The Blades Way

[puppet]

FFP only stops spending money you haven't got and building up debt. McCabe can sponsor the stadium for £10M if he wants to give us money to invest. But he doesn't want to give anything.

I agree, hiding behind FFP as though he'd love to not have to is utter bullshit and another reason I've gone off the bloke.

I don't expect him to keep tipping up cash. I expect him to stop pretending otherwise and level with us.

UTB

I'd be happy with that too... can't see it though, there's method in the madness... and it's not for the benefit of SUFC.

 

[Latters]

FFP only stops spending money you haven't got and building up debt. McCabe can sponsor the stadium for £10M if he wants to give us money to invest. But he doesn't want to give anything.

I agree, hiding behind FFP as though he'd love to not have to is utter bullshit and another reason I've gone off the bloke.

I don't expect him to keep tipping up cash. I expect him to stop pretending he wants to.

UTB

But because we don't own the stadium, sponsoring it would not be revenue for the club, the "money" (movement of funds in the accounts) would be transferred to Scarborough Holding or whoever.

 

[Staffs_Blade]

Can anyone recall when this was launched? I seem to think Blackwell was sat with McCabe and the banner. I am trying to find some press or programme articles about it for an article - you can probably guess the angle I am taking.

Also was it ever defined what "The Blades Way" is, or was it one of those nebulous ideas that is just a way of operating/acting? I seem to recall it was the latter.

I can date it to Summer 2008. I have a copy of 'Cutting Edge' from Winter 2008 and it has an interview with Blackwell in which he answers to the question - "Your blueprint for success here?" - "Kevin McCabe led the way in the summer when he coined the phrase 'The Blades Way' and that is my philosophy. Qualities such as determination, honesty, passion, commitment are being used to build Sheffield United as a business and a football club."

You're right as there is also a photo of Blackwell and McCabe in front of a poster or banner - 'The Blades Way' and underneath 'Commitment to Excellence.'

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

When the associations with overseas clubs were first formed I was quite taken with idea, partly because I'm a bit of a geek for football from around the world and partly because I thought it was actually quite a good idea. With the benefit of hindsight though they appear to have been a flight of fancy of McCabes which only benefitted his property interests (if indeed they benefitted anyone at all).

Have any details or figures ever been published about the numerous clubs we've been involved with over the years? I'm assuming that they were benefitting financially from the association if our half of the deal was to cherry pick their best and brightest. How much did it all cost? Wouldn't change anything but I'd be interested to know how much of our clubs resources went to managing and maintaining our affiliation with these clubs. We're still affiliated with 7 of them if Wikipedia is to be believed.

I thought we'd got a bit of a genius in charge but it turns out the other 91 chairmen were right.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

But because we don't own the stadium, sponsoring it would not be revenue for the club, the "money" (movement of funds in the accounts) would be transferred to Scarborough Holding or whoever.

More bollocks defending McC.

If a contract was required to be drawn up by Scarborough giving SUFC permission to name the stadium 'Kevins Home' or whatever and he was going to pay £10M for it then it would happen.

Only thing missing is the will.

 

[Northyorksblade]

I was a Blades 2000 member.
Basically it allowed you to pay up front for a 5 year season ticket and you also got your name stuck on your seat (which was a bit embarassing really)
Then they had a "bit of a do" with a running buffet and Alan Kelly presented us with a signed picture of himself saving that penalty against Coventry.

I was one too. The idea was to give this great opportunity to only 2,000 Blades. It was a bloody good price for 5 years ST, £800 if my memory serves me correctly. Trouble was only about 300? (certainly a lot fewer than 2,000) Blades signed up for it, so it was a resounding failure as far as money raising went.

 

[JohnDenver]

when I enquired clarification about his comment that the 'academy would see us self-sufficient' at the AGM, he roused the audience with names like Ward and Whitehouse, again dodging the reality behind his assertions about the academy as it was clear he'd originally outlined it as a cattle market rather than a breeding ground for Sheffield United to take full advantage on the pitch.

I agree with most of what you and Alco are saying here, but I think it's worth adding that in terms of keeping our talent, it's purely a matter of "how long for".

If a player is good enough he will leave eventually. This happens at every club. But the real question is, can we keep them long enough to move up the ladder before they go? When times were good and McCabe was investing, we kept Jagielka for an extra year (turning down Premiership bids), and this played a huge part in getting us promoted. I doubt it would have happened otherwise.

However, as long as the financial tide is flowing the wrong direction (paying back McCabe's debts), then it seems we will sell far too soon. Blackman, Lowton, and no doubt Maguire and Long, should bids come in.

To me, this is the definition of the wilderness years. Essentially we have the means to progress, but an owner who is no longer patient enough to turn down a windfall and wait for his investment to grow.

Frankly, I think McCabe is simply ashamed to admit it.

 

[Bedrock Blade]

Can anyone recall when this was launched? I seem to think Blackwell was sat with McCabe and the banner. I am trying to find some press or programme articles about it for an article - you can probably guess the angle I am taking.

Also was it ever defined what "The Blades Way" is, or was it one of those nebulous ideas that is just a way of operating/acting? I seem to recall it was the latter.

"The Blades way" is a corporate tag line, and like all corporate tag lines it means absolutely diddly shit.

 

[alcoblade]

But because we don't own the stadium, sponsoring it would not be revenue for the club, the "money" (movement of funds in the accounts) would be transferred to Scarborough Holding or whoever.

I don't think that's necessarily the case. It depends how it's drawn up. I'm fairly sure you can pay rent for the ground, then what you do with it afterwards is up to you. It all depends how the contract is drawn up - but there's no rule.

Man City (sorry Raul ) don't own the stadium, but their owners sponsor it for a shit load as a way of pumpimg money into the club.

UTB

 

[alcoblade]

If a player is good enough he will leave eventually. This happens at every club. But the real question is, can we keep them long enough to move up the ladder before they go?

Agreed - 5 months is kind of taking the piss though, isn't it.

UTB

 

[Latters]

More bollocks defending McC.

If a contract was required to be drawn up by Scarborough giving SUFC permission to name the stadium 'Kevins Home' or whatever and he was going to pay £10M for it then it would happen.

Only thing missing is the will.

Sorry I don't quite get where you're coming from here. Are you trying to say I'm talking bollocks defending McCabe? Because if so, that's a massive bag of bollocks in itself.

I will write it clearly so you understand. What I am saying is that he has taken our best asset for £1 or whatever it was, thus removing another income stream from the club and into his other companies.

Because he has taken the ground from us, sponsoring it would be no more beneficial to the club than sponsoring a telephone booth in town that we own equally as much.

The shirts on the other hand, I'm presuming we still own them. Perhaps he could work out some sort of kit sponsorship. But, of course he wouldn't want to do that, because he wouldn't personally gain from it.

 

[Fiery Blade]

Yes McCabe hides behind the FFP using it as an excuse not to invest - if he is waiting to try and recoup his money he will be waiting a bloody long time!
What FFP shows is that United probably have double the turnover any other club in the division has so in essence the players wage budget is twice that of any other club in the division - he is paying his players much more than they deserve or worth!

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

Sorry I don't quite get where you're coming from here. Are you trying to say I'm talking bollocks defending McCabe? Because if so, that's a massive bag of bollocks in itself.

I will write it clearly so you understand. What I am saying is that he has taken our best asset for £1 or whatever it was, thus removing another income stream from the club and into his other companies.

Because he has taken the ground from us, sponsoring it would be no more beneficial to the club than sponsoring a telephone booth in town that we own equally as much.

The shirts on the other hand, I'm presuming we still own them. Perhaps he could work out some sort of kit sponsorship. But, of course he wouldn't want to do that, because he wouldn't personally gain from it.

He may well have the ground as a fall back option to recoup so money in case it all goes tits up but if Mcc wanted to pump £10M into the club and wanted to do so by naming the ground after himself then no FFP will stop him.

Its the will to do that is lacking.

 

[Latters]

He may well have the ground as a fall back option to recoup so money in case it all goes tits up but if Mcc wanted to pump £10M into the club and wanted to do so by naming the ground after himself then no FFP will stop him.

Its the will to do that is lacking.

What I'm saying is that we don't own the ground. Surely if somebody was going to pay to sponsor the ground, be it McCabe or somebody else, the sponsorship money would go to the owner of the ground, I.e. not the Blades because the greedy bastard has taken it away from the club.

If he was to sponsor one of the few things the club has left to call its own, such as the kit, then we would see the income in the profit and loss account. But he doesn't want to because he wouldn't gain anything from it.

You seem to think that I am sticking up for McCabe, although I'm not sure how anybody could deduce that from what I've actually said. My opinion is that he has robbed the club of the ground (and the hotel) and therefore robbed them of a possible massive income stream. I would surmise that any income from allowing the Sheffield Eagles play at Bramall Lane now goes to one of McCabe's other companies, which again detracts from our turnover, giving us less cash to play with.

 

[GRUMPY BLADE]

What I'm saying is that we don't own the ground. Surely if somebody was going to pay to sponsor the ground, be it McCabe or somebody else, the sponsorship money would go to the owner of the ground, I.e. not the Blades because the greedy bastard has taken it away from the club.

If he was to sponsor one of the few things the club has left to call its own, such as the kit, then we would see the income in the profit and loss account. But he doesn't want to because he wouldn't gain anything from it.

You seem to think that I am sticking up for McCabe, although I'm not sure how anybody could deduce that from what I've actually said. My opinion is that he has robbed the club of the ground (and the hotel) and therefore robbed them of a possible massive income stream. I would surmise that any income from allowing the Sheffield Eagles play at Bramall Lane now goes to one of McCabe's other companies, which again detracts from our turnover, giving us less cash to play with.

Not sure about The Eagles, I feel that it could be lost income.

Back to the sponsership; why would anyone sponser the ground if the cash didn't go to SUFC? There would need to be a route in place for the cash to follow for it to happen.

 

[Latters]

Not sure about The Eagles, I feel that it could be lost income.

Back to the sponsership; why would anyone sponser the ground if the cash didn't go to SUFC?

That's the point. We need McCabe to give it back, which he won't do without making some sort of profit (buy it back for £2 maybe?). But seriously, now he's removed it from the football club, it will probably cost us millions to get it back to being classes as a club asset, if that ever happens at all. I can see it all turning sour and him doing one with the ground and us being left well in the shit.

 

[alcoblade]

That's the point. We need McCabe to give it back, which he won't do without making some sort of profit (buy it back for £2 maybe?). But seriously, now he's removed it from the football club, it will probably cost us millions to get it back to being classes as a club asset, if that ever happens at all. I can see it all turning sour and him doing one with the ground and us being left well in the shit.

We can easily rent the ground from the PLC and take the proceeds from sponsorship and corporate. It just depend show the deal is structured.

People get too wrapped up in ownership of this and that. It's intentions that count. If McCabe wants to shaft us, he can with or without the ground. If he wants the best for us, he can deliver it, with or without the ground.

UTB