Stoke show RFC how to run a Real Football Club

[floyd__streete]

I meant he might have been right about the 2nd point, (about the effect of signing new players) not the first.

New players might just have likely given us impetus, made certain players less certain of our place and added a bit of much-needed quality. But I guess I am speaking the bleedin' obvious here.

[Royal Rother]

Indeed, but we'll never know.

That said, he himself admitted it was a mistake with hindsight because the players he had proved not capable of staying up....

(Oh well, you know where I was coming from.)

[RoyalBlue]

I will be quite annoyed if a reasonably significant amount of the Long/Mills money is not re-invested into the team over the next year or so.

Reasonably significant can mean many things. But what if the money goes into the club to cover the known budgetary deficit which will allow the club to keep the current players on the sort of money they already are on? Isn't that investment of sorts?

A well run business does not repeatedly sell off its most valuable and productive assets in order to cover losses that are being run up on an annual basis. In the end those that do that are left with only low value assets incapable of supporting the demands on the business.

And to see just what a fantastically gifted businessman JM is is, take a look at how well his other businesses are doing. Of course the retort from his followers will be along the line of 'a lot better than yours' etc. but that still does not put him up anywhere near as high as some make out.

Not only will the club have a great deal of money coming in from the sale of Mills and Long but they also presumably have got shot of two of their highest earners, so are saving on wages too. Yet still we can't afford to reinvest significant sums in strengthening the squad for fear of the next black hole this well run business will be facing.

[Ian Royal]

An "interesting" fact I just noticed. 13 out of the 20 clubs in the Premier League this season have spent at least one year in the Championship since 2000-01.

And 13 of the 32 teams to have been relegated in that time haven't made it back, not including Blackpool who haven't had a chance to try.

[Arch]

Coppell said at the time of relegation that he had thought that 1, the squad he had was amply good enough to stay up and 2, that signing new players might just upset the applecart in the dressing room and not have an overall positive effect on the team.

And of course he might have been right.

He wasn't though, was he . We went down.

And before anyone dares suggest we were unlucky - we conceded 6 points to each of the two teams who finished directly above the dotted line that season, Fulham and Bolton. Thrashed we were, done over twice by both of them. We failed to invest through Coppell's paranoia and thoroughly deserved to go down.

Woah there, Neddy! Spot on about what sent us down, especially the home defeats against Fulham and Bolton, but that doesn't underwrite the leap to your point about investment. The very same players who got us all thinking we were comfortable in February capitulated in March and April. Why does it always have to be about investment and not judgments of what went on on the pitch on a given day?

[Sir Dodger Royal]

Interesting comments but we were so near to the Premiership last year. How many teams would then dismantle the side because they failed to go up?

The answer is virtually none. Last year we didn't have a massive deficit and the Madman even stated the fee for Sig would cover any deficit for two seasons.

Any business which is looking to develop and grow needs investment as opposed to asset stripping. Basically the Madman has no interest in moving RFC forward. Yes both fees for Mills and Long were fine but let's see how much is invested in the next two weeks but don't hold your breadth.

At best £1.5 million but in todays market that is no great shakes and in real terms would represent 10% of incoming fees for this season. Also you are unlikely to attract good players when it is clear to be seen that all we do is sell on for a profit. If RFC reckon they will always find gems for virtually nothing and then make a massive profit then they are living in 'cloud cuckoo' land.

To date we have been lucky but luck is not the way to grow and prosper it needs a strategy, implementation plan and adequate finance and by the latter I don't mean tuppence.

Real Facts in the Real World of Business something the Madman has lost and hence why his businesses are in no great state.

You know it makes sense. Enjoy a Pizzaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

[Hoop Blah]

Interesting comments but we were so near to the Premiership last year. How many teams would then dismantle the side because they failed to go up?

To be fair we've not really dismantled the side though.

Mills and Long have been sold. Ingimarsson, who didn't really feature for a couple of seasons was released and a loan defender moved on. That other clubs haven't shown enough of an interest in our remaining players (most thought Kebe and Federici would be gone by now) probably speaks volumes for how good others really think they are.

Would other clubs have done more to keep the few parts of the team here? In Longs case no. Mills? I doubt it but as he went to a fellow Championship side I guess there's a strong argument to say they would.

So dismantling boils down to selling Mills for a massively inflated fee. Can't fault them on that.

[Schards#2]

Interesting comments but we were so near to the Premiership last year. How many teams would then dismantle the side because they failed to go up?

To be fair we've not really dismantled the side though.

Mills and Long have been sold. Ingimarsson, who didn't really feature for a couple of seasons was released and a loan defender moved on. That other clubs haven't shown enough of an interest in our remaining players (most thought Kebe and Federici would be gone by now) probably speaks volumes for how good others really think they are.

Would other clubs have done more to keep the few parts of the team here? In Longs case no. Mills? I doubt it but as he went to a fellow Championship side I guess there's a strong argument to say they would.

So dismantling boils down to selling Mills for a massively inflated fee. Can't fault them on that.

I certainly think most other clubs would take greater steps than Reading will to fill the gaps.

I fully expect Reading to reinvest less than 10% of their incoming transfer fees. Just like last year.

You need an awful lot of luck or scouting/acadamy products far superior to every other team for that business model not to end in relegation.

[LUX]

I thoroughly enjoy SDR's musings and they brighten up the Team Board when they appear. And for once, some reasoned discussion from some.

agreed.

He and Floyd are very readable, albeit unrelentingly negative.

You don't have to share their views, of course. I like it when they are proven wrong, obviously. But their contributions >>>>>>95% of this Board.

[Hoop Blah]

I certainly think most other clubs would take greater steps than Reading will to fill the gaps.

I fully expect Reading to reinvest less than 10% of their incoming transfer fees. Just like last year.

You need an awful lot of luck or scouting/acadamy products far superior to every other team for that business model not to end in relegation.

Don't disagree with that, but that's a totally different argument than the one put forward about dismantling a play off losing team.

[Barry the bird boggler]

We lost our place at the top table due to SC's poor decision making and loyalty to players who were not performing to their full potential

The players he did bring in in Jan 2008 were completely wrong given our position and highly surprising given the players we were strongly being linked with at the time.

Management mistakes are not the fault of SJM

Please go away.

[Royal Rother]

I certainly think most other clubs would take greater steps than Reading will to fill the gaps.

I fully expect Reading to reinvest less than 10% of their incoming transfer fees. Just like last year.

You need an awful lot of luck or scouting/acadamy products far superior to every other team for that business model not to end in relegation.

What is wrong with filling the gaps from within? We have Manset, Robson Kanu, Obita, Taylor et al who need to be given chances to properly establish themselves.

If they are not up to it then we will buy in January.

This is surely the commendable philosophy our business model is built around. Greater self sufficiency in producing talent (something Stoke City do not have) will naturally lead to greater self sufficiency financially. Giving Academy products a proper chance to shine will surely lead to more talent knocking on our door.

Buying someone in the immediate aftermath of selling someone just to keep (some of) the fans happy would be daft.

18 months ago, if asked, most fans would have rated Church as being more likely to succeed than Long. (And Hunt in front of both of them). He (Church) has just had a really bad spell but Long had his fair share of those. Maybe he deserves a chance before we go and buy someone who would block his opportunities.

[Svlad Cjelli]

I certainly think most other clubs would take greater steps than Reading will to fill the gaps.

I fully expect Reading to reinvest less than 10% of their incoming transfer fees. Just like last year.

You need an awful lot of luck or scouting/acadamy products far superior to every other team for that business model not to end in relegation.

Why do you look at "amount of money spent" as the only indicator worth considering?

What few people who look at just that one, single, indicator don't seem to grasp is that it's not about how much you spend. It's about how and where you spend, and RFC over the years has developed an ability to spend more effectively and more efficiently than just about any other club.

We're one of the few clubs (so far) realising that total spend is less important than how you use the money. But the whole of football is slowly waking up to that and coming closer to our way of thinking.

And, despite the same things being said every single season - about how the whole policy will doom us to relegation - it's a business model that continues to go from strength to strength.

[Cypry]

Interesting comments but we were so near to the Premiership last year. How many teams would then dismantle the side because they failed to go up?

Sorry, but in what way have we "dismantled the side" - Mills and Long have both left yes, but we've all known that Long was likely to leave if we didn't make the Prem since before the playoffs. Yes, we need to rebuild in central defence, but actually that's probably not a bad thing....other than that I fully expect there to be only three changes to the side that went out at Wembley when we take on Leicester this weekend (both central defenders and Hunt + one up front).....hardly "dismantling the side"...

The answer is virtually none. Last year we didn't have a massive deficit and the Madman even stated the fee for Sig would cover any deficit for two seasons.

Sorry, where did he say that? Can you send me a link? As far as I'm aware, the club said we had a gap of £4M to fill, and the Sig was sold for £7M so a few people jumped to conclusions - I certainly don't remember hearing the club say that the deficit was covered for two years......

Any business which is looking to develop and grow needs investment as opposed to asset stripping.

In what way is the club being "asset stripped"? That would imply that funds were leaving the club, but the accounts quite clearly show that's not the case - the money that's coming in from transfers is being spent (mostly) on players wages

Basically the Madman has no interest in moving RFC forward.

Why would that be the case? The best case scenario for SJM is that we gain promotion, suitable buyers are attracted, and he is able to sell the club at a price which he feels is appropriate. What he can't/won't do is "bet the farm" on spending big in the hope that it will guarantee promotion (oh how I'll laugh if Leicester fail this year)....

Yes both fees for Mills and Long were fine but let's see how much is invested in the next two weeks but don't hold your breadth.
At best £1.5 million but in todays market that is no great shakes and in real terms would represent 10% of incoming fees for this season.

Let's wait and see shall we rather than gnash our teeth about something that hasn't happened yet....

Also you are unlikely to attract good players when it is clear to be seen that all we do is sell on for a profit.

Why would that not attract players? We have a great record of taking on players, developing them, and selling them on. Yes, there's a financial benefit to the club, but do you think the players gain nothing from this deal either? What salary increase did Siggy, Long, Mills get from their moves? If I were a young player, seeing the likes of Long join Reading, spend a few years getting excellent experience and developing, then moving into the Prem, I'd find the club a very attractive proposition thank you....

If RFC reckon they will always find gems for virtually nothing and then make a massive profit then they are living in 'cloud cuckoo' land.

But it does seem to be working at the moment - what about Obita, Taylor, d'Ath, Ugwu, Arnold - all of them have the potential to be the next "gem"

To date we have been lucky but luck is not the way to grow and prosper it needs a strategy, implementation plan and adequate finance and by the latter I don't mean tuppence.

If you think the club have no strategy then listen to Brian - whenever asked about money he always says the same thing - we aim to break even, that's the way we do things......of course we have a strategy, and given how we've been there, or thereabout for the last couple of years, IMO it's a strategy which appears to be working....

Real Facts in the Real World of Business something the Madman has lost and hence why his businesses are in no great state.

Sorry, can't see any facts in what you say.......just negative claptrap.....loads of businesses are having a tough time at the moment, or hadn't you noticed?

[brendywendy]

I will be quite annoyed if a reasonably significant amount of the Long/Mills money is not re-invested into the team over the next year or so.

Reasonably significant can mean many things. But what if the money goes into the club to cover the known budgetary deficit which will allow the club to keep the current players on the sort of money they already are on? Isn't that investment of sorts?

A well run business does not repeatedly sell off its most valuable and productive assets in order to cover losses that are being run up on an annual basis. In the end those that do that are left with only low value assets incapable of supporting the demands on the business.

And to see just what a fantastically gifted businessman JM is is, take a look at how well his other businesses are doing. Of course the retort from his followers will be along the line of 'a lot better than yours' etc. but that still does not put him up anywhere near as high as some make out.

Not only will the club have a great deal of money coming in from the sale of Mills and Long but they also presumably have got shot of two of their highest earners, so are saving on wages too. Yet still we can't afford to reinvest significant sums in strengthening the squad for fear of the next black hole this well run business will be facing.

no one thinks JM is minted. thats the whole problem you divot.

your 2nd paragraph about well run businesses, totally ignores the financial state of all the other clubs in this division, & totally ignores the fact that if wed spent more on players and wages, wed have even less money than currently, which isnt very much.

and as for your last statement. we only sold long yesterday, and Brian has said well be looking at players to bring in before the window closes, so why dont you just wait and see.

there arent enough rolly eyed emoticons in all the world

[Wycombe Royal]

A well run business does not repeatedly sell off its most valuable and productive assets in order to cover losses that are being run up on an annual basis. In the end those that do that are left with only low value assets incapable of supporting the demands on the business.

Football isn't a normal business though. As a club we have outgoings bigger than our incomings. The biggest cause of that is player wages so in order to stop that happening we need to pay the players less which in turn means the players aren't as good which means their value as assets is lower.

On the other hand you could have some better players thus increasing your wage bill to a level that means you operate at a loss but each year you can sell some of your more valuable assets to cover the shortfall. Another key to making this approach a success is to buy players that will increase in value. The result being you have a better team each year but on the downside you always have to make player sales. It is a fine balancing act to get this right but it is something that RFC have a track record of doing very well.

[Svlad Cjelli]

A well run business does not repeatedly sell off its most valuable and productive assets in order to cover losses that are being run up on an annual basis. In the end those that do that are left with only low value assets incapable of supporting the demands on the business.

This is the crux of the argument.

The average Championship salary bill in the Championship last season (09/10) was £14.75m, (on a salary/revenue
ratio of 88%). We paid more than the average salary for the league - so over £15m, which was about £4m more than our total income. If we paid less we'd lose players a whole lot quicker than we do.

So please would you answer the glaring inconsistency that there is across all your arguments? At the same time you both want the club to spend more on players whilst also criticising them for running up an annual deficit!

What would you like the club to do?
- Pay less to players?
- Increase income?
- Or develop a source of transfer income to cover the losses?

[Royal Rother]

Perfect responses all of the above but there really is no point responding to Royal Blue.

I don't have a major problem with people disagreeing with the model itself but this guy is a blinkered buffoon without the intelligence to understand that model because he can't get past his irrational hatred of SJM.

Give it up.

Cue the usual "noses up SJM's arse" reply I suppose.

[Schards#2]

I certainly think most other clubs would take greater steps than Reading will to fill the gaps.

I fully expect Reading to reinvest less than 10% of their incoming transfer fees. Just like last year.

You need an awful lot of luck or scouting/acadamy products far superior to every other team for that business model not to end in relegation.

Why do you look at "amount of money spent" as the only indicator worth considering?

What few people who look at just that one, single, indicator don't seem to grasp is that it's not about how much you spend. It's about how and where you spend, and RFC over the years has developed an ability to spend more effectively and more efficiently than just about any other club.

We're one of the few clubs (so far) realising that total spend is less important than how you use the money. But the whole of football is slowly waking up to that and coming closer to our way of thinking.

And, despite the same things being said every single season - about how the whole policy will doom us to relegation - it's a business model that continues to go from strength to strength.

2006/7 - 8th in Premiership
2007/8 - 18th in Premiership
2008/9 - 4th Championship
2009/10 - 9th Championship

In Mid Feb 2011, we were 12th before embarking on a sensational and completely unforseen run (which is great), but without that, it's a straight line in the wrong direction, how is this going from strength to strength?

It's not just about money, if you lose someone in a Bosman, it's just as damaging. But the reality is that if you sell or lose your top performers and replace them with acadamy players or cheap lower league players, your side will get progressively worse. Once in a while you will unearth a diamond but you cannot defy gravity for ever.

Once in a while, you can come back from 2-0 down to win but, if you give the opposition a 2-0 start every game, over time, you will lose more than you win and it will cost you.

[brendywendy]

and compared to teams who came down and didnt go back up schards?



we got relegated from the prem, youd have to accept that once that happened some decrease in quality would occur.
but weve stabilised quicker than most and have managed to remain competetive.