Plan McKay: Long term model or short term policy?

[Mr1Croft]

The problem is this isn’t just a new transfer policy; this is a whole direction of a business model that the board of Doncaster Rovers are aiming to build. This topic has divided the Rovers fans like never before there are many who are 100% against, some who doubt this new approach but are willing to see how it unfolds, some fans think it will be good for short term only and others are 100% behind it reshaping the club from top down.
Before we look into the actual policy I think we first must look at the effects afterwards. Obviously we are all aware that should we go down this approach must be abolished, only around 10% of players coming to us now will dare come to League One. But what happens if it succeeds is this approach better long term or short term? Some fans have stated that they don’t mind these players here short term while we are in desperate need of quality and points, but they think should we get out of this mess we should not continue it as it jeopardises the future stability of the football club.

This then brings us to what happens after 2 years and McKay is out of contract, people have raised the very valid point that if it is a huge success there is no guarantee that McKay will stick around, especially clubs who have been relegated from the Premiership will be just a few of the clubs trying to get their wage bill down and still perform at an efficient level, will our management, and more importantly our board of directors have enough experience and linked up enough contacts to continue this forever? That is what will probably determine the success of this policy, not whether it succeeds after 2 years, but whether the club will be clear of financial crisis and making a profit (albeit a small one) after 5  years. Again this is based on the assumption that this works out perfect.

I think then it comes down to whether or not we think this will work, if it is so simple to bring in quality players who are out of favour at other clubs for a very small percentage of their wage, why haven’t other clubs tried this in the past? The only example that comes to mind is the Bellamy signing to Cardiff, however that was probably more controversial as that was for a whole season, but if any club is going to loan its players (as good as) free of charge I could only see Manchester City as the only club. But it comes down to another question: What can McKay do to persuade them to loan out some of their stars at a cut down wage that other clubs have failed at?

What I find even more bizarre is what I read online in a sport blog from the Guardian (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2011/nov/15/willie-mckay-doncaster-rovers-dean-saunders) This is a quote from McKay in that article:

\"We'll put them in the shop window. England, with Sky Sports, the Premier League, is a shop window,\" McKay explains. \"We give them the opportunity to play, then if another club comes in for them we split the fee – 40% to us, 60% to the selling club.\"

McKay is not only going to successfully persuade some of the best talent to come here and the parent clubs pay most of the wages, he is also going to get them to agree a 40% fee is given to us if the selling club comes along. Again this is not a masterstroke of genius that McKay wants to do, and I’m sure this is something clubs and agents alike will be trying for years, and I bet in the past some have succeeded at getting fees such as 10% from a sale after a loan, but 40%. I could understand if we were selling him and this would be a sell on clause but it’s not. What clubs are going to say “Yeah you can have him for 3 months, you pay £5,000 of his wages a week and we will pay the other £45,000, and if we manage to sell him for a figure we deem necessary, say £6,000,000 we will happily give you £2,400,000. I am sorry but I cannot for the life of me think of any club to do this, taking in mind the clubs we are targeting overseas are either attempting Europa league or Champions League glory, they cannot afford to lose any more money due to the introduction of UEFA’s Financial Fair Play policy.

One other flaw which I think I may be alone in mentioning is, say we approach Bayern Leverkusen and we agree a deal with a player for him to come on loan and pay £3,000 a week towards his wages, given they pay the rest, Leverkusen are then not happy at the 40% clause, because of the publicity of this new transfer policy it wouldn’t surprise me if teams such as Bristol City or Barnsley then get in touch with Leverkusen and say “Hey, we’ll have him here, we’ll pay £1000 more towards his wages and we don’t want any sell on clause in the deal” what happens then when we are undercut at the last minute, this will only have to happen once and it could really throw the policy into deep water, if other clubs start undercutting us, we will be forced to stop trying to enforce a sell on fee, which then means apart from saving money on wages, the money from sell on fees is the only thing that makes this policy look worthwhile financially.

Stability is seen as key in football, stability in the team, the management, the board and the business model. Maybe the direction we were heading in before wasn’t 100% stable, but that doesn’t mean that this is stable either. On the level of the field of play, people are raising questions about team spirit, motivation and whether or not the players we have will be replaced. Players who aren’t performing should be questioning themselves if they deserve to play, and so rightly this new policy may even ‘give them a good kick up the backside’ to quote someone on here.

If these players are (and maybe rightly so) being pushed out by the ‘loanees’ putting themselves in the shop window, then do these players have a future at the football club? If we sell them or release them I personally want to know whether we will be buying any players or offering them long term contracts. This business model looks at paying players only a percentage of their estimated wage, so we must then assume if we look to buy anyone or bring them in on a long term contract in the next two years they must either be what we have come to see in the Rovers shirt offered contracts in the last few years, as it is only them players with poor ability that are willing to sign for such low wage demands, unless many quality players agree to drop £50,000 to £5,000 for the next two or three years.

See the problem is from a business point of view a club is only worth as much as it’s assets. For Doncaster Rovers we only own our players, if we are looking to loan more players long term, to cut the wage bill in half we must assume that some of our players must accept a pay cut or leave the club. Either way the value of our club drops through the roof. If any of our board (especially JR) cannot suddenly support us financially anymore then how is it going to look to a possible investor and major shareholder if we only valued around £5.5 million, since we will not own many players to total up over that figure.

My final point is the ability of these players. For example look at Diouf, soon he will be gone and if he goes on to sign for a different club we then have to rely on either: 1) A player who has been as good as described surplus to requirements and dropped to the bench and or a possible reserve team or 2) A ‘loanee’ who we are yet to see in a Rovers shirt, thus having to constantly rely on someone that isn’t a certainty to sign never mind play!
My own personal opinion is that this model does not offer financial stability other than short term, business stability or stability within the squad. For these reasons I cannot possibly agree with it, there are benefits but I think the disadvantages and the risks overweigh the advantages and the benefits. Clubs that lose stability are far more vulnerable and subject to quickly being sucked into the trap of financial woes when money is injected if a business model goes unexpectedly wrong.

I am going to see how it unfolds, but that doesn’t mean I agree with it, for me personally if this club is definitely going in this direction than only relegation can save us from risking our future financially and on the football field. Of course this is just my individual opinion, and I'm sure there are those who disagree...

[mushRTID]

Why do your posts always use far more words than needed?

That was one of Rigo's tricks, why use 10 words when 100 will do?

[Mr1Croft]

Because if I don't fully write my veiws, it's easier for people to scrutinise and I therefore spend another 10 posts replying to others enphasazing what I originally implied.

But I will admit this is more of an essay than a forum post.

[I-was-there1976]

Wow

i wish i had that much time on my hands





In summary, what does it say ??

[Mr1Croft]

Wow

i wish i had that much time on my hands

In summary, what does it say ??

In short:

What happens after the 2 years is up given it is a sucess? what can McKay do that other clubs/agents can't to get some of these bargain loans? Why will clubs not only let their players on loan and still pay most of their wages and give us a 40% sell on fee. What if other clubs undercut us as say \"we'll take the player on loan, pay slightly more wages than donny, but we don't want a sell on fee\"? The plan lacks stability in terms of squad, finances and as a business model.

[dickos1]

why not just wait and see what happens? The team is still currently made up of players that have showed theyre not good enough over the last year, so it cant get any worse by trying something different. Just sit back and see what kind of ride you get taken on.

[Mr1Croft]

why not just wait and see what happens? The team is still currently made up of players that have showed theyre not good enough over the last year, so it cant get any worse by trying something different. Just sit back and see what kind of ride you get taken on.

Read the first line of my last paragraph in the opening post. I did state I'm going to see what happens.

[dickos1]

I realise that mate, but in trying to pick holes in everything your never going to be satisfied. if its a success after 2 years we will be in the prem.

[benaldo]

I stopped taking it seriously at the end of the first paragraph where he says that if Rovers get relegated only 10% of players will come to the club.

How does he know that?

And he goes on to say \"no-one is going to agree to the ridiculous 40/60 split\" Well, I've got news for you, Chimbonda and Diouf have already agreed.....and that was within the first couple of weeks of the scheme being made public......

And then towards the end he says \"well what if a club like bayen loan a player and then find out there is a 40% sell clause. They wont be happy\" Jesus christ, if the likes of you and me know about it, don't you think the legal departments of other clubs will be aware???? And it'll be written in to the initial loan agreement I should imagine.


And then, at the end he goes on to value the club. I seem to remember JR buying the club for £10 or something ridiculous. Footy clubs are notoriously hard to value, so forgive me if I'd rather listen to that thing that comes out of that dustbin on seseame street.

Sorry sunshine, you're showing your age.

[wilts rover]

Like him or loathe him, the one thing that you can say about Willie Mckay is that he is a very successful football agent who has placed a large number of clients at PL clubs. He (apparently) has a huge number of contacts at clubs in Europe, predominantly France. He also (apparently) will only make any money from this if these deals happen, ie, if the players he places with us are seen to be successful and a PL team wants them. The theory being of course is that if the individuals are playing well, the team is playing well.

I presume that the advanatge to the selling club is that their players have a shop window in the English Championship, rather than the French Division 3, thus altering more PL clubs to their potential, thus driving the price up and getting them more money than they otherwise would.

Thats my take on it, I have no more idea than you where we will be in two years.

[Mr1Croft]

I stopped taking it seriously at the end of the first paragraph where he says that if Rovers get relegated only 10% of players will come to the club.

How does he know that?

And he goes on to say \"no-one is going to agree to the ridiculous 40/60 split\" Well, I've got news for you, Chimbonda and Diouf have already agreed.....and that was within the first couple of weeks of the scheme being made public......

And then towards the end he says \"well what if a club like bayen loan a player and then find out there is a 40% sell clause. They wont be happy\" Jesus christ, if the likes of you and me know about it, don't you think the legal departments of other clubs will be aware???? And it'll be written in to the initial loan agreement I should imagine.


And then, at the end he goes on to value the club. I seem to remember JR buying the club for £10 or something ridiculous. Footy clubs are notoriously hard to value, so forgive me if I'd rather listen to that thing that comes out of that dustbin on seseame street.

Sorry sunshine, you're showing your age.

The fact that you use quotation marks and yet fail to quote me shows how serious your reply should be taken.

The fact is benaldo I don't know anything I am only making fair assumptions. Chimbonda and Diouf? Did you bother reading any of it benny or do you not understand I'm struggling to see clubs agreeing to it, not players.

If your gonna criticise what I write, at least make sure what your replying is correct and relevant, and that is before you try to use smart remarks such as \"showing your age\"

[Snods Shinpad 2]

Well, I've got news for you, Chimbonda and Diouf have already agreed.....and that was within the first couple of weeks of the scheme being made public......

Eh? The 40/60 split is between clubs, not players, so Chimbonda and Diouf have agreed to nothing.

Sorry sunshine, you're showing your age.

[benaldo]

To be honest that diatribe was so confusing that I can't understand it and I doubt the author can.

So let me get this right - you have a crystal ball? You can predict the future? And you are quite clearly against what the club are trying to do?

Does that sum it up?

[Mr1Croft]

To be honest that diatribe was so confusing that I can't understand it and I doubt the author can.

So let me get this right - you have a crystal ball? You can predict the future? And you are quite clearly against what the club are trying to do?

Does that sum it up?

Did you actually read it or do you pride yourself on having the final say...

As for predicting the future that is the whole point on this thread, trying to understand what is going to happen by exploring different avenues. I have not stated this will fail or suceed I have made some key assumptions which I deem fair (e.g McKay will be sought after if this works and he will become a king of revolution by his own rights). Im sure you have made an assumption in the past to pit forward an arguement but its okay when you do it, your old and wiser than I will ever be.

You however cannot get your head round people having an opinion, you deem everything not in black and white as utter nonesense. You attempt to belittle others and when they bite back you throw your dummy out (as previously seen). We live in a capitalist dominating world, the driving force is opinions and choice.

Is it not you that says we shouldn't judge supporters on how long they have been going Rovers ? Isn't that the same on judging someone on their age?

I don't know why im bothering to reply, you will probably sidestep anything valid to throw in insults such as \"been kicked out for wearing a suit recently?\" And you imply Im immature...

[madmick50]

An excellent post Mr1Croft. You've obviously given the matter a great deal of thought. It's a shame some others don't try and understand your opinion. They don't have to agree with it but it is only fair that they should at least try and understand where you are coming from before making unwarranted criticisms.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

It is a fair point and more clubs will have to go down the shot-term contract route. Over do it and there's the danger you become unstable, under do it and you're burdened with unsustainable contracts.

I don't see a problem with having a core of good honest professionals on modest contracts and provide you with stability, supplemented by short-term players who are free agents, loans etc.

There's more to our current predicament than just the McKay thing. There's something not right somewhere and it existed before SOD departed. I can't hep thinking there are too many of our 'core' players who are feeling sorry for themselves for one reason or another and they have got themselves in a rut.

I can't imagine any decent pro would not welcome the challenge of competition for places and let's be right, the majority have had their chance to impress the manager.

Deano spoke about the 'fun' element being brought in to training and upping the ante on the intensity of training. I thought at Ipswich the performance level went up a notch but on Saturdays performance there was no evidence that the players are enjoying what they're doing or willing to continue that improvement after a 2 week rest.

There seems to me that's there's too much passing the buck, \"not my fault gov\" and one of the key things that was part of SOD's philosophy was taking responsibility. We saw that this ebbed away when SOD had to keep chopping and changing due to enforced injuries.

Neither SOD or Saunders have been able to stabilise things, get a couple of results together and build confidence. Sooner or later, Saunders has to say enough is enough, work with the players, decide their best positions, stick with it and get better at it. You need 7 or 8 core players who are consistent enough to more or less nail down their positions week in week out.

How many of our players can we say have shown any decent level of consistency in the last 12 months? That's why we are where we are.

[Mr1Croft]

I can't say I disagree with you there Baz, I did touch on that during my opening post, but as you are probably aware it was looking at the model itself as opposed to why we are in this predicament e.g. the players.

What interests me is as to what happens in January, the loans and short term contracts have not exactly saved the club any cash and to start halving the wage bill, we must at least knock 25% before next season for this to be a real target for the club, unless we are going to go for radical changes next year. I think therefore we are looking at some players could be on their way at January.

[dickos1]

It's a four year plan to reduce the wage bill, people like keegan, naylor, may leave in January! Some of these players will stay longer than people are presuming. Beye has already stated he wants to stay until the end of the season, and it's looking likely that were signing 2 more this week who will also be here hopefully until the end of the season. The door in my opinion won't be revolving as much as u fear!!

[Mr1Croft]

It's a four year plan to reduce the wage bill, people like keegan, naylor, may leave in January! Some of these players will stay longer than people are presuming. Beye has already stated he wants to stay until the end of the season, and it's looking likely that were signing 2 more this week who will also be here hopefully until the end of the season. The door in my opinion won't be revolving as much as u fear!!

Is it? I'm sure I read somewhere JR said it was two, I may be wrong and if so the issue of players being offloaded sooner rather than necessary will as you say not be as bad as I feared.

That said I didn't deem it that big of an issue in the first place with this policy, there are still too many players who can be considered dead wood, but after the inury crisis we couldn't afford to let them go just yet...

[Snods Shinpad 2]

Another point worth noting is that from the players brought in under Saunders; Diouf, Chimbonda, Illunga, and Ikeme, only Ikeme and Illunga offer any chance of a slice of any potential transfer pie as the others are either free agents or have deals that run out in July.

Goulon is a free agent and Beye is out of contract this summer.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

Quite right. He's got to trim out because at the moment I bet he can't see wood for trees on the training ground.

The idea of bringing in a better class of player is ok if you have that core but we haven't got a stable core and I'm not sure he knows what that core looks like.

We have approaching 30 players on the books and I could only name about 6 who, injury aside, I would have in my team week in week out and another 6 who I'd expect to be pushing or have the potential. He's maybe got to look back a bit before he can look forward and look at appearances for players who are more reliable then others.

Here's who I think are at most risk.

Martis. Sorry mate too injury prone and too prone to loss of confidence.
Keegan. Bye Bye
Barnes. Bye bye - worth a risk but not able to get anywhere near his former glories.
Naylor. Bye bye for me
Dumbuya. Couldn't nail down a place. too inconsistent.
Illunga. Not good enough to warrant extending loan
Gary Woods. Time to find another club. Wish him well.

Bouhenna - needs to get on the pitch sharpish - bags of potential
Radford - unable to judge

O'Connor. Just hope he can find some form but he's in danger of the chop.
Martin Woods. Could be a sad 'retirement'.
Chambers - as above
Shiels - will probably prefer to stay in Scotland anyway.
Gillett. His size will work against him unfortunately

[Wild Rover]

Another point worth noting is that from the players brought in under Saunders; Diouf, Chimbonda, Illunga, and Ikeme, only Ikeme and Illunga offer any chance of a slice of any potential transfer pie as the others are either free agents or have deals that run out in July.

Goulon is a free agent and Beye is out of contract this summer.

Just like to point out Goulon is under contract at Blackburn until Next October 2012, so is not a free agent.

[benaldo]

I agree with most of what youre saying donnybaz. The only exception for me would be Barnes. I think he's still coming round to what he used to be able to do, and let's get that straight, the kid was really something special not 3 years ago....plus he's still only 23/24 isn't he? He got a bad, bad injury and then was advised to leave football as he'd never play again (or so I was told by some Derby fans). For me, he still doesn't look fit but he is certainly making progress forward. He's still a good attacking player and possibly our best right winger at the moment (If you're playing Diouf in the middle). I'd keep Barnes and tie him to a contract. A fit Giles barnes is going to be worth some cash...of that there is no doubt, and if anyone needs any proof of what a fit giles Barnes can do - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3S9Nmx-aO4&feature=related

The thing in all this is either you are going along with the manager and the chairman and the board and the players or you aren't. The Mackay plan is either pure genius or it's ridiculous. None of us know the answer yet, but we owe the plan some time and support because the other solution is to go down without a fight.

And for those who are worried that other clubs will catch on, they probably will, but none of them have Mackay in their corner. True, he's not the only agent in the world, but he's one of the most ingrained agents in the modern game. With his contacts and his efforts (which havent been theat bad so far have they?!) who knows what the club could acheive? The only slight concern that I have is that JR and his penchant for publicity are trying to build a collection of sensational stars at the KM for the reasons of PR and getting spectators through the turnstiles. If that is anywhere near JRs thoughts instead of getting good players in to play well, then it's doomed to failure. Time will tell.

[Wild Rover]

With the advent of this FIFA fair play thingy, all premiership clubs are expected to \"Cut their cloth according to their means\". Yesterday or day before Man City publishe pre tax loss of 200 million, this is 20 times the amount FIFA are running with, so a loss of 10 million is sustainable according to FIFA.

The money men will no longer be able to simply spend to collect trophies, they can spend on achademy and stadia, as much as they like, but transfer fees and wages will be capped in a weired sort of way.

This inevitably means squad size will be reduced.

Why should DRFC not be in the mix for players like the ones seen coming in recent weeks, on permanent transfers.

If the said players chose another club to ply their trade, then there will be some at that club seeking pastures new, thus it filters down through the leagues.

When implemented there will be some fantastic players available, DRFC will be a staging post for some i think.

[Mr1Croft]

I agree with most of what youre saying donnybaz. The only exception for me would be Barnes. I think he's still coming round to what he used to be able to do, and let's get that straight, the kid was really something special not 3 years ago....plus he's still only 23/24 isn't he? He got a bad, bad injury and then was advised to leave football as he'd never play again (or so I was told by some Derby fans). For me, he still doesn't look fit but he is certainly making progress forward. He's still a good attacking player and possibly our best right winger at the moment (If you're playing Diouf in the middle). I'd keep Barnes and tie him to a contract. A fit Giles barnes is going to be worth some cash...of that there is no doubt, and if anyone needs any proof of what a fit giles Barnes can do - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3S9Nmx-aO4&feature=related

The thing in all this is either you are going along with the manager and the chairman and the board and the players or you aren't. The Mackay plan is either pure genius or it's ridiculous. None of us know the answer yet, but we owe the plan some time and support because the other solution is to go down without a fight.

And for those who are worried that other clubs will catch on, they probably will, but none of them have Mackay in their corner. True, he's not the only agent in the world, but he's one of the most ingrained agents in the modern game. With his contacts and his efforts (which havent been theat bad so far have they?!) who knows what the club could acheive? The only slight concern that I have is that JR and his penchant for publicity are trying to build a collection of sensational stars at the KM for the reasons of PR and getting spectators through the turnstiles. If that is anywhere near JRs thoughts instead of getting good players in to play well, then it's doomed to failure. Time will tell.

As the title of the thread suggests that is what I think is in an important factor. Short term it offers a way out of this mess, if it doesnt work we will be relegated at best. Long term however I just think it offers too much instability that would not only devalue the club but leave us more than vulnerable if we lose another major shareholder.

McKays record in the past isn't exactly perfect but given he's been cleared of all investigations suggests he is either innocent and clean, or really good at covering his tracks. Which ever one you believe, it doesn't make this more prone to sucess or failure...