LOI rumours etc

darsar · 04-01-2011 12:40pm

Your living on a different planet really man. There is not going to be €30,000 in bonuses paid to any player.

Going by your theory

10 goals @ €200 = €2000

I'd say €50 appearance would be about right but we'll say €100 so that's

25 games @ €100 = 2500

So to win the league, make a cup final and beat a team in Europe that you don't know who it yet makes up €25,500 approx in bonuses. That's laughable.

Firstly it'd be very foolish to assume winning a league, making a cup final and beating a team in Europe is anyway near a certainty.

Sure Rovers shat the bags so many times at home last year they were asking Bohs to win the league.

Secondly, to justify the bonuses your giving out, his basic wage would have to be approx €20,000 - €30,000 so I'd take his €40-50,000 at Fingal.

Didn't clubs in the very recent future assume winning rounds in Europe and end up on their arse?

In summary, very foolish of someone in this world on this island to agree to a wage you might get depending on so many factors out of your control.

CiaranC · 04-01-2011 12:50pm

darsar wrote: »

Didn't clubs in the very recent future assume winning rounds in Europe and end up on their arse?

In summary, very foolish of someone in this world on this island to agree to a wage you might get depending on so many factors out of your control.

You are not really grasping it. Its not "assuming" anything, its an agreement to pay the players handsomely IF the club get the cash from progressing in Europe and winning the league/cup, and NOT having to pay them if we dont. Previously clubs were handing out 3 grand a week to players regardless of results.

The money simply isnt there to pay players anything like this supposed 50 grand a year you think O'Neill is supposed to be getting at Fingal. The only way it possibly COULD be there is if a club won the league, the cup, and played through three full rounds of European competition.

Its taking the gamble out of the equation and putting the clubs interest ahead of the players, while still attempting to attract them to sign.

Paulw · 04-01-2011 1:01pm

But, from a players side, how is he supposed to survive the season, paying bills, mortgage, etc, on what his "basic" is, and then waiting on a possible lump sum (high tax sum) at the very end of the season.

I'd prefer a steady reliable wage (so I can budget), rather than a very small wage and a large lump at the end.

I agree that from the club's view it would be better to pay on bonus rather than flat larger wage.

CiaranC · 04-01-2011 1:06pm

Paulw wrote: »

But, from a players side, how is he supposed to survive the season, paying bills, mortgage, etc, on what his "basic" is, and then waiting on a possible lump sum (high tax sum) at the very end of the season.

We are a part time football club. Our players work elsewhere to supplement their income, or claim social welfare for when we are not paying them.

If Fingal are paying players 50 grand a year on 52 week contracts, after losing their backer and with their crowds, they wont last the season.

OhNoYouDidn't · 04-01-2011 1:14pm

Hold up here.

Rovers offered him a basic of about €800 a week plus the bonus structure.

Fingal countered with €850 per week minus the bonus structure.

He thinks the latter is a better deal.

He is an idiot. The rest is assinie Rovers bashing because we make the rest of you look bad.

Paulw · 04-01-2011 1:15pm

CiaranC wrote: »

We are a part time football club. Our players work elsewhere to supplement their income, or claim social welfare for when we are not paying them.

I'm talking in general terms, not about any specific club. My view is from a cashflow point of view, for the player.

OhNoYouDidn't · 04-01-2011 1:16pm

CiaranC wrote: »

We are a part time football club. Our players work elsewhere to supplement their income, or claim social welfare for when we are not paying them.

If Fingal are paying players 50 grand a year on 52 week contracts, after losing their backer and with their crowds, they wont last the season.

Sorry Double C, we are a part time club in the sense that most players are on 40 week contracts, but not one Rovers player has a job outside football. Of last years squad only Pat Flynn had a second job. Training is during the day now.

Fingal are also offering 40 week contracts.

OhNoYouDidn't · 04-01-2011 1:17pm

Paulw wrote: »

I'm talking in general terms, not about any specific club. My view is from a cashflow point of view, for the player.

The cashflow difference in this case was €50 per week.

But in general, you are right. It won't suit every player. So be it.

stovelid · 04-01-2011 1:20pm

Paulw wrote: »

I'd prefer a steady reliable wage (so I can budget), rather than a very small wage and a large lump at the end.

I agree that from the club's view it would be better to pay on bonus rather than flat larger wage.

The ability of the club to honour the wages for the full duration of the contract should also be looked at.

OhNoYouDidn't · 04-01-2011 1:22pm

Sligored wrote: »

Where will this 50k bonus per player fit into the budget and the 65% rule?

What do you mean where? We were at 50% odd last year, our first season of all the players being on these contracts. If the players as a group get a fixed percentage of the prize money thats less than 65%, its quite straightforward to figure out. Even for a Slig.

The only 'risk' is that Twigg scores 100 league goals in a season at x a pop.

CiaranC · 04-01-2011 1:27pm

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Sorry Double C, we are a part time club in the sense that most players are on 40 week contracts, but not one Rovers player has a job outside football. Of last years squad only Pat Flynn had a second job.

Several of the younger lads worked for An Post during the Christmas

OhNoYouDidn't · 04-01-2011 1:31pm

CiaranC wrote: »

Several of the younger lads worked for An Post during the Christmas

Ok, gotcha. My point is during the 40 weeks they are contracted, none of them have a second job.

I would love to know how many select the 52 week payroll option

djpbarry · 04-01-2011 1:48pm

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Rovers offered him a basic of about €800 a week plus the bonus structure.

Fingal countered with €850 per week minus the bonus structure.

He thinks the latter is a better deal.

He is an idiot.

Hardly. He’s been offered a guaranteed €2,000 versus a potential €x. The fact that x is likely going to be greater than 2,000 is beside the point – there is still a risk attached to it. You cannot label a player “an idiot” for minimising risk in their personal finances. Particularly when you’re quick enough to criticise a certain north Dublin club for factoring potential prize money into their budget.

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

The rest is assinie Rovers bashing because we make the rest of you look bad.

Careful now – it’s an awful long fall from that high horse of yours.

stovelid · 04-01-2011 1:54pm

djpbarry wrote: »

Hardly. He’s been offered a guaranteed €2,000 versus a potential €x. The fact that x is likely going to be greater than 2,000 is beside the point – there is still a risk attached to it. You cannot label a player “an idiot” for minimising risk in their personal finances. .

To be honest though, I assume Rovers would want to have a dog of a season and he would want to have a stinker himself to not make up the shortfall (small as it is) discussed here in bonus payments. Not to mention Champions League. And the fact that SF are a precarious financial proposition at the moment.

OhNoYouDidn't · 04-01-2011 2:04pm

djpbarry wrote: »

Hardly. He’s been offered a guaranteed €2,000 versus a potential €x. The fact that x is likely going to be greater than 2,000 is beside the point – there is still a risk attached to it. You cannot label a player “an idiot” for minimising risk in their personal finances. Particularly when you’re quick enough to criticise a certain north Dublin club for factoring potential prize money into their budget.

Yet you ignore the risk associated with the viability of the other club... Convieneient.

djpbarry · 04-01-2011 2:14pm

stovelid wrote: »

And the fact that SF are a precarious financial proposition at the moment.

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Yet you ignore the risk associated with the viability of the other club... Convieneient.

That's a fair point, but in the general sense, my point still stands.

darsar · 04-01-2011 2:16pm

How sure are you of Fingal only offering 42 weeks and not a two year?

€850 over 52 comes out at over €11k more than the €800 over 40 or 42 weeks.

super_furry · 04-01-2011 2:22pm

How on earth are Fingal offering anyone €850 a week? Their sugar daddy has gone, their crowds are poor and they're going to have the added overhead of paying for Dalymount this season. Hope I'm wrong, but there's more than a whiff of Dublin City about this carry-on.

OhNoYouDidn't · 04-01-2011 2:23pm

darsar wrote: »

How sure are you of Fingal only offering 42 weeks and not a two year?

€850 over 52 comes out at over €11k more than the €800 over 40 or 42 weeks.

Because they are offering 42 weeks.

Fair point on the duration of the contract, not sure if he was getting a longer one or not.

darsar · 04-01-2011 2:25pm

super_furry wrote: »

How on earth are Fingal offering anyone €850 a week? Their sugar daddy has gone, their crowds are poor and they're going to have the added overhead of paying for Dalymount this season. Hope I'm wrong, but there's more than a whiff of Dublin City about this carry-on.

They'd to pay for Morton too so that's not a new expense.

darsar · 04-01-2011 2:27pm

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Because they are offering 42 weeks.

Fair point on the duration of the contract, not sure if he was getting a longer one or not.

I wouldn't be so sure. There are/was 9 or more players on season gone on 52 weeks. Concidering GON a key player you'd think he'd be top of the list for a 52 concidering other interest.

Paulw · 04-01-2011 2:42pm

super_furry wrote: »

How on earth are Fingal offering anyone €850 a week? Their sugar daddy has gone, their crowds are poor and they're going to have the added overhead of paying for Dalymount this season.

People are simply guessing his wages.

I don't think Dalymount is an added overhead, in fact, I believe it's a lower overhead than using Morton.

The club has secured other financing for the season. Crowds are still growing, year on year, as are other revenue streams. While finances are definitely tight and different, there is still money there. The budget is controlled and well spent (IMHO).

It's never about a single player, and I think many clubs are trying to watch what they spend and how they spend what they have.

major bill · 04-01-2011 5:08pm

djpbarry wrote: »

Banter: Good humoured, playful, typically spontaneous conversation; To engage in banter or playful conversation; To play or do something amusing; To tease mildly.

this thread isnt banter...the thread is petty point scoring at best.

Hard Worker · 04-01-2011 6:32pm

Paulw wrote: »

People are simply guessing his wages.

I don't think Dalymount is an added overhead, in fact, I believe it's a lower overhead than using Morton.

The club has secured other financing for the season. Crowds are still growing, year on year, as are other revenue streams. While finances are definitely tight and different, there is still money there. The budget is controlled and well spent (IMHO).

It's never about a single player, and I think many clubs are trying to watch what they spend and how they spend what they have.

Morton havn't been fully paid yet for last season.
I'm sure Dalymount will want money up front for each game, just the same as the agreement Bohs had when Rovers played there.

Pineapple stu · 05-01-2011 3:05am

And you know this how?

antomorro-sei · 05-01-2011 3:25pm

We just signed Ste Bradley...

http://stpatsfc.com/news.php?id=4091

stovelid · 05-01-2011 3:32pm

antomorro-sei wrote: »

We just signed Ste Bradley...

http://stpatsfc.com/news.php?id=4091

Great footballer but disapeared in games too much for us. Maybe it was the nature of some of our football in the last two seasons. He plays better with another midfielder - preferably two - who will muck in for him.

Decent free-kick on him too.

super_furry · 05-01-2011 3:37pm

Good signing there, I was sorry to see him go.

dreamers75 · 05-01-2011 3:44pm

stovelid wrote: »

Great footballer but disapeared in games too much for us. Maybe it was the nature of some of our football in the last two seasons. He plays better with another midfielder - preferably two - who will muck in for him.

Decent free-kick on him too.

Always liked him hopefully he plays infront of MUlcahy and Byrne, Byrne still hasnt decided if hes retiring or not tho.

CiaranC · 05-01-2011 4:05pm

dreamers75 wrote: »

Always liked him hopefully he plays infront of MUlcahy and Byrne, Byrne still hasnt decided if hes retiring or not tho.

Ive a feeling he'll be much better for you than he was for us.

doncarlos · 05-01-2011 4:41pm

antomorro-sei wrote: »

We just signed Ste Bradley...

http://stpatsfc.com/news.php?id=4091

Great signing. Very good footballer that didn't really fit in to Rovers style of play. Would have liked to see him in Oriel. On the positive side it reduces Bolger's options so he might be Dundalk bound yet.

OhNoYouDidn't · 06-01-2011 12:59pm

Rovers related gossip.

Callum Davenport and Malcom Christie in on trial.

Hears second choice keeper Jaime MacDonald being lined up for a season long loan if Mannus leaves.

Two Greek strikers from PAOK potentially coming in on loan.

Zebra3 · 06-01-2011 1:05pm

Paulw wrote: »

Crowds are still growing, year on year, as are other revenue streams.

Well, we'll see what happens to the crowds now that SF have moved away from their "spiritual" home. There may be an upturn in visiting fans, but I fail to see how moving to Dalyer will increase home support.

And other revenue streams will defo need to grow as one major one has just dropped off..........

Gavin "shels" · 06-01-2011 1:09pm

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Rovers related gossip.

Callum Davenport and Malcom Christie in on trial.

Hears second choice keeper Jaime MacDonald being lined up for a season long loan if Mannus leaves.

Two Greek strikers from PAOK potentially coming in on loan.

I've read some mental rumours, but fcuk me!:D

The Volt · 06-01-2011 1:09pm

Any update on that stadium being built out in Lusk?

Paulw · 06-01-2011 1:11pm

Zebra3 wrote: »

Well, we'll see what happens to the crowds now that SF have moved away from their "spiritual" home. There may be an upturn in visiting fans, but I fail to see how moving to Dalyer will increase home support.

And other revenue streams will defo need to grow as one major one has just dropped off..........

Two major ones have dropped. But, other money has been secured.

Yeah, the move will have an impact, so only time will tell what sort of impact it will have - positive from other football supporters from the area coming to watch out of curiosity, or a fall from the recent Fingal fans. I really don't know what will happen there.

I guess all will be clear in the coming weeks. Not that long now until pre-season starts (next week??), and then the first pre-season games and cup games.

Zebra3 · 06-01-2011 1:23pm

Paulw wrote: »

Yeah, the move will have an impact, so only time will tell what sort of impact it will have - positive from other football supporters from the area coming to watch out of curiosity, or a fall from the recent Fingal fans. I really don't know what will happen there.

Well, with a club 120 years old already playing in Dalyer for over a century and another club 115 years old playing 2 or 3 km away, I doubt it'll be the former.....

shanec1928 · 06-01-2011 1:36pm

Ritchie Ryan signed up.

CiaranC · 06-01-2011 1:39pm

forza rovers wrote: »

Ritchie Ryan signed up.

I hear he got a 6% increase on his money from last year. Question is now what is he going to spend the extra 18 quid on

dsmythy · 06-01-2011 1:42pm

Paulw wrote: »

Two major ones have dropped. But, other money has been secured.

Yeah, the move will have an impact, so only time will tell what sort of impact it will have - positive from other football supporters from the area coming to watch out of curiosity, or a fall from the recent Fingal fans. I really don't know what will happen there.

I guess all will be clear in the coming weeks. Not that long now until pre-season starts (next week??), and then the first pre-season games and cup games.

I became interested in LOI football towards the end of 2007 after befriending a Bohs nut. I would have become a Bohs fan if Fingal hadn't have come into existence. I saw them as being my local team seeming as I live in Swords plus I heard of their plans to end up in a stadium in Fingal. Now I'm not just going to my home games outside of Fingal, but in Dalymount no less. The home of the team I original turned down because I didn't see them as local enough. Ironic indeed.

Paulw · 06-01-2011 1:54pm

Zebra3 wrote: »

Well, with a club 120 years old already playing in Dalyer for over a century and another club 115 years old playing 2 or 3 km away, I doubt it'll be the former.....

You could be right, but you never know.

Personally, if there was no Fingal home game on a weekend, I would tend to go to Dalymount, if there was a game on there. That's just me though.

I think since Fingal started I have only missed 4-5 home games. I enjoy watching a live game of football, no matter who is playing. I'd quicker go to a LOI game than I would go to the pub to watch an English Premiership game.

OhNoYouDidn't · 06-01-2011 2:00pm

Gavin shels wrote: »

I've read some mental rumours, but fcuk me!:D

Which bits in particular are 'mental'?

OhNoYouDidn't · 06-01-2011 2:02pm

Zebra3 wrote: »

Well, with a club 120 years old already playing in Dalyer for over a century and another club 115 years old playing 2 or 3 km away, I doubt it'll be the former.....

Both of whom have spectacularly failed to make any significant impact into the local community over that time.

New fans are much more likely to go and see Fingal than Shels. Question is do they exist