Stephen Bettis speaks to local Media

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?


8lade said:
Only Brentford run on a theoretical shoestring and they have a scouting set up which costs Ā£10m/year to run. My understanding is we have some of our scouting through United World which is a similar but smaller version and costs SUFC Ā£1m/year. You are right we should aspire to be more like them and I think we are attempting this.
The EPL has become such a financial monster that having a billionaire owner isn't enough anymore 2 clubs with billionaire owners were relegated last season.
Click to expand...
Spot on mate .Brentford are a good example. They also put a lot in to their Academy which they view as a very important part of the club . Expertly run "little" club but they do have rich owners which is a bonus but never the less well run .
 
petcharlie said:
Spot on mate .Brentford are a good example. They also put a lot in to their Academy which they view as a very important part of the club . Expertly run "little" club but they do have rich owners which is a bonus but never the less well run .
Click to expand...
I agree, they are a fantastic example. But it does cost a hell of a lot of money to do.
 
There are few examples that better demonstrate you need

A vision/plan
Resources to get it going and develop it
Patience and dedication to bring it to long-tern fruition
Continuity of the plan despite changes in personnel

Until the ownership issue is resolved- and maybe not even then- we don't have all the above building blocks. You can't just magic yourselves into BMFC mk2.

Can we not agree we are quite good at some stuff but could do other bits better and move on?
 
raul said:
There are few examples that better demonstrate you need

A vision/plan
Resources to get it going and develop it
Patience and dedication to bring it to long-tern fruition
Continuity of the plan despite changes in personnel

Until the ownership issue is resolved- and maybe not even then- we don't have all the above building blocks. You can't just magic yourselves into BMFC mk2.

Can we not agree we are quite good at some stuff but could do other bits better and move on?
Click to expand...
I think the issue is that some of our supporters canā€™t accept that weā€™re not good at some things and take criticism of the club as a personal affront.

Wanting us to improve and suggesting areas where it could happen is just shouted down as ā€œmoaning about everythingā€ and then you get told that you should just be grateful for what weā€™ve got and not expect anything better.
 
derekacorah said:
I think the issue is that some of our supporters canā€™t accept that weā€™re not good at some things and take criticism of the club as a personal affront.

Wanting us to improve and suggesting areas where it could happen is just shouted down as ā€œmoaning about everythingā€ and then you get told that you should just be grateful for what weā€™ve got and not expect anything better.
Click to expand...
Itā€™s the manner in which it is often put across. Wanting us to improve and suggesting areas where it could happen is entirely positive and I canā€™t see that anyone on here would have any problem with it.

However, the language often used to put the point across (ā€œshitā€, ā€œwankā€ and ā€œuselessā€ all regularly feature) tend to mark the poster down as someone not to be taken seriously. Itā€™s very often not phrased as anything even approaching constructive criticism but in a vitriolic and negative manner.

Which, of course, invites a bit of vitriol in returnā€¦ā€¦
 
Nick Jansky said:
Itā€™s the manner in which it is often put across. Wanting us to improve and suggesting areas where it could happen is entirely positive and I canā€™t see that anyone on here would have any problem with it.

However, the language often used to put the point across (ā€œshitā€, ā€œwankā€ and ā€œuselessā€ all regularly feature) tend to mark the poster down as someone not to be taken seriously. Itā€™s very often not phrased as anything even approaching constructive criticism but in a vitriolic and negative manner.

Which, of course, invites a bit of vitriol in returnā€¦ā€¦
Click to expand...
Agreed that there are ways and means to get a point across.
 
Probably my final point on this, years ago no one gave a flying one about the financial side of the club they supported as it wasn't as easy to get information. You might have had local papers reporting on accounts annually or flagging that clubs were skint (I remember a 'dire straits' type headline in the Star when I was a kid and for some reason I thought it was about the band!).

Now the financial information is in the public domain at the click of a button and you don't have to order a set of accounts from CH anymore, a few clicks and you've got the PDF and can spend as little or as much time pulling them apart as you want. You can also follow people like Swiss Ramble, Kieran Maguire or even El Accounto himself if you want an informed (Swiss Ramble) or slightly more ill-informed (the other 2) opinion on them.

The football climate has shifted massively and FPP, revenue and the 'business of football' has become a much more common debating ground. People now counter arguments of "your team is fucking shit and you're going down" with "well at least we're a well run club" or "our net spend was less than yours" or "our wage bill is the lowest in the league".

I personally see the benefits of being 'well run' financially and wouldn't think badly of a club who set out with this as a goal.

I just think sometimes that it would be nice to get the office discussion back to ribbing people about the fact that their team is a division below yours and really shit at football (not naming names!) instead of discussing what the chairman is doing or how much money they've spent/saved/lost/made. Football is ultimately about what happens on the pitch and as much as Forest might be a car crash happening in slow motion, the players they've signed and the wins at places like Chelsea a draw at Man City etc. is something that they'll remember. They won't talk in 20 years time about the fact that they were up against FFP in 24/25 will they?

My point is that I'd love us to just think "fuck it" and bring some really exciting and entertaining footballers to the club and break the bank to do it with a carefree attitude. That's what it's all about, forget that it will lead to another 6 years in League 1, behave like PL club now and give us something to cheer about.
 
ā€Weā€™re Sheff United, weā€™re told weā€™re a sensibly run clubā€
Canā€™t see it catching on as a chant.Some on here would sing it all day long though!
 
Ndiayewillalwaysloveyou said:
Click to expand...

Raises so many questions:
Who was the club?
Who were the players?
What's our top whack?

I'm going to say not a top club (Man U sprang to mind straight away) as it would be obvious we wouldn't run to their wages.
Would a relegation fighter be cheeky enough to try and offload somebody they don't want to the mighty Blades? Maybe, I suppose outside of the traditional top 6 everybody else is in a relegation battle until they've put a string of results together. Questions, questions.
 

derekacorah said:
Probably my final point on this, years ago no one gave a flying one about the financial side of the club they supported as it wasn't as easy to get information. You might have had local papers reporting on accounts annually or flagging that clubs were skint (I remember a 'dire straits' type headline in the Star when I was a kid and for some reason I thought it was about the band!).

Now the financial information is in the public domain at the click of a button and you don't have to order a set of accounts from CH anymore, a few clicks and you've got the PDF and can spend as little or as much time pulling them apart as you want. You can also follow people like Swiss Ramble, Kieran Maguire or even El Accounto himself if you want an informed (Swiss Ramble) or slightly more ill-informed (the other 2) opinion on them.

The football climate has shifted massively and FPP, revenue and the 'business of football' has become a much more common debating ground. People now counter arguments of "your team is fucking shit and you're going down" with "well at least we're a well run club" or "our net spend was less than yours" or "our wage bill is the lowest in the league".

I personally see the benefits of being 'well run' financially and wouldn't think badly of a club who set out with this as a goal.

I just think sometimes that it would be nice to get the office discussion back to ribbing people about the fact that their team is a division below yours and really shit at football (not naming names!) instead of discussing what the chairman is doing or how much money they've spent/saved/lost/made. Football is ultimately about what happens on the pitch and as much as Forest might be a car crash happening in slow motion, the players they've signed and the wins at places like Chelsea a draw at Man City etc. is something that they'll remember. They won't talk in 20 years time about the fact that they were up against FFP in 24/25 will they?

My point is that I'd love us to just think "fuck it" and bring some really exciting and entertaining footballers to the club and break the bank to do it with a carefree attitude. That's what it's all about, forget that it will lead to another 6 years in League 1, behave like PL club now and give us something to cheer about.
Click to expand...

Exactly my position; better to have loved and lost than never loved at all.

Pal of mine is a big Bolton fan, his oft-quoted memories are seeing his team play at Bayern Munich. Watching the likes of Okocha, Campo and Djorkaeff. Priceless moments. Worth enduring the bad times surely? Because if you choose frivolity or parsimony, those bad times inevitably come anyway for a club our size.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom