"Real changes needed within the club" says Pearson

[Welsh Kiwi]

Originally Posted by The Only Way Is Up

Some of us will nostalgically remember our days in 77'/'78 being promoted to and then afterwards playing in the old second division for four seasons. One poster mentioned it, and was praising Arfon for his managerial achievement in taking us there, largely with John Neale's squad. Let's not forget that money was pumped recklessly into the playing squad during those days which left the club with huge losses - and those led to severe cutbacks in '81/'82 which saw us plummet back down to the old fourth division in two consecutive seasons when the player budgets had been cut. That was all under private ownership, and we know where that model eventually led.

Nowadays, players probably couldn't care less about a club's finances as long as they are paid the highest wages they (or their agents) can negotiate. If a better offer comes along they will move, and the same applies with managers - as we know!

Where our ability to pay the highest wages now is limited by a sensible need not to exceed our income and go into debt (i.e. sustainability) some other teams in the NL can be as reckless as they want due to there being no financial fair play rules and/or wealthy benefactors/investors.

Did our short debt-ridden spell in the old second division justify the years spent in the wilderness since then? Fans who don't care about the risks to the club's security may well say yes and that we should do the same again at any cost. Many of those are younger, and live for today without a care for tomorrow. Other supporters - who have maybe spent 60+ years supporting the club, and who don't want to see us go out of business - will say no.

Which of those last two camps do YOU belong to?

I'm in camp Wrexham AFC.

In regards to your comments re 81/82 the main problem that became critical (due to the severe snowfall and ice) was the loss of revenue from a large number of home fixtures being cancelled consecutively, which hammered the cashflow and bank overdraft. Arfon had also wanted a bigger playing squad and a larger team of backroom staff and we had purchased a number of expensive players (relative to Wrexhams size) such as Joey Jones 212K , Ian Edwards 125K and Ian Arkwright 100K.

The business model under private ownership was both very successful (trophies and promotion) and unsuccessful (relegation) but it only hit rock bottom due to a few individuals acting in bad faith or personal greed, rather than just the effects of a private ownership business model.

It would be a bit far fetched to suggest the decades in the wilderness are all accountable to those short years in the old 2nd division. Especially as there has been a significant number of different owners, board members, managers and players since the 1980's. Our club also enjoyed a relatively successful period in the mid 90's with Brian Flynn who stopped the decline and created significant revenue by investing in youth development such as the sale of Bryan Hughes for £1M.

Running a successful football club requires some degree of risk. There is no way around it if you want to compete. Football is a competitive business. If you only seek sustainability as your aspiration above success then you are effectively aiming to stagnate. Which in the end can also lead to going out of business.

If we are now having to spend a reserve budget on players that we did not account for, to get us out of the danger zone, then that in effect is an even bigger risk as it might not be successful and we still could be relegated. It would have made more sense to spend it at the beginning of the season and appoint the right kind of manager to invest it wisely and to gain at least a play off place.

[KingBuxton_Forever red]

Originally Posted by GiggityGiggityGiggityGoo

Fowler.

Different situation all together, was a bad apple, wasnt our captain, we were about to get relegated. I just cant see it.

[Phils-an-alki]

Originally Posted by mattw

Every post you make Sparky has a dog at the JCP, did Joe Clarke sleep with your mum or am I missing something?

I've heard their bark is worse than their bite.

[Phils-an-alki]

Originally Posted by KingBuxton_Forever red

Different situation all together, was a bad apple, wasnt our captain, we were about to get relegated. I just cant see it.

They absolutely would do it. They've done it before which is proof enough and you need to remember this is the same board that's ignored a members resolution regarding the disabled platform. They brought back Keates when the fans didn't want him too. This shows the little to no regard they have for fans.
History and evidence suggests they wouldn't bat an eyelid. The spin they'd put on it would be the best to date I reckon...

[LlayDragon]

Originally Posted by mattw

Every post you make Sparky has a dog at the JCP, did Joe Clarke sleep with your mum or am I missing something?

Have you been dogging again Sparky? I thought you'd sworn off it?

[Hightown Brymbo Red]

Originally Posted by The Only Way Is Up

Some of us will nostalgically remember our days in 77'/'78 being promoted to and then afterwards playing in the old second division for four seasons. One poster mentioned it, and was praising Arfon for his managerial achievement in taking us there, largely with John Neale's squad. Let's not forget that money was pumped recklessly into the playing squad during those days which left the club with huge losses - and those led to severe cutbacks in '81/'82 which saw us plummet back down to the old fourth division in two consecutive seasons when the player budgets had been cut. That was all under private ownership, and we know where that model eventually led.

Nowadays, players probably couldn't care less about a club's finances as long as they are paid the highest wages they (or their agents) can negotiate. If a better offer comes along they will move, and the same applies with managers - as we know!

Where our ability to pay the highest wages now is limited by a sensible need not to exceed our income and go into debt (i.e. sustainability) some other teams in the NL can be as reckless as they want due to there being no financial fair play rules and/or wealthy benefactors/investors.

Did our short debt-ridden spell in the old second division justify the years spent in the wilderness since then? Fans who don't care about the risks to the club's security may well say yes and that we should do the same again at any cost. Many of those are younger, and live for today without a care for tomorrow. Other supporters - who have maybe spent 60+ years supporting the club, and who don't want to see us go out of business - will say no.

Which of those last two camps do YOU belong to?

Imagine if WST had been running the show in 77/78..They wouldn't have given the managers job to Arfon and we wouldnt have bought Dixie and Dai.!

[krux]

Originally Posted by mattw

Every post you make Sparky has a dog at the JCP, did Joe Clarke sleep with your mum or am I missing something?

its the Joe Clarke Project not Joe Clarke's Project.

So the actions of the player, who compared to the current crop was a super midfielder, are irrelevant.

[Prodigal Dragon]

Originally Posted by The Only Way Is Up

Some of us will nostalgically remember our days in 77'/'78 being promoted to and then afterwards playing in the old second division for four seasons. One poster mentioned it, and was praising Arfon for his managerial achievement in taking us there, largely with John Neale's squad. Let's not forget that money was pumped recklessly into the playing squad during those days which left the club with huge losses - and those led to severe cutbacks in '81/'82 which saw us plummet back down to the old fourth division in two consecutive seasons when the player budgets had been cut. That was all under private ownership, and we know where that model eventually led.

Nowadays, players probably couldn't care less about a club's finances as long as they are paid the highest wages they (or their agents) can negotiate. If a better offer comes along they will move, and the same applies with managers - as we know!

Where our ability to pay the highest wages now is limited by a sensible need not to exceed our income and go into debt (i.e. sustainability) some other teams in the NL can be as reckless as they want due to there being no financial fair play rules and/or wealthy benefactors/investors.

Did our short debt-ridden spell in the old second division justify the years spent in the wilderness since then? Fans who don't care about the risks to the club's security may well say yes and that we should do the same again at any cost. Many of those are younger, and live for today without a care for tomorrow. Other supporters - who have maybe spent 60+ years supporting the club, and who don't want to see us go out of business - will say no.

Which of those last two camps do YOU belong to?

You raise some interesting points but I believe your analysis is too ‘black and white’, whereas life is generally a murky grey.

Fans want success on the pitch but, alas, this WST-adopted model is not delivering; at the moment it is causing great anxiety amongst fans — and seemingly the players, too — due to our lowly position outside the FL. The degree of success wanted is very much dependent on numerous factors — where we are now and where we were in our living memories being some — but that ‘romantic desire’ is tempered by our inability to raise sufficient money and our poor decision making at executive and managerial level.

I do not know what Pearson’s motives are for his piece in The Leader but it can be interpreted in whichever way the reader wants. But I think it clear that something is wrong for the skipper to give a presumably unauthorised tome. I do, however, agree that survival is absolutely essential before repositioning ourselves in the summer.

Ultimately, football is a results-based business/passion. The Board is not only failing to deliver success but has now jeopardised the very existence of OUR club. WK explains how the weather affected cash-flow, back in the early 80s, made worse by the selfish decisions of some of the then board members. If we are relegated we will become almost impossible to manage with future financial restraints. Even if we stay up, we will face a tighter budget if the WST continue to own the club and do not adapt.

Finally, it would be a calamity it the club dies, whilst it would merely be ironic if Wrexham fans were responsible for its demise. But there is a long list of failed clubs and there is no God-given right we can escape that awful fate. If we continue taking the wrong decisions or putting off necessary decisions, we will almost certainly join that band of ex-FL clubs that never return to the arena that offers what the fans want and the club so desperately needs.

[KingBuxton_Forever red]

Originally Posted by Phils-an-alki

They absolutely would do it. They've done it before which is proof enough and you need to remember this is the same board that's ignored a members resolution regarding the disabled platform. They brought back Keates when the fans didn't want him too. This shows the little to no regard they have for fans.
History and evidence suggests they wouldn't bat an eyelid. The spin they'd put on it would be the best to date I reckon...

I think for all those reasons, they wouldnt do it. That would be taking the royal piss and they know it. They are already on the thinnest of thin ice.