Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
October 26, 2025, 10:34:33 am

Login with username, password and session length

Links


Join the VSC


FSA logo

Author Topic: Definition of substantial funds  (Read 4217 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Dutch Uncle

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 7613
Re: Definition of substantial funds
« Reply #30 on January 01, 2022, 11:19:16 am by Dutch Uncle »
It's just unbelievable and embarrassing that all of a sudden certain fans think they should be dictating the clubs transfer policy, identifying targets and demanding the club bid for players on or above the market value.

There's a reason many transfers are concluded towards the end of the transfer window when clubs and agents don't achieve the value they want for players. That's when the negotiation starts and the merry go round begins.

This is business I think fans should keep their noses well and truly out of. I'm also disappointed the club have even entertained questions about certain players and perhaps poorly managing expectations.

We need to get back to keeping all this stuff behind close doors and see what happens. Managing it like this generally ends in disappointment.

I know what you’re saying, but I don’t agree with all of it. Football is big business and fans are huge stakeholders in clubs. Clubs generate news and there’s huge demand for (and consumption of) that. You can’t just shut the fans out and I don’t think there’s anything fundamentally wrong with the statements made by the club. As always, the proof will be what we see coming in over the window, and I do think it’s vital we start early and positively.

Where I certainly agree with you is the observation of an unhealthy obsession with numbers and figures. It adds nothing at all.

Where we have a particular problem with public statements, is the unbelievably high concentration of stupid, loud, toxic imbeciles waiting to criticise every move. It’s hard to know whether this is an affliction that every club suffers, I don’t really look. On reflection, I don’t even think it’s particularly representative of our own fanbase. But it’s overwhelming the social media channels and it must be deflating for staff, players and management at the club.

What a great example of two slightly differing views being argued constructively  :thumbsup:

For my own sanity, and defence of many of my posts (there can be very few on here with a greater obsession with numbers and figures  :blush:), I am presuming all numbers referred to are financial only  :lol:



(want to hide these ads? Join the VSC today!)

big fat yorkshire pudding

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 14417
Re: Definition of substantial funds
« Reply #31 on January 01, 2022, 11:21:01 am by big fat yorkshire pudding »
Let's be real the average wage at rovers is probably in the 2k bracket plus bonuses.  At bigger clubs like Portsmouth it's probably around 2-3* that on average.  Then clubs like Sunderland, sheff wed about 10-15* that.

Marquis right now for one will be a big earner, likely on the biggest contract he's ever getting given where his career is at.  He's not going to give that up, maybe in the summer but without some form of pay off he's not coming here or probably anywhere.  Having said that if he does want to and wants to play football maybe he would make it happen, can't see it.

There are probably some good deals to be had.

Jonathan

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 4869
Re: Definition of substantial funds
« Reply #32 on January 01, 2022, 11:23:17 am by Jonathan »
It's just unbelievable and embarrassing that all of a sudden certain fans think they should be dictating the clubs transfer policy, identifying targets and demanding the club bid for players on or above the market value.

There's a reason many transfers are concluded towards the end of the transfer window when clubs and agents don't achieve the value they want for players. That's when the negotiation starts and the merry go round begins.

This is business I think fans should keep their noses well and truly out of. I'm also disappointed the club have even entertained questions about certain players and perhaps poorly managing expectations.

We need to get back to keeping all this stuff behind close doors and see what happens. Managing it like this generally ends in disappointment.

I know what you’re saying, but I don’t agree with all of it. Football is big business and fans are huge stakeholders in clubs. Clubs generate news and there’s huge demand for (and consumption of) that. You can’t just shut the fans out and I don’t think there’s anything fundamentally wrong with the statements made by the club. As always, the proof will be what we see coming in over the window, and I do think it’s vital we start early and positively.

Where I certainly agree with you is the observation of an unhealthy obsession with numbers and figures. It adds nothing at all.

Where we have a particular problem with public statements, is the unbelievably high concentration of stupid, loud, toxic imbeciles waiting to criticise every move. It’s hard to know whether this is an affliction that every club suffers, I don’t really look. On reflection, I don’t even think it’s particularly representative of our own fanbase. But it’s overwhelming the social media channels and it must be deflating for staff, players and management at the club.

What a great example of two slightly differing views being argued constructively  :thumbsup:

For my own sanity, and defence of many of my posts (there can be very few on here with a greater obsession with numbers and figures  :blush:), I am presuming all numbers referred to are financial only  :lol:

Haha yes exactly! Please keep providing your own numerical analysis and journeys through history. Happy new year.

colincramb

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 2539
Re: Definition of substantial funds
« Reply #33 on January 01, 2022, 11:40:52 am by colincramb »
Reckon we must have about 15k a week to spend on players at most which is a lot for us

You are probably right. 4 x players on 4k a week has been touted around. Imagine marquis and downing will be on the 15-16k combined.

Do you know what the average weekly wage for a L1 player is? You could get 10 for 15k a week.

This isn’t true

Padge_DRFC

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 5803
Re: Definition of substantial funds
« Reply #34 on January 01, 2022, 11:42:09 am by Padge_DRFC »
Reckon we must have about 15k a week to spend on players at most which is a lot for us

You are probably right. 4 x players on 4k a week has been touted around. Imagine marquis and downing will be on the 15-16k combined.
Maquis and Downing will be on no more than 11.000 / 12000 combined imo. Max.
Probably around 10.000 combined.

The ave League 1 wage is as GazLaz said around 1.500 a week.

Averages dramatically brought down by reserves/youth team players named in squads. Rovers line up v Sunderland would have probably seen half the line up on less than 500 quid a week. Then your proper league 1 players in that team on 3-4k a week.
4 proper league 1 players is going to cost us 15-16k a week.
Having known one of the accountants all be it from a few years ago. Rovers were paying players like Andy Williams, Coppinger etc 5-6k a week before we went down to league 2.

steve@dcfd

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 10004
Re: Definition of substantial funds
« Reply #35 on January 01, 2022, 12:03:24 pm by steve@dcfd »
Contracts for players in this years budget will end in June. If we sign them on Short term contracts they will end in May. Therefore we will have to pay them for the next 22/26 weeks out of this years budget with the substantial funds added

DonnyBazR0ver

  • VSC Member
  • Posts: 19858
Re: Definition of substantial funds
« Reply #36 on January 01, 2022, 12:16:19 pm by DonnyBazR0ver »
It's just unbelievable and embarrassing that all of a sudden certain fans think they should be dictating the clubs transfer policy, identifying targets and demanding the club bid for players on or above the market value.

There's a reason many transfers are concluded towards the end of the transfer window when clubs and agents don't achieve the value they want for players. That's when the negotiation starts and the merry go round begins.

This is business I think fans should keep their noses well and truly out of. I'm also disappointed the club have even entertained questions about certain players and perhaps poorly managing expectations.

We need to get back to keeping all this stuff behind close doors and see what happens. Managing it like this generally ends in disappointment.

I know what you’re saying, but I don’t agree with all of it. Football is big business and fans are huge stakeholders in clubs. Clubs generate news and there’s huge demand for (and consumption of) that. You can’t just shut the fans out and I don’t think there’s anything fundamentally wrong with the statements made by the club. As always, the proof will be what we see coming in over the window, and I do think it’s vital we start early and positively.

Where I certainly agree with you is the observation of an unhealthy obsession with numbers and figures. It adds nothing at all.

Where we have a particular problem with public statements, is the unbelievably high concentration of stupid, loud, toxic imbeciles waiting to criticise every move. It’s hard to know whether this is an affliction that every club suffers, I don’t really look. On reflection, I don’t even think it’s particularly representative of our own fanbase. But it’s overwhelming the social media channels and it must be deflating for staff, players and management at the club.
.

Fair comment Jonathan. It just seems so unhealthy when the manager/club are pushed and cajoled into revealing perhaps more than they should about specific targets although sometimes as we know, there are red herrings thrown into the pond just to satisfy the thirst for information.

I don't know about you, but I like surprises!! Ha.


Campsall rover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 14394
Re: Definition of substantial funds
« Reply #37 on January 01, 2022, 12:33:30 pm by Campsall rover »
Reckon we must have about 15k a week to spend on players at most which is a lot for us

You are probably right. 4 x players on 4k a week has been touted around. Imagine marquis and downing will be on the 15-16k combined.
Maquis and Downing will be on no more than 11.000 / 12000 combined imo. Max.
Probably around 10.000 combined.

The ave League 1 wage is as GazLaz said around 1.500 a week.

Averages dramatically brought down by reserves/youth team players named in squads. Rovers line up v Sunderland would have probably seen half the line up on less than 500 quid a week. Then your proper league 1 players in that team on 3-4k a week.
4 proper league 1 players is going to cost us 15-16k a week.
Having known one of the accountants all be it from a few years ago. Rovers were paying players like Andy Williams, Coppinger etc 5-6k a week before we went down to league 2.
Padge there will not be any of our players on 4 grand a week.
Only one near could be  Bostock if DM was allowed to give him that. I doubt it to be honest.

Maybe Rowe, Close and Anderson, Taylor on 2.500 / 3 grand but to be honest other than those 4 i don’t think any of our contracted players will be on more than 2 grand a week.

I don’t know of course, as everyone else on here we are all surmising, but if any one thinks we have players on 4 grand plus then i personally think you are well off the mark.

Our wage bill is likely to be a max of 2 million just on the playing squad and coaching staff.
Do the maths.

4 grand at Rovers in league 1 is pie in the sky.  Championship yes.

Padge_DRFC

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 5803
Re: Definition of substantial funds
« Reply #38 on January 01, 2022, 01:10:32 pm by Padge_DRFC »
Close and Hiwula will be on it. Taylor probably not as the security of a 3 year deal lowered his weekly wage I reckon.

Hiwula was supposed to be ripping league 1 up and hasn't happened. Close is a proper player. Injuries ruining it. I doubt we were the only team in for him and paying peanuts won't have got him here over others.
It sounds like Wellens blew a lot on just a few players then that's when we got to signing players like Dodoo, Garnder and Barlow.
If anything I'd say there's probably a bug divide in wages within the squad itself and even starting line up.

Campsall rover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 14394
Re: Definition of substantial funds
« Reply #39 on January 01, 2022, 01:13:52 pm by Campsall rover »
Close and Hiwula will be on it. Taylor probably not as the security of a 3 year deal lowered his weekly wage I reckon.

Hiwula was supposed to be ripping league 1 up and hasn't happened. Close is a proper player. Injuries ruining it. I doubt we were the only team in for him and paying peanuts won't have got him here over others.
It sounds like Wellens blew a lot on just a few players then that's when we got to signing players like Dodoo, Garnder and Barlow.
If anything I'd say there's probably a bug divide in wages within the squad itself and even starting line up.
Well I am pleased you know that Hiwula and Close are on 4 grand a week. None of the rest of us have a clue.
So they are on more that T Rowe? I don’t think so.

Padge_DRFC

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 5803
Re: Definition of substantial funds
« Reply #40 on January 01, 2022, 01:43:42 pm by Padge_DRFC »
Add Rowe to those 2.

Chris Black come back

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 16083
Re: Definition of substantial funds
« Reply #41 on January 01, 2022, 06:33:22 pm by Chris Black come back »
Reckon we must have about 15k a week to spend on players at most which is a lot for us

You are probably right. 4 x players on 4k a week has been touted around. Imagine marquis and downing will be on the 15-16k combined.
Maquis and Downing will be on no more than 11.000 / 12000 combined imo. Max.
Probably around 10.000 combined.

The ave League 1 wage is as GazLaz said around 1.500 a week.

Averages dramatically brought down by reserves/youth team players named in squads. Rovers line up v Sunderland would have probably seen half the line up on less than 500 quid a week. Then your proper league 1 players in that team on 3-4k a week.
4 proper league 1 players is going to cost us 15-16k a week.
Having known one of the accountants all be it from a few years ago. Rovers were paying players like Andy Williams, Coppinger etc 5-6k a week before we went down to league 2.

Andy Giddings said on Praise or Grumble tonight that Downing is on 4.5k per week.

Campsall rover

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 14394
Re: Definition of substantial funds
« Reply #42 on January 01, 2022, 06:48:25 pm by Campsall rover »
Reckon we must have about 15k a week to spend on players at most which is a lot for us

You are probably right. 4 x players on 4k a week has been touted around. Imagine marquis and downing will be on the 15-16k combined.
Maquis and Downing will be on no more than 11.000 / 12000 combined imo. Max.
Probably around 10.000 combined.

The ave League 1 wage is as GazLaz said around 1.500 a week.

Averages dramatically brought down by reserves/youth team players named in squads. Rovers line up v Sunderland would have probably seen half the line up on less than 500 quid a week. Then your proper league 1 players in that team on 3-4k a week.
4 proper league 1 players is going to cost us 15-16k a week.
Having known one of the accountants all be it from a few years ago. Rovers were paying players like Andy Williams, Coppinger etc 5-6k a week before we went down to league 2.

Andy Giddings said on Praise or Grumble tonight that Downing is on 4.5k per week.
So if a loan then I doubt we will pay more than half.   Up to Pompey then.
« Last Edit: January 01, 2022, 06:58:24 pm by Campsall rover »

keith79

  • Forum Member
  • Posts: 2578
Re: Definition of substantial funds
« Reply #43 on January 01, 2022, 09:47:45 pm by keith79 »
Pay up Pompey.

 

TinyPortal © 2005-2012