top dogs has been very limited. In turn this generates the question why develop the youth players when you get very little back for that investment. Though personally I would have liked Fev to stay with the "reserves".
- I hate DR and would much prefer all clubs to have stood up in the 1st instance and say we are not doing this, but it didn't happen. I dislike the fact that we are using it, but understand why we have gone down this route (small squad means you have to find additional bodies from somewhere). I even considered whether following my club was appropriate on the back of going with DR, but the truth is I love my club and it would be nigh on impossible to turn my back on it.
Maybe see you at the first game of the season? You can show me the information you have on Fev's financial plan from 2016?
