Annual Accounts | Page 3 | Vital Football

Annual Accounts

It obviously doesn't say how much was paid to MA but presumably a lower sum than would have been due if we had sacked him. The fact that we were willing to pay him off shows how convinced the board was that we were heading in the wrong direction and could not allow him another season.

The legacy is the squad MK inherited. So was it a lack of confidence in MA's coaching ability or a lack of confidence in the players he had signed?
 
Scotimp said:
It obviously doesn't say how much was paid to MA but presumably a lower sum than would have been due if we had sacked him. The fact that we were willing to pay him off shows how convinced the board was that we were heading in the wrong direction and could not allow him another season.

The legacy is the squad MK inherited. So was it a lack of confidence in MA's coaching ability or a lack of confidence in the players he had signed?
Click to expand...
I never really believed it was a mutual agreement although there was an agreement and payment to him to facilitate the mutuality. I always thought the board instigated the end, especially after the money invested at Christmas and his macho nonsense about "a fan drinking through a straw."
 
Scotimp said:
It obviously doesn't say how much was paid to MA but presumably a lower sum than would have been due if we had sacked him. The fact that we were willing to pay him off shows how convinced the board was that we were heading in the wrong direction and could not allow him another season.

The legacy is the squad MK inherited. So was it a lack of confidence in MA's coaching ability or a lack of confidence in the players he had signed?
Click to expand...

Or a lack of confidence on MA’s part that he‘d be able to meet the expectations of the board with the players he’d have at his disposal hence him wanting to leave?
 
Scotimp said:
It obviously doesn't say how much was paid to MA but presumably a lower sum than would have been due if we had sacked him. The fact that we were willing to pay him off shows how convinced the board was that we were heading in the wrong direction and could not allow him another season.

The legacy is the squad MK inherited. So was it a lack of confidence in MA's coaching ability or a lack of confidence in the players he had signed?
Click to expand...

I think lack of confidence in him wanting to be here which would manifest itself in the above. The fact he negotiated means the terminal feelings were mutual.
 
cdhIMP said:
I think Colby Bishop moved to Portsmouth for a fee more than combined total for those six mentioned players. Plus Accrington don't have a recruitment team and DOF to pay for.
Click to expand...
It was around £500k for Bishop apparently.
 
Mattytindraws said:
Given the 5th place finish was under a salary cap, maybe our £800k increase was insignificant relative to the increases at others clubs and therefore our 17th place was actually a really good outcome?
Click to expand...
True, although I still don't think we got value for money last season. I think the price cap that season is a little over-egged in the sense that whilst sides didn't spend as much, the bigger sides still had decent budgets and players on their books from previous seasons so although it levelled the playing field a bit, it didn't completely level it - far from it.
 
cdhIMP said:
Harry Toffalo - £200k
Bruno Andrade - £75k?
Jorge Grant - £nil
Anthony Scully £150k?
Cohen Bramall £160k
Michael O'Connor - £50k?

£635k, wasn't far off!
Click to expand...
Bramall was £200k, that was his release clause.

I'd be gobsmacked if Scully and Toffolo were that low.
 
hulloutpost said:
For anybody that thinks we should be mixing it with the big boys in L1, this is a sobering reminder of the level we are competing at. Thank you to the board members who continue to fund our existence at this level
Click to expand...

Your right we have no chance of mixing it with the big boys in this league financially.

Our board is fantastic but we would be cutting our cloth accordingly if we were in League 2, NL or NLN, our budgets would be relevant to the leagues we play because of the the people we would attract to the board and the money they would put in playing at those levels and our match day income at those levels would obviously reduce the further we dropped.

If we go on that we will never progress and will be forever a lower league team with a odd decent cup game.

I'm am not deluded and do realise that financially there are some teams in this league who are throwing money at it left, right and center and that is very difficult to compete against but you either try or you just roll over and I don't mean financially but in the players you recruit, that's the way we have to compete.

And let's not forget that despite all the big teams in this league with all the money they had, only a couple of seasons ago we weren't just competing with them we were sitting top of the tree so it can be done but recruitment to this is key and in my opinion our recruitment has deteriorated not got better!

It's not easy, I accept that but the only way we have a chance of competing at the top end of any league in relation to the budget we have is to recruit better, get the balance of recruitment right and then coach those players for the position's you have brought them in for and the formation and style you want to play.

That's how we have to do it along with maybe investing in an established centre forward or an experienced central midfielder every now and again but we can't just say we can't compete financially with teams, we have to find a way to compete.
 
clanfordimp said:
And let's not forget that despite all the big teams in this league with all the money they had, only a couple of seasons ago we weren't just competing with them we were sitting top of the tree so it can be done but recruitment to this is key and in my opinion our recruitment has deteriorated not got better!
Click to expand...

Erm, there was a wage cap in place. That sure as hell helped.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.