For me, IF we have a bottom six budget, four successive seasons challenging for playoffs would be very impressive indeed, Mr Middle. Indeed four successive seasons outside the bottom six would be a pretty good achievement.
DJ, I understand you cannot give details and wouldn't ask you too. Could you confirm though whether as you understand it the Trust Board has reasonable knowledge of the relative standing of its playing budget compared to other clubs.
@DJWYC14 said:
I don't disagree glasshalffull and also agree with the sentiment expressed in both aloysius and fame_46 's posts. I am still intrigued however by your inference that you have further knowledge on where our budget sits comparatively. Can you state your position or were you in fact guessing like the other posters?
I would suggest that @glasshalffull is just a typical bullshitter
Basing your view on success based on something you can't possibly know is a pretty strange way to do it isn't it @DevC ? It almost makes the games irrelevant if the table can be decided on budget sizes.
Although my knowledge may be a little out of date as it is a situation that can change (i.e. new investment at clubs like Accrington and Crawley), I am confident that we were in the bottom 6 budget wise this time last season and I am not aware of any substantial loosening of the purse strings since.
Let’s look at it another way. How many clubs can we be relatively safe in assuming are worse off than Wycombe?
I would say probably Newport, Stevenage, Cheltenham,
Yeovil, Morecambe and Barnet. Don’t know about FGR but they are bankrolled by a multi millionaire. So, that’s just 6 clubs. Yes, some guesswork there but also some knowledge.
Don't all clubs release their figures in end of year accounts? A year or so on, but i'm sure someone with a lot of time on their hands could sniff through the info.
But at the end of the day, we've been fed, "small budget, squad and overachieving", but then you look at the big lower league names we have. So it's hard to really judge.
Either way we're blessed to have Bayo, Tyson, CMS and Saunders. Probably right up there in the biggest name players in the league. The latter 3 we have seen some fairly easy to believe steers on what they've earnt previously, in the 5k-15k a week bracket.
Pay offs from past clubs, best offer available being from us, wanting to remain in this sort of area, and it can all add up
it's pretty facile to draw up a list of "budgets" (whatever that means) and say that's how you expect the table to look, to say the least
obviously, if a side has a million quid more to spend on the side than another, then of course you'd expect them to finish higher, but are we really saying that if we spend a grand more on wages per month than another side then we have really underachieved if we finish below them
there are so many other factors, not least ability of the manager, how long they've had to build a squad over time, how settled the squad is etc
as it happens, I think we've got a good manager, he's been there a while, and he's put together a not bad squad. I predicted we'd get promoted at the start of the season and I haven't changed my mind
this constant going back to "budgets" is tedious in the extreme
The tables are influenced by budget size though, Mr middle, wouldn't you agree. its why for example you can be pretty sure that Man C, man U, Liverpool, Arsenal, Tottenham and Chelsea will fill at least five of the top six places again next season. Every now and then though a Leicester comes along to keep sporting dreams alive.
Let us dream a little and hope that mr plant is right and that the club is promoted this season. Whatever our relative budget is this season, presumably we can all agree that our budget in Lg1 would be likely to be in the bottom four. In such circumstance would you argue that we have just as much chance of success in lg1 as any other team? Would you agree with me that in such circumstance a final outcome of 17th would be a relative success and indeed 20th would be acceptable or would you call for the managers head at such disgraceful failure?
@eric_plant said:
it's pretty facile to draw up a list of "budgets" (whatever that means) and say that's how you expect the table to look, to say the least
obviously, if a side has a million quid more to spend on the side than another, then of course you'd expect them to finish higher, but are we really saying that if we spend a grand more on wages per month than another side then we have really underachieved if we finish below them
there are so many other factors, not least ability of the manager, how long they've had to build a squad over time, how settled the squad is etc
as it happens, I think we've got a good manager, he's been there a while, and he's put together a not bad squad. I predicted we'd get promoted at the start of the season and I haven't changed my mind
this constant going back to "budgets" is tedious in the extreme
I disagree that it’s facile to see a correlation between spending power and league positions. A look at all four divisions tells you that, although there are the odd exceptions, the richer you are the more likely you are to be successful. If you find the topic so tedious why did you bother to post about it?
The money at the top of the game has distorted it to the point where it is no longer a sport. Leicester City were hardly paupers and whilst their success was a story it wasn't the miracle some suggest. In League Two though I'd say it has much less impact. How did Portsmouth spend so long in the league and why are we still regularly playing Notts Co. and Luton Town?
I think we may have to disagree about whether Leicester City winning the league was a amazing unexpected achievement or not, Mr Middle. I think we will find that seasons like last where 6th placed team (Man utd) have 50% more points than the team in eighth are the rule not the exception.
Money gap between top and bottom is lower in lg2 than premier and player quality follows more of a normal distribution curve, nonetheless if we had access to budgets, I suspect we would find a very strong positive correlation by the end of season between budget and league position. Just the way it is.
One last question from me, Mr Middle. if the question was asked at the finance forum where our budget lay and the response from the trust was "bottom six", would you believe them?
@Right_in_the_Middle said:
The money at the top of the game has distorted it to the point where it is no longer a sport. Leicester City were hardly paupers and whilst their success was a story it wasn't the miracle some suggest. In League Two though I'd say it has much less impact. How did Portsmouth spend so long in the league and why are we still regularly playing Notts Co. and Luton Town?
Luton and Notts County, the top two? I suspect we won’t be playing them for much longer unless of course we win promotion ourselves. The richer clubs will always attract the better players although it’s not a guarantee of instant success.
Oh Eric. Is 2018 to be just the same as 2017. Is reasonably mature discussion really to be disrupted by boring and witless personal abuse? Is that what we want the gasroom to be?
I know I should be interested in the Budget...but I'm not. And though it looks highly likely that Luton and County will be the automatic promotion winners...it's not settled yet by a long chalk. As @Right_in_the_Middle noted, Pompey were a shoe-in every season because of size of club, gates, etc etc...but they spent three years trying to get out.
To be fair to them the question really should be first team budget rather than all playing budget. I genuinely don't think the answer would be yes if that was the question. They have hidden behind the lack of a youth set up on this point.
What are you basing your 'knowledge' on though @glasshalffull ? Are you a club representative with access to this information?
If not then I don't understand how you can claim to have this knowledge.
@DevC I would have said the Board will be able of and have a rough idea of our relevant standing compared to other clubs yes, can't comment on exactly how much detail and how accurate it is myself though.
@DevC Youth systems cost money. That is part of a playing budget. Whether they 'lose' money or not depends on a lot of factors that aren't really relevant to the debate. I would love Wycombe to run a youth set up more than anything else. I am probably as far a way as possible as thinking it is stupid. I think it is an essential make up of a proper community club.
In terms of fan forums, I think they are pretty much pointless with Ainsworth and Howard involved. Neither give much away but in all honesty I'd wonder what the point is in asking your question anyway. I thought I'd made it pretty clear I don't follow your budget equals league placing argument. Wondering how much each player in the league earns is pointless.
Still curious about @glasshalffull postings and what I see as making assumptions unless he is indeed very 'in the know' which would be surprising. Seems to hint at coming from a position of knowledge but isn't saying if this is the case so would be interesting to know if this knowledge is based on anything other than guesswork?
@DJWYC14 said:
What are you basing your 'knowledge' on though glasshalffull ? Are you a club representative with access to this information?
If not then I don't understand how you can claim to have this knowledge.
DevC I would have said the Board will be able of and have a rough idea of our relevant standing compared to other clubs yes, can't comment on exactly how much detail and how accurate it is myself though.
If I was a club representative (which I’m not) I would be unlikely to reveal my identity on here, would I?
There are ways of obtaining this information from people who have a fair idea of what’s going on in their division.
I don't think that the 70 or so league teams running youth systems are doing so for purposes of community involvement. I do think they are doing so out of a hardnosed business judgement that it is in their commercial interest to do so.
I don't have any desire to know how much eg Luke O'Nien earns. If I did learn that he earned for example £50k per year, I wouldn't know whether to be surprised that that was so high, so low and about as expected. I am interested in the relative budget however, as I recognise that budget is a strong predictor of performance and hence a vital element of forming a reasonable judgement on club and manager performance.
I am rather saddened that you are so negative about Howard and Ainsworth. In my view the club will in all likelihood be a less successful entity when they are gone. I fear we may find out soon enough. lets hope I am wrong.
@Right_in_the_Middle said:
DevC Youth systems cost money. That is part of a playing budget. Whether they 'lose' money or not depends on a lot of factors that aren't really relevant to the debate. I would love Wycombe to run a youth set up more than anything else. I am probably as far a way as possible as thinking it is stupid. I think it is an essential make up of a proper community club.
In terms of fan forums, I think they are pretty much pointless with Ainsworth and Howard involved. Neither give much away but in all honesty I'd wonder what the point is in asking your question anyway. I thought I'd made it pretty clear I don't follow your budget equals league placing argument. Wondering how much each player in the league earns is pointless.
Of course budget equals league placing in all but the exceptional cases. How can you argue otherwise when there is so much evidence throughout the leagues?
@DevC I'm only negative about Ainsworth and Howard in terms of their communication to the supporters. Ainsworth is always quite secretive and Howard isn't a great public speaker. I've got a lot of time for everything else they do at the club so it's a pretty poor tactic to take one criticism as a total condemnation.
I can't get my head around needing to know a budget to work out how good a team is. Surely the strongest indicator is how good the team is on the pitch. If you don't care about how much a player earns and can't equate it to normality why is the total of those wages so important?
Clubs have youth set ups because that is what clubs have always done. Do Risborough Rangers do it out of a hard nosed business judgement? Your view is very much bourne out of 21st century media a
@glasshalffull Plenty of examples to show the these are not exceptional cases so I'm going to continue to argue otherwise. Luton, Portsmouth and Notts Co are case in point.
Comments
For me, IF we have a bottom six budget, four successive seasons challenging for playoffs would be very impressive indeed, Mr Middle. Indeed four successive seasons outside the bottom six would be a pretty good achievement.
DJ, I understand you cannot give details and wouldn't ask you too. Could you confirm though whether as you understand it the Trust Board has reasonable knowledge of the relative standing of its playing budget compared to other clubs.
I would suggest that @glasshalffull is just a typical bullshitter
Basing your view on success based on something you can't possibly know is a pretty strange way to do it isn't it @DevC ? It almost makes the games irrelevant if the table can be decided on budget sizes.
Although my knowledge may be a little out of date as it is a situation that can change (i.e. new investment at clubs like Accrington and Crawley), I am confident that we were in the bottom 6 budget wise this time last season and I am not aware of any substantial loosening of the purse strings since.
Let’s look at it another way. How many clubs can we be relatively safe in assuming are worse off than Wycombe?
I would say probably Newport, Stevenage, Cheltenham,
Yeovil, Morecambe and Barnet. Don’t know about FGR but they are bankrolled by a multi millionaire. So, that’s just 6 clubs. Yes, some guesswork there but also some knowledge.
I'd expect Accrington & crawley have less than us on top of your list at least
I'd guess we'd be similar to a cambridge, Exeter, Grimsby and Carlisle in the middle somewhere but it's all guesswork really.
Don't all clubs release their figures in end of year accounts? A year or so on, but i'm sure someone with a lot of time on their hands could sniff through the info.
But at the end of the day, we've been fed, "small budget, squad and overachieving", but then you look at the big lower league names we have. So it's hard to really judge.
Either way we're blessed to have Bayo, Tyson, CMS and Saunders. Probably right up there in the biggest name players in the league. The latter 3 we have seen some fairly easy to believe steers on what they've earnt previously, in the 5k-15k a week bracket.
Pay offs from past clubs, best offer available being from us, wanting to remain in this sort of area, and it can all add up
it's pretty facile to draw up a list of "budgets" (whatever that means) and say that's how you expect the table to look, to say the least
obviously, if a side has a million quid more to spend on the side than another, then of course you'd expect them to finish higher, but are we really saying that if we spend a grand more on wages per month than another side then we have really underachieved if we finish below them
there are so many other factors, not least ability of the manager, how long they've had to build a squad over time, how settled the squad is etc
as it happens, I think we've got a good manager, he's been there a while, and he's put together a not bad squad. I predicted we'd get promoted at the start of the season and I haven't changed my mind
this constant going back to "budgets" is tedious in the extreme
Not sure about Crawley.
The tables are influenced by budget size though, Mr middle, wouldn't you agree. its why for example you can be pretty sure that Man C, man U, Liverpool, Arsenal, Tottenham and Chelsea will fill at least five of the top six places again next season. Every now and then though a Leicester comes along to keep sporting dreams alive.
Let us dream a little and hope that mr plant is right and that the club is promoted this season. Whatever our relative budget is this season, presumably we can all agree that our budget in Lg1 would be likely to be in the bottom four. In such circumstance would you argue that we have just as much chance of success in lg1 as any other team? Would you agree with me that in such circumstance a final outcome of 17th would be a relative success and indeed 20th would be acceptable or would you call for the managers head at such disgraceful failure?
I disagree that it’s facile to see a correlation between spending power and league positions. A look at all four divisions tells you that, although there are the odd exceptions, the richer you are the more likely you are to be successful. If you find the topic so tedious why did you bother to post about it?
The money at the top of the game has distorted it to the point where it is no longer a sport. Leicester City were hardly paupers and whilst their success was a story it wasn't the miracle some suggest. In League Two though I'd say it has much less impact. How did Portsmouth spend so long in the league and why are we still regularly playing Notts Co. and Luton Town?
I think we may have to disagree about whether Leicester City winning the league was a amazing unexpected achievement or not, Mr Middle. I think we will find that seasons like last where 6th placed team (Man utd) have 50% more points than the team in eighth are the rule not the exception.
Money gap between top and bottom is lower in lg2 than premier and player quality follows more of a normal distribution curve, nonetheless if we had access to budgets, I suspect we would find a very strong positive correlation by the end of season between budget and league position. Just the way it is.
One last question from me, Mr Middle. if the question was asked at the finance forum where our budget lay and the response from the trust was "bottom six", would you believe them?
Luton and Notts County, the top two? I suspect we won’t be playing them for much longer unless of course we win promotion ourselves. The richer clubs will always attract the better players although it’s not a guarantee of instant success.
Dev already pouring cold water on a yet to be achieved promotion and railing against imaginary future comments from supporters
what an absolute joyless dullard
Oh Eric. Is 2018 to be just the same as 2017. Is reasonably mature discussion really to be disrupted by boring and witless personal abuse? Is that what we want the gasroom to be?
I know I should be interested in the Budget...but I'm not. And though it looks highly likely that Luton and County will be the automatic promotion winners...it's not settled yet by a long chalk. As @Right_in_the_Middle noted, Pompey were a shoe-in every season because of size of club, gates, etc etc...but they spent three years trying to get out.
@DevC No. I don't think I would.
To be fair to them the question really should be first team budget rather than all playing budget. I genuinely don't think the answer would be yes if that was the question. They have hidden behind the lack of a youth set up on this point.
then there doesn't seem much point in having forums then, Mr middle.
I don't mind you qualifying the question you want to ask, but if you then don't believe the answers anyway - what's the point?
What do you mean by "first team budget" - are you excluding just youth team or other stuff as well?
You seem to be assuming that youth set ups lose money - why then do virtually every club run them? Are they all stupid?
They do lose money
....
What are you basing your 'knowledge' on though @glasshalffull ? Are you a club representative with access to this information?
If not then I don't understand how you can claim to have this knowledge.
@DevC I would have said the Board will be able of and have a rough idea of our relevant standing compared to other clubs yes, can't comment on exactly how much detail and how accurate it is myself though.
thank you DJ. Fully understand that is as far as you can go.
@DevC Youth systems cost money. That is part of a playing budget. Whether they 'lose' money or not depends on a lot of factors that aren't really relevant to the debate. I would love Wycombe to run a youth set up more than anything else. I am probably as far a way as possible as thinking it is stupid. I think it is an essential make up of a proper community club.
In terms of fan forums, I think they are pretty much pointless with Ainsworth and Howard involved. Neither give much away but in all honesty I'd wonder what the point is in asking your question anyway. I thought I'd made it pretty clear I don't follow your budget equals league placing argument. Wondering how much each player in the league earns is pointless.
Still curious about @glasshalffull postings and what I see as making assumptions unless he is indeed very 'in the know' which would be surprising. Seems to hint at coming from a position of knowledge but isn't saying if this is the case so would be interesting to know if this knowledge is based on anything other than guesswork?
If I was a club representative (which I’m not) I would be unlikely to reveal my identity on here, would I?
There are ways of obtaining this information from people who have a fair idea of what’s going on in their division.
Strong whiff of something in here...
I disagree with you, Mr Middle.
I don't think that the 70 or so league teams running youth systems are doing so for purposes of community involvement. I do think they are doing so out of a hardnosed business judgement that it is in their commercial interest to do so.
I don't have any desire to know how much eg Luke O'Nien earns. If I did learn that he earned for example £50k per year, I wouldn't know whether to be surprised that that was so high, so low and about as expected. I am interested in the relative budget however, as I recognise that budget is a strong predictor of performance and hence a vital element of forming a reasonable judgement on club and manager performance.
I am rather saddened that you are so negative about Howard and Ainsworth. In my view the club will in all likelihood be a less successful entity when they are gone. I fear we may find out soon enough. lets hope I am wrong.
???
Of course budget equals league placing in all but the exceptional cases. How can you argue otherwise when there is so much evidence throughout the leagues?
@DevC I'm only negative about Ainsworth and Howard in terms of their communication to the supporters. Ainsworth is always quite secretive and Howard isn't a great public speaker. I've got a lot of time for everything else they do at the club so it's a pretty poor tactic to take one criticism as a total condemnation.
I can't get my head around needing to know a budget to work out how good a team is. Surely the strongest indicator is how good the team is on the pitch. If you don't care about how much a player earns and can't equate it to normality why is the total of those wages so important?
Clubs have youth set ups because that is what clubs have always done. Do Risborough Rangers do it out of a hard nosed business judgement? Your view is very much bourne out of 21st century media a
@glasshalffull Plenty of examples to show the these are not exceptional cases so I'm going to continue to argue otherwise. Luton, Portsmouth and Notts Co are case in point.