Interesting on wages

[selby]

  I have been sent some interesting info on the average wages paid by clubs according to Footy.com. obviously the accuracy of the information may be suspect but here goes on the average weekly wages paid by the clubs to players.
   Manchester United    £100,792 is the highest
   Leeds United            £8,952
   Sheffield Weds         £!5,426
   Doncaster Rvs          £1,947
   Wigan                     £ 5,385
   Rotherham              £2,846
   Scunthorpe              £2,462
    MK Dons                 £2,948
    Rochdale                 £1,167
  It is a full list of all teams, and obviously may or may not be that accurate, but makes you wonder how teams pay their way.
   Another interesting point is Bradford City with cheap season tickets and big crowds at £1,625 and losing their top players.
  Barnsley are £3,882 so if they keep that will be one of the top payers in our division.
  How the figures are derived at, if they include all playing staff etc is an unknown, but never the less it gives a little insight, and shows how some teams Bury for instance have shoved the boat out, while others like Shrewsbury have dropped on a good team without paying over the odds.

[Wild Rover]

AVERAGE, so some higher, some lower, at individual clubs, and of course last season. which in DRFC case included one or two high earners and one or two bottom of the ladder.

[wesisback]

Is there a link or any chance you could get the full stats for League One. It will be interesting to see where we sit as a whole division as we were definitively told we were competitive last year.

[vaya]

Given that the club doesn't split the wages out in the accounts, I'd be interested to see what these figures are based on, other than thin air.

[Michael Shaw]

Like everything you read on the Internet they stats may be inaccurate:-

https://www.footy.com/footballers-vs-the-fans/#you-vs-your-club

[selby]

  Wes, sorry I don't know a link, we are top ten, their is a distinct north south bias, and of course the teams coming down are all at the top end.
   Interestingly three teams well above us, Bury, Northampton, and MK Dons have been relegated, with the two south west teams Bristol Rovers and Plymouth, surprisingly to me with their average crowds being well down the list.
    Charlton are the big underachievers at £4500.

[Michael Shaw]

If it is reasonably accurate it makes very interesting reading and highlights under and over achievers and where Rovers stands.

[vaya]

They're probably generated from a bingo machine, but I'll hazard a guess they'll be treated as fact and produce endless posts.

[Michael Shaw]

Quite. When I was working I was not supposed to discuss my salary with colleagues as it can create resentment and jealousy. So if football clubs announce individual salaries to other players and the wider world I would be surprised. But there again, I know nothing.

[DonnyOsmond]

Yeah, completely made up numbers.

[Bentley Bullet]

It's a negative, so it's false. Can we have positive truths only, please!

[selby]

 Vaya, I have said it has to be taken with a pinch of salt, but bloody hell I was only trying to share something of a little interest during the closed season while debating to go long or short on a couple of shares.
   It's not serious for me, it's light relief, and I don't take my toast burning quite as serious as you.

[wesisback]

Yeah, completely made up numbers.

Thank you Richard Poole.

[idler]

In the mid 60s Rovers were almost certainly the highest paid players in the old 4th division. There was an appearance bonus, a win or draw bonus, a league place bonus and if I remember right a £1 for every 1,000 fans over a gate of 8,000.
This was the promotion season of 65/66 and all of this was in an article in DEP.
I had a mate who played for Rovers intermediates at the time and he said the players were even then trying to find what others were on as they were on different basic wages.
Those bonuses, if you were top of the league and played two games a week would more than double their wage with the crowds we were getting at the back end of the season.
That was the time that everything was in place to kick on. Hubert Bates was more interested in taking what he could though. Horrible little man.

[Alan Southstand]

Take a tip from me, Selby, (and Basil Fawlty), don't mention 'the Board' - I did, but I think I got away with it!

 

[Michael Shaw]

Idler, I think incentives are a great idea personally. I worked hard for my bonuses each year, but a fixed salary and long contracts can create some level of complacency.

[DonnyOsmond]

Yeah, completely made up numbers.

Thank you Richard Poole.

Anytime x

[RedJ]

It's a negative, so it's false. Can we have positive truths only, please!

Nothing to do with the fact that there's no way they could've accurately actually got this information from our club from our accounts then?

[selby]

  Whether the numbers are right or wrong, what they do back up is that the last seasons budget was as the club said a top half budget.
  What they also reflect, is that clubs with some of the better budgets like Northampton, Bury and the MK Dons they do not guarantee success, or that relative small average wages such as at Shrewsbury and Plymouth mean you are going to have a bad season.
   Big Budgets probably give you a better chance if they are managed correctly, but the collective of a team, the players suiting the style of play, an astute team manager, plus fitness can overcome money when it comes to football.
   Warnock is the prime example of that, repeatedly overcoming teams with bigger budgets over a long period of time and with different clubs.

[RoversAlias]

  Whether the numbers are right or wrong, what they do back up is that the last seasons budget was as the club said a top half budget.

Odd thing to say really as, if they are wrong (and they surely are, of all the places to hold accurate financial wage details of every club, I somehow doubt "Footy.com" is a likely candidate), then they don't back up anything at all.

[GazLaz]

Looks about right. Mid table wages and a mid table team. Nothing to be ashamed of.

[DonnyBazR0ver]

It just reinforces that all the time going around in circles talking about the budget is just a waste of time. How the budget is used on existing contracts/new contracts, injured players has more of an influence on what's put out on the pitch every week and that's down to how DF manages the players and the budget at his disposal.

I tend to look at the players, the manager for answers, rather than looking across at the directors box!

[Pancho Regan]

  Whether the numbers are right or wrong, what they do back up is that the last seasons budget was as the club said a top half budget.
 

Sorry to sound pedantic but surely you mean "If these numbers are right....." etc?

Because, as RoversAlias says, if they are wrong then none of your conclusions are valid are they?

[Bentley Bullet]

It's a negative, so it's false. Can we have positive truths only, please!

Nothing to do with the fact that there's no way they could've accurately actually got this information from our club from our accounts then?

Could they have got accurate information from the other clubs accounts, or is it just Rovers who didn't provide it?

[vaya]

  Whether the numbers are right or wrong, what they do back up is that the last seasons budget was as the club said a top half budget.
 

Sorry to sound pedantic but surely you mean "If these numbers are right....." etc?

Because, as RoversAlias says, if they are wrong then none of your conclusions are valid are they?

There's little way to prove the accuracy of any of it without knowing how the figures have been arrived at, and even then it assumes uniformity in the way each club reports wages within their accounts (or if at all). Even if 80% are 'right' then the other 20% negate the overall context.

[RedJ]

It's a negative, so it's false. Can we have positive truths only, please!

Nothing to do with the fact that there's no way they could've accurately actually got this information from our club from our accounts then?

Could they have got accurate information from the other clubs accounts, or is it just Rovers who didn't provide it?

If the other clubs did provide it, that's up to them, I couldn't care less what other clubs do. Not really sure what your point is, even if it was just Rovers it still doesn't make their what's at best a guess at our average wage any more accurate, does it?

[Barmby Rover]

It just reinforces that all the time going around in circles talking about the budget is just a waste of time. How the budget is used on existing contracts/new contracts, injured players has more of an influence on what's put out on the pitch every week and that's down to how DF manages the players and the budget at his disposal.

I tend to look at the players, the manager for answers, rather than looking across at the directors box!

Definitely, a mark of success is just staying up and never challenging to do anything, the future of Donny Rovers.

[Bentley Bullet]

My point is that however true or false the list is if Rovers figures had been more complimentary there would have been less response regarding its inaccuracy.

[RedJ]

Not really. If a figure is inaccurate and people are trying to make out it's fact, it's still inaccurate.

[Michael Shaw]

As as limited company Doncaster Rovers have to publish annual accounts. As part of those accounts would they maybe include a provision for players wages? We can all look up the size of the squad for any club and therefore come up with an average salary. I can't be bothered to do that myself but maybe staff at footy.com have done. I have no idea, but just guessing how these stats may be correct. Who knows short of accusing footy.com of being liars and producing fake information.