terry TAYLOR...
terry TAYLOR...
Interesting letter/email published in the NLP today by our Goldalming
correspondent re the Conference Management.
"Brian Lee must go!" was the headline.
correspondent re the Conference Management.
"Brian Lee must go!" was the headline.
-
- Middle-Aged Spread
- Posts: 1044
- Joined: Fri Aug 10, 2007 9:28 am
Re: terry TAYLOR...
"OUFC4eva" wrote:Interesting letter/email published in the NLP today by our Goldalming
correspondent re the Conference Management.
"Brian Lee must go!" was the headline.
TT was also going on about every club needing to be at or near financial break even to be allowed into the Conference.
Would be an interesting number of clubs in Div 5 if that rule was brought in.
-
- Senile
- Posts: 5178
- Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:22 am
That was indeed me, albeit edited and published a week late by NLP.
Clubs at all levels should operate at no worse than break even in my view.
I don't see why directors should be able to hock the future of clubs as their temporary playthings, usually leaving a mess forthe supporters to sort out.
It is only because of directors having ambition beyond their capability that causes clubs to go to the wall, or enter administration for local businesses and the taxpayer to pick up the bill.
It is not operating a level playing field if clubs are allowed to spend beyond their means whilst others act prudently.
Overspending also contributes to excessive wage demands from players, which then affects all clubs, and leads to higher ticket prices, and/or reliance on other income such as TV money.
Oerspending leads to interest costs, which in turn leads to reduced future budgets, or a spiral of overspending to make up perennial deficits.
We might well have a few more part time clubs as a result, and we might well have a slightly different World order of football supremacy, but neither is a bad thing. How many of use think that Chelseahave bought their way to the top with funds that they do not have? Most I should think. It mak a very uninteresting competition when the competition can be bought, even if you can't really afford to buy it.
Clubs at all levels should operate at no worse than break even in my view.
I don't see why directors should be able to hock the future of clubs as their temporary playthings, usually leaving a mess forthe supporters to sort out.
It is only because of directors having ambition beyond their capability that causes clubs to go to the wall, or enter administration for local businesses and the taxpayer to pick up the bill.
It is not operating a level playing field if clubs are allowed to spend beyond their means whilst others act prudently.
Overspending also contributes to excessive wage demands from players, which then affects all clubs, and leads to higher ticket prices, and/or reliance on other income such as TV money.
Oerspending leads to interest costs, which in turn leads to reduced future budgets, or a spiral of overspending to make up perennial deficits.
We might well have a few more part time clubs as a result, and we might well have a slightly different World order of football supremacy, but neither is a bad thing. How many of use think that Chelseahave bought their way to the top with funds that they do not have? Most I should think. It mak a very uninteresting competition when the competition can be bought, even if you can't really afford to buy it.
-
- Middle-Aged Spread
- Posts: 1808
- Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:34 am
- Location: London
Indeed. A bit like Us in the 1980's.... However, whenever I see the Milk Cup, I think of the wonderful sides I watched play in my very early days as an oufc supporter. In no way do I think of the debt buying that trophy (or our position in the top division) got Us in to. One which we're still paying back today, in the form of non-ownership of our stadium etc etc
Good times, the 1980's. Whatever happens to Chelsea in the future, I bet their hardcore supportbase will look back at the noughties with as much fondness as we look back at the 1980s.
Good times, the 1980's. Whatever happens to Chelsea in the future, I bet their hardcore supportbase will look back at the noughties with as much fondness as we look back at the 1980s.
-
- Senile
- Posts: 5178
- Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:22 am
Re:
I doubt they would if Abramovich got bored and pulled the plug."recordmeister" wrote:Indeed. A bit like Us in the 1980's.... However, whenever I see the Milk Cup, I think of the wonderful sides I watched play in my very early days as an oufc supporter. In no way do I think of the debt buying that trophy (or our position in the top division) got Us in to. One which we're still paying back today, in the form of non-ownership of our stadium etc etc
Good times, the 1980's. Whatever happens to Chelsea in the future, I bet their hardcore supportbase will look back at the noughties with as much fondness as we look back at the 1980s.
Yes the argument fully extends to us in the 1980s. But who knows where we and every other club would be if no one had been allowed to overspend. We might now be a top flight team on a sustainable basis, and Chelski might be a Blue Square Premier club. Ticket prices might be affordable to everyone, instead of only the prawn sandwich brigade being able to see the likes of ManUre and Chelski, and football might be at more regular times and not subject to TV scheduling, and matches might be live on TV without having to subscribe to Sky.
Every time I think about playing the likes of ManUre and Liverpool, I can't help but remember the Mirror Group pensioners, and the local companies that got shafted by Maxwell, both during and after his reign, as a result of Maxwell's actions.
You have to live your life with morals, not a me me me attitude, having no cares for your responsibilities, or the rights of others.
-
- Senile
- Posts: 5178
- Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:22 am
Re:
I suspect there may have been one or two (tens of thousands) in the Mirror Group pension scheme who didn't have much interest in OUFC. A shed load of people lost pretty much their entire pension rights just as they were approaching retirement. Not good, and certainly not worth a trophy."A-Ro" wrote:I was in the Mirror Group pension scheme and I for one don't mind trading my pension as it was for the good times we had.
Having said that I wouldn't trade my current pension pot for similar success.
Re:
First Wilder, now you diss the Milk Cup. Will this blasphemy ever end?!?"GodalmingYellow" wrote:I suspect there may have been one or two (tens of thousands) in the Mirror Group pension scheme who didn't have much interest in OUFC. A shed load of people lost pretty much their entire pension rights just as they were approaching retirement. Not good, and certainly not worth a trophy."A-Ro" wrote:I was in the Mirror Group pension scheme and I for one don't mind trading my pension as it was for the good times we had.
Having said that I wouldn't trade my current pension pot for similar success.
-
- Senile
- Posts: 5178
- Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 10:22 am
Re:
"theox" wrote:First Wilder, now you diss the Milk Cup. Will this blasphemy ever end?!?"GodalmingYellow" wrote:I suspect there may have been one or two (tens of thousands) in the Mirror Group pension scheme who didn't have much interest in OUFC. A shed load of people lost pretty much their entire pension rights just as they were approaching retirement. Not good, and certainly not worth a trophy."A-Ro" wrote:I was in the Mirror Group pension scheme and I for one don't mind trading my pension as it was for the good times we had.
Having said that I wouldn't trade my current pension pot for similar success.
Johnny Aldridge likes to dress up in women's clothes...
Joey Beauchamp preferred Swinedown...
Jim Smith likes the sauce... oh hang on a minute, at least let's make it realistic.
Fully agree(!!) with GY on this one - as someone who was just a bit too young to be taken to the Milk Cup it has since been nothing but money troubles which has resulted in our plumment down the divisions, well that David Kempout and Brian 'I don't need Mooney or Craig Davies' Talbot.
Living within our means should see us doing well in league 1, with the odd go at promotion - not too much to ask surely?
Living within our means should see us doing well in league 1, with the odd go at promotion - not too much to ask surely?