The Dominance of Dublin GAA *Mod warning post#1*

kilns

Enquiring wrote: »

Dublin lost to Laois, save and nearly lost to Longford, all in a couple of years in the mid noughties. That's where Dublin were. They had some talented youngsters coming through though. Coinciding with the huge number of professional coaches strangely.

Again you make your sweeping statements without any backup, you stated up to funding Longford were competitive with Dublin based on one game. How much did Dublin beat Longford by the previous year, I will save you the search it was 19 points. Now do you think Dublins average winning margin against Longford up to 2006 was more reflective of 2006 or 2005, I know you won't answer.

But it you want to make sweeping statements, try and do a bit of research or else you end up looking silly.....

Enquiring

kilns wrote: »

Again you make your sweeping statements without any backup, you stated up to funding Longford were competitive with Dublin based on one game. How much did Dublin beat Longford by the previous year, I will save you the search it was 19 months. Now do you think Dublins average winning margin against Longford up to 2006 was more reflective of 2006 or 2005, I know you won't answer.

But it you want to make sweeping statements, try and do a bit of research or else you end up looking silly.....

Dublin were at home the year before, maybe that's where the push for all Dublin championship games to be played in Croke park came from? They saw the difference it could make.

If thats the only thing that you can pick out from my extensive research, it tells me you're struggling pretty bad.

kilns

Enquiring wrote: »

Well at least you're posting in a reasonable manner and not resorting to abusive private messages!

Dublin were at home the year before, maybe that's where the push for all Dublin championship games to be played in Croke park came from? They saw the difference it could make.

If thats the only thing that you can pick out from my extensive research, it tells me you're struggling pretty bad.

Again had Longford caught up with Dublin? The answer is no and never will,

ooter

Again more, all of dublin's championship games are not played in croke park. But again it'll be sidestepped and ignored.

Enquiring

kilns wrote: »

Oh are you such a sensitive soul to call being called a chancer with a smiley face abusive, poor baby

Again had Longford caught up with Dublin? The answer is no and never will, stop embarrassing yourself

Longford were very close to beating Dublin, Westmeath and Laois had done so just before that. It was a different era. The decades where it was Dublin v Kerry with a few teams popping up here and there were over.

Instead of continuing on naturally, unfortunately Bertie stepped in. It's resulted in some of the teams who caught up now been told that they are not worthy of playing on the same pitch as the Dublins and Kerry's.

ArielAtom

tikkahunter wrote: »

How many primary schools have Cork and how many have Dublin ? That’s were the development funding goes not the clubs .

Tikka, this is the root of the misunderstanding by certain posters. The development funding which was allocated to Dublin was for the development of children of the ages 5-12 or to put it simply for those who can't grasp that simple fact, Primary School kids. There is a great twitter account from one of those GPO's giving a really good insight into his role in developing GAA in the schools. It's great to see young people from the country coming to Dublin and helping to develop Gaelic Games in the capital. A big thank you to them. And yes they are attached to clubs, where they organise the Academy and offer advice to volunteers that maybe don't have a GAA background.

The Twitter account is @GAAmeCoaching, very well rounded individual who just posts facts. No agenda.

Enquiring

ArielAtom wrote: »

Tikka, this is the root of the misunderstanding by certain posters. The development funding which was allocated to Dublin was for the development of children of the ages 5-12 or to put it simply for those who can't grasp that simple fact, Primary School kids. There is a great twitter account from one of those GPO's giving a really good insight into his role in developing GAA in the schools. It's great to see young people from the country coming to Dublin and helping to develop Gaelic Games in the capital. A big thank you to them.

I'm just going to leave a few quotes here. They're from Kevin O'Shaughnessy and Ger O'Connor, both Dublin county board members:

"The coaches work very much in tune with what the particular club wants. They are all trained to Hetac Level 7 under an NUIG programme. It is a high standard that allows them to train the trainers in each club to a high quality."

"The coaches don't just concentrate on hurling or football. They organise everything within a club and camogie and ladies football get the benefit too."

I can provide you with more quotes if you're doubting these 2 men?

Enquiring

ArielAtom wrote: »

Tikka, this is the root of the misunderstanding by certain posters. The development funding which was allocated to Dublin was for the development of children of the ages 5-12 or to put it simply for those who can't grasp that simple fact, Primary School kids. There is a great twitter account from one of those GPO's giving a really good insight into his role in developing GAA in the schools. It's great to see young people from the country coming to Dublin and helping to develop Gaelic Games in the capital. A big thank you to them. And yes they are attached to clubs, where they organise the Academy and offer advice to volunteers that maybe don't have a GAA background.

The Twitter account is @GAAmeCoaching, very well rounded individual who just posts facts. No agenda.

I just had a quick look at this Twitter account:

"GPOs main role is multi faceted and multi tiered.
•Primary school coaching
•Post Primary school assistance
•Coach education in club
•Nursery (4-7 year olds) coordination and coaching
•Summer Camps
•Advanced Camps
As well as other roles within each club as designated..."

Facts. No agenda. 😀 Blows the primary school myth out of the water yet again.

Wouldn't it be great to have a coach with those job specifics allocated to your club? Imagine if you received funding so these coaches could be made available for nearly every club in your county?

Also remember, the funding for these coaches was a Dublin only scheme. And there are people actually still denying that this didn't have any impact on the amazing upturn in fortunes right across Dublin GAA.

tikkahunter

Enquiring wrote: »

I just had a quick look at this Twitter account:

"GPOs main role is multi faceted and multi tiered.
•Primary school coaching
•Post Primary school assistance
•Coach education in club
•Nursery (4-7 year olds) coordination and coaching
•Summer Camps
•Advanced Camps
As well as other roles within each club as designated..."

Facts. No agenda. �� Blows the primary school myth out of the water yet again.

Wouldn't it be great to have a coach with those job specifics allocated to your club? Imagine if you received funding so these coaches could be made available for nearly every club in your county?

Also remember, the funding for these coaches was a Dublin only scheme. And there are people actually still denying that this didn't have any impact on the amazing upturn in fortunes right across Dublin GAA.

where is the donkey work done ? In the primary schools in the area , that’s what gets the kids into the nursery, Cúl camps and any other summer camps . The majority of a Gpo’s week is spent in primary schools .

JeffKenna

tikkahunter wrote: »

where is the donkey work done ? In the primary schools in the area , that’s what gets the kids into the nursery, Cúl camps and any other summer camps . The majority of a Gpo’s week is spent in primary schools .

50% of their week.

tikkahunter

JeffKenna wrote: »

50% of their week.

Depends on how many schools that are in the area 😉

Enquiring

tikkahunter wrote: »

where is the donkey work done ? In the primary schools in the area , that’s what gets the kids into the nursery, Cúl camps and any other summer camps . The majority of a Gpo’s week is spent in primary schools .

The coaches wages are half paid by the clubs. They work for the clubs! High ranking Dublin GAA officials say they work for the clubs and outline their role. I don't know why you doubt their word? Yes, they spend time in local primary schools. The main goal of that is to recruit players for the club they're hired for.

beggars_bush

Enquiring wrote: »

The coaches wages are half paid by the clubs. They work for the clubs! High ranking Dublin GAA officials say they work for the clubs and outline their role. I don't know why you doubt their word? Yes, they spend time in local primary schools. The main goal of that is to recruit players for the club they're hired for.

Wouldn't it be great if there was funding for clubs in rural counties to 50% fund a club coach?
Clubs could even row in together to share this 50%

Except, every club in Dublin is treated differently than those outside the county. Why is that?
Despite many of them having multi million euro in turnover

RoyalCelt

ArielAtom wrote: »

Glad we have cleared that up. Corks sponsorship is for Football and Hurling, it does not take into Ladies football or Camogie. Ah the halycon days when meath hammered Dublin, I don't miss them days at all. I had to listen to my relations far to much crowing on about how much better meath were.

Meath were not always beating dublin.

10's beat them in 2010. Lost count of the years Dublin won.

00's beat them in 01. Lost to dublin on 02, 05, 07, 09.

90's Meath win in 91, 92, 96, 97, 99.
Dublin win 93, 94, 95,

So just the one decade where we had 2 more wins over you. It used to be a rivalry where a lot was at stake. Now there are no bragging rights because a massive gap was artificially funded by the GAA. Outside interference.

After the 90's meath only beat Dublin once in each of the following 2 decades. Does leinster not need a strong meath like the gaa needed a strong dublin? Where was the multi million save meath football plan.

The reality is the money men cared about your county and not mine or any other for that fact. It's why we're all losing interest and not appreciating your wins like teams previously were including previous dublin teams.

RoyalCelt

kilns wrote: »

Again had Longford caught up with Dublin? The answer is no and never will,

In a would before dublin were blasted with millions it was actually possible. 2005 being the case in point. I'd imagine if Longford had been receiving 20M in development funds the previous 10 years and 10 million in sponsorship they'd have been in even better shape and would have beat Dublin. Unrealistic yes but it just shows how GAA special money interventions can alter results.

Enquiring

beggars_bush wrote: »

Wouldn't it be great if there was funding for clubs in rural counties to 50% fund a club coach?
Clubs could even row in together to share this 50%

Except, every club in Dublin is treated differently than those outside the county. Why is that?
Despite many of them having multi million euro in turnover

It really is a sad reflection on the GAA and what it has become. Of course, what you suggest would not only be the fair way but the right way to have done things. They decided to give one county special treatment. It was a business decision, nothing more. There were far more deserving counties, look at what GAA players in the 6 had to go through. The GAA made their money off their investment but now the profits are falling. It's up to the rest of us to protest with our feet. Hit them where it hurts. This is all of our organisation. It would die without us.

RoyalCelt

Enquiring wrote: »

It really is a sad reflection on the GAA and what it has become. Of course, what you suggest would not only be the fair way but the right way to have done things. They decided to give one county special treatment. It was a business decision, nothing more. There were far more deserving counties, look at what GAA players in the 6 had to go through. The GAA made their money off their investment but now the profits are falling. It's up to the rest of us to protest with our feet. Hit them where it hurts. This is all of our organisation. It would die without us.

Weird question. How many players are left playing outside of Dublin who hold a Leinster Medal or an All Ireland medal? Could we see a day where no current player from outside the capital holds either honour for the first time ever.

Enquiring

RoyalCelt wrote: »

Weird question. How many players are left playing outside of Dublin who hold a Leinster Medal or an All Ireland medal? Could we see a day where no current player from outside the capital holds either honour for the first time ever.

Would any of the Meath/Louth players from 2010 still be playing? Strangely, you might have to go back to 2003 in Leinster if Munnelly is still playing. There would be a few on the Donegal and Kerry squads. Maybe some on the Cork squad as well.

StupidLikeAFox

ArielAtom wrote: »

Tikka, this is the root of the misunderstanding by certain posters. The development funding which was allocated to Dublin was for the development of children of the ages 5-12 or to put it simply for those who can't grasp that simple fact, Primary School kids. .

How about these quotes from Dublin development officers - this would prove the opposite of what you are saying, or that the funding was used to focus on the club *instead* of the schools:

"It would have been difficult, trying to work the club-school relationship when you were trying to cover that many clubs. I’d say 65 percent of my time back then would have been in the schools whereas now it would be 75 percent with the club [Kilmacud]."

"The big change came when the funding came through in 2004, 2005. All of a sudden you had 40-45 coaches. Instead of having to go around to 10 clubs, you only had to focus on one or two"

kilns

RoyalCelt wrote: »

In a would before dublin were blasted with millions it was actually possible. 2005 being the case in point. I'd imagine if Longford had been receiving 20M in development funds the previous 10 years and 10 million in sponsorship they'd have been in even better shape and would have beat Dublin. Unrealistic yes but it just shows how GAA special money interventions can alter results.

In 2005 Dublin beat Longford by 19 points

RoyalCelt

kilns wrote: »

In 2005 Dublin beat Longford by 19 points

2006. You know the match I went. Used to be famously known as the last time dublin played outside croker even for qualifiers. Back when the dubs weren't world beaters and the gaa needed every advantage to milk the Dublin gate for money and hope you win at the same time.

MayoAreMagic

Strumms wrote: »

Dublin vs Kildare 2017...Attendance ... 66,734 for example turned up.

Positive thing not to play in croker ? If there are 60 thousand plus people demanding tickets the fair outcome is to play a match in a venue that can enable as much demand as possible to be catered for... ?

You’d rather that match take place in a venue with about half that capacity, turning up.

It’s game of the ‘common person’... so play it where you can accommodate as many as possible but the game costs to run... and corporate facilities and entertainment do their share as a revenue generating facet of and for the GAA... it’s not just Dublin who benefit from that.... every sport, athletics, soccer, tennis the same... or maybe the GAA should have gone a different way, forget corporate facilities and when the likes of people are complaining about investment and lack of facilities assistance from the GAA, they can be happy they contributed to killing a revenue stream that can and does help GAA nationwide.

Funny enough, their average attendance in leinster for the same year was around 37000 - not even half of croke parks capacity. Is it even paying to open croke park on those figures?
They played a game in omoore park, which has a capacity of 22000, and only managed to bring 13400, including the opposition fans. Where were all these people demanding tickets that you referenced?

Clearly there is more than enough room in plenty of grounds for an average of 37000 and a less than half full croke park is pointless.
Your harping on about 'corporate' and revenue streams misses the most important point - have a good product that people want to see. If you have that then the rest is easy, and you dont need to be chasing corporations because they will come to you. We dont have that unfortunately.
As for your huge pride in the 66000 odd figure for the leinster final. Well Mayo and roscommon were able to get 65000 odd for the quarter final in the same year, so it is no great feat at all for dublin to be honest about it. Furthermore i will be the first to say, the game shouldnt have been in croke park at all, 65000 or not. Corporate types can travel too cant they? If the product was there, they would.

Strumms

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

Funny enough, their average attendance in leinster for the same year was around 37000 - not even half of croke parks capacity. Is it even paying to open croke park on those figures?
They played a game in omoore park, which has a capacity of 22000, and only managed to bring 13400, including the opposition fans. Where were all these people demanding tickets that you referenced?

Clearly there is more than enough room in plenty of grounds for an average of 37000 and a less than half full croke park is pointless.
Your harping on about 'corporate' and revenue streams misses the most important point - have a good product that people want to see. If you have that then the rest is easy, and you dont need to be chasing corporations because they will come to you. We dont have that unfortunately.
As for your huge pride in the 66000 odd figure for the leinster final. Well Mayo and roscommon were able to get 65000 odd for the quarter final in the same year, so it is no great feat at all for dublin to be honest about it. Furthermore i will be the first to say, the game shouldnt have been in croke park at all, 65000 or not. Corporate types can travel too cant they? If the product was there, they would.

It’s not about a good product. It’s about a sport.. team A, endeavoring to beat team B...comprehensively.... that is what sport is.. professional or otherwise...Golf, soccer, basketball, Gaa ..football camogie and hurling, darts, hockey, tennis...competition... professional, amateur, under age, college, you name it.

Each team or participants in every fûcking sport wants to beat the other team as comprehensively as possible... in my tennis competition days in competitions I wanted to hammer the fûck out of the opposition... I wanted the kid to remember next year having beat him 6-3 6-1 6-2..

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

In 2015 Dublin's sponsorship total was 1.1 million, it moved to 1.5 million in 2016. It 2019 it sat at 2.1 million. It's ever increasing. What happens when it goes up to 5 million? Higher? Let's not forget, this increased sponsorship was gained off the back of increased success across Dublin GAA, that success came about from the Games Development money paid for by all of us.

Perhaps it’s ever increasing because dublin have been successful and are more marketable as a result over that period? As noted earlier Kerry’s sponsorship has been adversely affected by their relative recent lack of success.. similarly corks sponsorship deal includes a huge additional performance related element. Given the prominence of hurling in cork compared to dubli I’d say they’ll do well from that element over the lifetime of the deal.

Tell me enquiring, is there a reason you think kids growing up in dublin should get less attention in terms of game development than elsewhere? We’ve already seen that per capita dublin has significantly less coaches than the rest of Leinster- 118 vs 60 to 70. Why exactly shouldn’t kids in dublin have access to games development just so your county can win an all ireland or Leinster by beggaring teams that are better than yours.

Btw congratulations to cork for getting their act together and pursuing a strategy to maximise sponsorship revenue. I’m assuming all the split dublin brigade will now recant the posts where they assured is it ‘couldn’t be done by other counties’ and ‘ wouldn’t work elsewhere’. Hopefully this is the beginning of other counties taking this stuff seriously- the idea of counties with huge diaspora in particular playing the poor mouth on their commercial appeal as an excuse to not move forward helps mo one

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

That's not possible and you know it's not possible. In this GAA you envisage, it's about those who can gain access to funds who will excel and those who can't will be confined to the b competitions I assume you're in favour of. There's only one path that will lead us down.

That's not the GAA I want to see and it's not what the GAA is supposed to be about. If you're happy to compete unfairly then you are in the same boat as the Dubs. The rest of us have to stand up and put a stop to this.

Why is this a problem for you now but not for the 30 years that Kerry were ahead of everyone in sponsorship terms for example? You paint a picture that somehow money was nice and fair pre this dublin team while ignoring that evidence that it was anything but. What do you think the issues with funding were pre this dublin team and how do you propose to fix them? I assume you’re equally unhappy with the skewed nature of the championship pre 2011?

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

Yes, no one has suggested that!

It's interesting though that you bring up Longford. They nearly beat Dublin in 2006, this was just after the increase in funding was sent Dublin's way. The investment into Dublin GAA was supposed to bring results. The GAA wanted and needed to make a return on it. So Dublin were moved to Croke Park for every championship game for the next 10 years after that scare v Longford.

Amazingly, Longford were able to compete with Dublin before the millions of euros took effect. It's crazy the difference money can make.

Wait, a few pages back you were telling us dublin were seeing the benefits of the money back in 2003. Now you’re telling is in 2006 the GAA couldn’t get any return from the dublin money

At least get your story straight and stick to it

tritium

y0ssar1an22 wrote: »

has the laois offaly amalgamation happened yet?

thats why the split will never happen.

how many coaches do dublin have vs kildare for example?

From earlier dublin have 60-70 games dev personnel. Rest of Leinster have 118. Per capita rest of Leinster have significantly more than dublin

beggars_bush

tritium wrote: »

Perhaps it’s ever increasing because dublin have been successful and are more marketable as a result over that period? As noted earlier Kerry’s sponsorship has been adversely affected by their relative recent lack of success.. similarly corks sponsorship deal includes a huge additional performance related element. Given the prominence of hurling in cork compared to dubli I’d say they’ll do well from that element over the lifetime of the deal.

Tell me enquiring, is there a reason you think kids growing up in dublin should get less attention in terms of game development than elsewhere? We’ve already seen that per capita dublin has significantly less coaches than the rest of Leinster- 118 vs 60 to 70. Why exactly shouldn’t kids in dublin have access to games development just so your county can win an all ireland or Leinster by beggaring teams that are better than yours.

Btw congratulations to cork for getting their act together and pursuing a strategy to maximise sponsorship revenue. I’m assuming all the split dublin brigade will now recant the posts where they assured is it ‘couldn’t be done by other counties’ and ‘ wouldn’t work elsewhere’. Hopefully this is the beginning of other counties taking this stuff seriously- the idea of counties with huge diaspora in particular playing the poor mouth on their commercial appeal as an excuse to not move forward helps mo one

If only all those multi millionaires from longford now living in the Bahamas would pump a few million in every year to improve standards across the county
How many foreign based dubs are doing likewise?

ooter

I've no idea if dublin's sponsorship deals are performance based, but if they are imagine how much more money they'd be getting if the hurlers weren't going backwards.

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

The coaches wages are half paid by the clubs. They work for the clubs! High ranking Dublin GAA officials say they work for the clubs and outline their role. I don't know why you doubt their word? Yes, they spend time in local primary schools. The main goal of that is to recruit players for the club they're hired for.

Sorry, is the issue now that the clubs in Dublin are spending their OWN money? Do clubs elsewhere not spend their OWN money? I’m assuming any club that’s funding an employee has a say over at least some of their time, regardless of which county they’re in

tritium

beggars_bush wrote: »

Wouldn't it be great if there was funding for clubs in rural counties to 50% fund a club coach?
Clubs could even row in together to share this 50%

Except, every club in Dublin is treated differently than those outside the county. Why is that?
Despite many of them having multi million euro in turnover

Every time it’s suggest someone tells us it won’t work

Rest of leinster has 118 games development personnel!!!!

beggars_bush

tritium wrote: »

From earlier dublin have 60-70 games dev personnel. Rest of Leinster have 118. Per capita rest of Leinster have significantly more than dublin

What is the point of per capita conparisons?

There are thousands of children in dublin who don't play any gaa as the coaching is disproportionately placed in middle class area schools and clubs

Rosita

MayoAreMagic wrote: »

As for your huge pride in the 66000 odd figure for the leinster final. Well Mayo and roscommon were able to get 65000 odd for the quarter final in the same year, so it is no great feat at all for dublin to be honest about it.

.

Funny you should mention "being honest about it" in the same breath as neglecting to mention that when Mayo and Roscommon played in front of 65,000 people in Croke Park, there were actually four counties playing in the stadium that day as there were two quarter-finals taking place.

They attracted 39,000 to the replay when it was just the two of them, which is respectable but hardly of the order you are suggesting.

tritium

beggars_bush wrote: »

What is the point of per capita conparisons?

There are thousands of children in dublin who don't play any gaa as the coaching is disproportionately placed in middle class area schools and clubs

The whole point of games development is to get them playing, tha yes why gdos spend time in the scholls

You seem to be implying this notion that the gdos are running some sort of training supercamps in dublin. We both know thats not the case. But you tell me so how many coaches each county should have and what should be the basis of allocation

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

Perhaps it’s ever increasing because dublin have been successful and are more marketable as a result over that period? As noted earlier Kerry’s sponsorship has been adversely affected by their relative recent lack of success.. similarly corks sponsorship deal includes a huge additional performance related element. Given the prominence of hurling in cork compared to dubli I’d say they’ll do well from that element over the lifetime of the deal.

Tell me enquiring, is there a reason you think kids growing up in dublin should get less attention in terms of game development than elsewhere? We’ve already seen that per capita dublin has significantly less coaches than the rest of Leinster- 118 vs 60 to 70. Why exactly shouldn’t kids in dublin have access to games development just so your county can win an all ireland or Leinster by beggaring teams that are better than yours.

Btw congratulations to cork for getting their act together and pursuing a strategy to maximise sponsorship revenue. I’m assuming all the split dublin brigade will now recant the posts where they assured is it ‘couldn’t be done by other counties’ and ‘ wouldn’t work elsewhere’. Hopefully this is the beginning of other counties taking this stuff seriously- the idea of counties with huge diaspora in particular playing the poor mouth on their commercial appeal as an excuse to not move forward helps mo one

I just said in that post that Dublin got increased sponsorship off the back of the success gained from having a huge number of professional coaches.

The question is, why do you think underage development in Dublin should have got 2 decades worth of attention while no other county had access to the same program?

Cork had sponsorship prior to this deal? Were you not aware that all counties have sponsors? It's just no one has close to 2.1 million per year and rising like Dublin.

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

Why is this a problem for you now but not for the 30 years that Kerry were ahead of everyone in sponsorship terms for example? You paint a picture that somehow money was nice and fair pre this dublin team while ignoring that evidence that it was anything but. What do you think the issues with funding were pre this dublin team and how do you propose to fix them? I assume you’re equally unhappy with the skewed nature of the championship pre 2011?

I've called for pooled sponsorship and a cap on spending on team preparations. Would you be in favour of the same? I'm interested in fair play for all, you'll need to look closer to home for those in favour of unfair competitions.

tritium

beggars_bush wrote: »

If only all those multi millionaires from longford now living in the Bahamas would pump a few million in every year to improve standards across the county
How many foreign based dubs are doing likewise?

No idea, any more than I know for Mayo, Kerry Galway etc. Given expensive New York dinners are a common form of “fundraising” I’d say it’s common across the GAA

Not at all sure what that’s got to do with being able to market yourself to sponsors though. AIG aren’t a dublin company , sports direct aren’t a cork company

Though if you believe there’s anything underhanded going on that you have proof rather than paranoia about you can share it. It’s unlikely to be controversial I would have thought given the money the like of Limerick seem to have received from their donors

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

Wait, a few pages back you were telling us dublin were seeing the benefits of the money back in 2003. Now you’re telling is in 2006 the GAA couldn’t get any return from the dublin money

At least get your story straight and stick to it

The money was used for coaching and improving underage structures. That helped underage teams in 2003 and it eventually transferred to senior level.

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

Sorry, is the issue now that the clubs in Dublin are spending their OWN money? Do clubs elsewhere not spend their OWN money? I’m assuming any club that’s funding an employee has a say over at least some of their time, regardless of which county they’re in

I was just busting the myth that the coaches were just for primary schools. As you know, the clubs wouldn't be paying big money just for that. The coaches have transformed club standards in Dublin and consequently, inter county standards.

You are probably also aware that this was a Dublin only scheme? That is the problem. Half the wages were paid for by all of us.

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

The whole point of games development is to get them playing, tha yes why gdos spend time in the scholls

You seem to be implying this notion that the gdos are running some sort of training supercamps in dublin. We both know thats not the case. But you tell me so how many coaches each county should have and what should be the basis of allocation

Wait a minute! You were just going on about the clubs spending their own money. Do you think they might actually coach for the clubs that are paying half their wages? They dont coach other coaches? They dont run training camps?

ooter

Except it hasn't transferred to senior level with the small ball.
Underage players in 2003 would be in their prime now.

JeffKenna

Really goes to show how dead intercounty football is that this is the main topic of conversation all year.

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

I just said in that post that Dublin got increased sponsorship off the back of the success gained from having a huge number of professional coaches.

The question is, why do you think underage development in Dublin should have got 2 decades worth of attention while no other county had access to the same program?

Cork had sponsorship prior to this deal? Were you not aware that all counties have sponsors? It's just no one has close to 2.1 million per year and rising like Dublin.

As has already been pointed out, as is evidenced by the deal they just signed, cork may have had sponsorship but they certainly and demonstrably weren’t making the most of it.

You seen to want to put everything down to funding but conveniently ignoring the wider funding the GAA provides. It spent over €20 million on games development and player welfare last year, not all of it going directly to counties. Dublin came up with an approach that enabled them to directly use the funds but the reality is games development would need that level of funding anyway based on the number of people it’s trying to reach in dublin. Would you be happier if it was shared out and administered centrally on a per capita basis, with dublin getting more? If dublin tore down the organisational structures so they used funding less efficiently? Again how would you allocate this funding ? You keep avoiding giving those details. As I’ve already demonstrated Leinster has 118 gdos, not all of these coming from county allocations, until you’re prepared to acknowledge and account for that your numbers are absolute pony and your argument pointless

As has also been pointed out, the gdos are not supporting the inter county game. You talk about sponsorship money,fundraising, club subscriptions and the rest as if they were all one pot funding team dublin- they’re not. Most large inter county teams are spending massively on their team preparations, I gave the figure of 1.6m for Mayo in 2016, yet you’re happy to fob it off as travelling expenses. You just want the flashy headline as an excuse to justify your bitterness. What exactly is the breakdown of the dublin salary spend you quote for example? You bitch about their ability to attract sponsors but what does that cost dublin in terms of marketing personnel? What’s the net gain rather than the headline? I’m sure it’s worth it but I’m also sure that you’re quite deliberately missing the context to push your agenda

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

I was just busting the myth that the coaches were just for primary schools. As you know, the clubs wouldn't be paying big money just for that. The coaches have transformed club standards in Dublin and consequently, inter county standards.

You are probably also aware that this was a Dublin only scheme? That is the problem. Half the wages were paid for by all of us.

Are “all of us” also paying ten wages for the 118 gdos in the rest of Leinster? What’s that costing “all of us”?

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

I didnt think it was complicated but I'll explain it for you if you need.

The money was used for coaching and improving underage structures. That helped underage teams in 2003 and it eventually transferred to senior level. It's not rocket science.

dublin had been getting the benefits 3 years before you say they were struggling, in fact you argued in had been happening g well in advance of 2003. That 2003 pool of players would have been well integrated into senior by that stage if the funding had been working so well in 03

Absolute nonsense argument you’re making there

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

As has already been pointed out, as is evidenced by the deal they just signed, cork may have had sponsorship but they certainly and demonstrably weren’t making the most of it.

You seen to want to put everything down to funding but conveniently ignoring the wider funding the GAA provides. It spent over €20 million on games development and player welfare last year, not all of it going directly to counties. Dublin came up with an approach that enabled them to directly use the funds but the reality is games development would need that level of funding anyway based on the number of people it’s trying to reach in dublin. Would you be happier if it was shared out and administered centrally on a per capita basis, with dublin getting more? If dublin tore down the organisational structures so they used funding less efficiently? Again how would you allocate this funding ? You keep avoiding giving those details. As I’ve already demonstrated Leinster has 118 gdos, not all of these coming from county allocations, until you’re prepared to acknowledge and account for that your numbers are absolute pony and your argument pointless

As has also been pointed out, the gdos are not supporting the inter county game. You talk about sponsorship money,fundraising, club subscriptions and the rest as if they were all one pot funding team dublin- they’re not. Most large inter county teams are spending massively on their team preparations, I gave the figure of 1.6m for Mayo in 2016, yet you’re happy to fob it off as travelling expenses. You just want the flashy headline as an excuse to justify your bitterness. What exactly is the breakdown of the dublin salary spend you quote for example? You bitch about their ability to attract sponsors but what does that cost dublin in terms of marketing personnel? What’s the net gain rather than the headline? I’m sure it’s worth it but I’m also sure that you’re quite deliberately missing the context to push your agenda

Cork standards could have been improved if they were receiving games development funding on the same scale as Dublin. Dublin have received 12.5 times the amount Cork received this century. Any explanation?

You want to ignore two decades of funding disparity. You can do so if you wish but no one else has to play along in your game of make believe.

Where do inter county teams get their players from? It wouldn't be the clubs that have had the services of professional coaches for 2 decades would it?

Of course it's one big pot. What are you talking about? The whole point is that Dublin have built on the investment by he GAA and all of us and are now operating with a level of finance that no one can come close to. I think you're well aware of the enormity of the figures at this stage! If you want a breakdown, then contact Dublin GAA directly. They are raging any accounts were released so I doubt they'll give you a reply but you can try.

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

I've called for pooled sponsorship and a cap on spending on team preparations. Would you be in favour of the same? I'm interested in fair play for all, you'll need to look closer to home for those in favour of unfair competitions.

What’s fair about dublin busting themselves to maximise sponsorship revenue and a Kildare official to ask for their cut when they haven’t done the same?

How long do you think the dublin corks and Kerry’s of this works will bother their ass doing the sponsorship lifting so that other counties don’t have to?

On team prep I absolutely favour a cap on spending if only to stop some counties prioritising short termism instead of investing in structures , Obvious question is what would be the basis for that- Leitrim simply couldn’t spend what Mayo or Kerry would currently need for example, how would you manage that? The only starting point I can see would have to be based on what teams can afford based on real revenues like ffp in soccer. What would your approach be?

unfortunately though very little of what you’ve been on about actually relates to inter county team spending.

tritium

Enquiring wrote: »

Cork standards could have been improved if they were receiving games development funding on the same scale as Dublin. Dublin have received 12.5 times the amount Cork received this century. Any explanation?

You want to ignore two decades of funding disparity. You can do so if you wish but no one else has to play along in your game of make believe.

Where do inter county teams get their players from? It wouldn't be the clubs that have had the services of professional coaches for 2 decades would it?

Of course it's one big pot. What are you talking about? The whole point is that Dublin have built on the investment by he GAA and all of us and are now operating with a level of finance that no one can come close to. I think you're well aware of the enormity of the figures at this stage! If you want a breakdown, then contact Dublin GAA directly. They are raging any accounts were released so I doubt they'll give you a reply but you can try.

So you actually don’t have any answer

Just throwing out headlines and hoping to make a sensationalised story

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

Except your conspiracy theory says dublin had been getting the benefits 3 years before you say they were struggling, in fact you argued in had been happening g well in advance of 2003. That 2003 pool of players would have been well integrated into senior by that stage if the funding had been working so well in 03

Absolute nonsense argument you’re making there

What conspiracy theory? Are you claiming Dublin did not receive a huge level of funding granted by Bertie? Where did the money go? It sounds like the conspiracy theory is coming from your side!

The money was for underage structures, the aim was to produce players for senior level. Underage players are called underage for a reason, you cant just throw 14 year olds into play senior football.

These cows are small. Those cows are far away!

Enquiring

tritium wrote: »

What’s fair about dublin busting themselves to maximise sponsorship revenue and a Kildare official to ask for their cut when they haven’t done the same?

How long do you think the dublin corks and Kerry’s of this works will bother their ass doing the sponsorship lifting so that other counties don’t have to?

On team prep I absolutely favour a cap on spending if only to stop some counties prioritising short termism instead of investing in structures , Obvious question is what would be the basis for that- Leitrim simply couldn’t spend what Mayo or Kerry would currently need for example, how would you manage that? The only starting point I can see would have to be based on what teams can afford based on real revenues like ffp in soccer. What would your approach be?

unfortunately though very little of what you’ve been waffling on about actually relates to inter county team spending.

So you're in favour of Dublin receiving 2.1 million per year in sponsorship while other counties receive pittance?

Dublin spend over 1.5 million every year on team preparations. That's without much travel expenses. Far more than any other county when travel expenses are taken away. It's a huge amount Dublin spend, all part of the reason why Dublin being split is been called for. They're operating at a professional level in an amateur sport.