Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Ballers]

Ok, right, firstly ignore the sheer crack pottedness of the first bit. And secondly, yes following the last bit to it's logical conclusion is yes you might not want to go part time but if it's the only thing that's finiancially viable perhaps you should do it (especially in light of the first bit).

Now for me the middle part is the interesting one and something we've not really considered I think. I know a fair few of us are 'part-time and proud of it'. Me, I cringe a little at that. I'm glad we're not run like a bunch of dickheads and that we're not a financial basket case but in the longer term we have to look at the most effective way of running a club like ours. Not withstanding we're currently below smaller clubs than us on full time set ups but not much more money, we've got a....actually read it first.......

From Alty official site

From Blue Square Football we learn that "Kidderminster chairman Dave Reynolds has moved to reassure Harriers' supporters that the club will not be reverting to a part-time outfit. The club were recently handed two anonymous donations which spared them from facing a potential winding-up order.

Reynolds told The Shuttle: 'I don't see any future in part-time to be honest. I think in regards to part-time players, the quality we had years ago isn't there anymore... that time has gone and things have changed'.

Meanwhile, new director and Aggborough Holdings member Mark Serrell... said: 'There was a big increase in attendances in the 2008-09 season when the club finished sixth, they dropped off last year. This year we're struggling with attendances already, 1,565 is the highest and the lowest is 937... that's something we've got to change. Fans can support functions and come up with ideas. We're also looking for more volunteers to help work around the club. We need as much help as I can get. If we don't improve the financial position quickly the club faces administration and liquidation. That help and effort is needed immediately'".

-----

As I was saying do we have too much faith in the ability of part time footballers, too much respect for our heroes of yesteryear who really could've done a job at a higher level? I mean where is a Ken McKenna, Jeff Johnson or say a Kim Casey or a Mark Carter who couldn't immediately play at a higher level/earn more money. For me perhaps we have to accept that lower league footballers are now paid so much that the traditional idea of earning more through a combination of playing and working doesn't hold true. If anything we certainly won't find the Graham Heathcote's who will play for years.

 How many good players have we had recently who've stayed for any length of time. Basically Stuart Coburn, Colin Little at the end of his career and the last of the genuine non league footballers Chris Denham and to a lesser extent Nicky Clee. The others who are Conference standard have been Youngy, Senior, Kearney etc who've fallen into our lap due to circumstance for a year or two. Is the genuine level for part time footballers BSN like Peyton and O'Neill (effective there) and some of the Droylsden lads (Kilheeney, Roche etc)? There's a lot to add to this which I will do in time but it's the first time someone has stuck their neck out and put this viewpoint forward so, er, dicusss....

[taxi Phil]

Back in the good old days, our team included John Owens and John Davison, who were both teachers. Paul Mayman at Vics was a bank manager. Clive Freeman some years later was a solicitor. Players  with THAT sort of full time career would probably still stay part time, but the traditional "FA cup hero" type of part timer who had to be up early for his post round or whatever would certainly be considering full time in the current environment. The game has moved on, but not necessarily for the better.

[TheCultOfIanTunnacliffe]

Ballers,

I couldn't agree more with you about cringing when I hear that 'part-time and proud of it' mantra being trotted out.

To me, it just conveys the (wrong) message that we are not a forward-thinking club.

Hats off to you for daring to raise the subject!

  

[taxi Phil]

There's no point in being "forward thinking" if the moolah's not there to back it up. Or would we rather be another Vics - or worse still Ilkeston ?

[Nasha]

I think there was a subject on another forum (can't remember which one) of the 'postmen and footballer'  days,and it is extremely rare we will see that nowadays.

When you look at the FA Cup 2nd round draw, there is only Drolylsden/Swindon Supermarine who can claim to be part time in the full and proper right.

[joe]

I think Ballers is spot on with his assesment that Conf North/South players are your proper part time players now. We are effetivlly playing in what used to be division 4 now the Premier League is mainly for foreigners.

[Paul Cain's Chip Pan]

I couldn't agree more with you about cringing when I hear that 'part-time and proud of it' mantra being trotted out.

I have to agree with this really. Our club is brilliantly run and I'm very grateful for the tireless hard work that board members and volunteers alike contribute day in, day out.

However, I have never (and will never) regard being part time as something to be proud of. I'm proud of our FA Cup history, I'm proud when I see the players battling hard for the club, in fact there are literally hundreds of things that make me proud to be an Alty fan. Being part time just isn't one of them.

[taxi Phil]

I'm not necessarily proud of BEING part time......but I AM proud of this club's achievements as a "small fish in a big pool". Of course I've dreamed over the years of stepping up to full time status and the Football League. But I'm sufficiently grounded to realise that it's very unlikely for this club. Even in our glory days of 30 years ago finances were a stumbling block. People think our proximity to the big Manchester clubs is a problem because it affects our attendances - but it's a bigger problem because it deters potential investors ! The pragmatist in me says we've already hit the peak of our potential back then, and can't even aspire to THAT now.

This season I'll settle happily for staying up, because even being in this league is a massive achievement for a club with our limited resources. And if we don't escape ? BSN is a league where we can compete as equals with practically anybody. Don't want to go there yet though !

[Alty TV]

Excellent post. I’ve been thinking about this view for sometime. The standard of football in the conference keeps improving year on year and to some extent we are struggling to keep up (and, if you think about it, doing pretty well just to compete!) Wimbledon was a perfect example; we played pretty well but were well beaten, not just by a full time team, but a professional looking team.
How many teams who have remained properly part-time have stayed in the conference for a number of years - we would have been relegated twice (not including Robinsongate) had it not been for the demise of others.
Yes, some teams who keep over spending drop out, but then someone else comes in and takes their place in the ‘silly spending stakes’ - to us there doesn't seem to be any justice.
Don’t get me wrong, I am very proud of the way our club is run and would hate to see us splash out silly money that we don’t have, but ‘part-time and proud’? Well if you are really honest, whether you think it is right or not, BSN/BSS is the place for part-time teams these days and it will always be a struggle to stay in the conference, let alone progress.
I’m not advocating turning full-time, and I hope this doesn’t sound defeatist (because I think we still have a fighting chance this season) just trying to put the part-time business into context.

[RocketDan]

I'm not sure if I am getting off the question a bit, however, In terms of "ability", I don't think there is much between the best part time footballers in the region (at altrincham) and the lowest paid full time footballers. The difference is part-time players never reach their maximum "ability" due to lack of training (i.e. they never reach full fitness and their skills on the pitch or not a representation of their potential). Going fulltime allows players to unlock their individual potential, improve fitness and focus on particular aspects of their game. This is also the case when looking at the team as a whole, a fulltime team can prepare for a game fully and focus on their next opponent.

So, with this in mind, If we were to go fulltime, would it be necessarily to sign lots of new "fulltime players". Most of our players could make the step up if they so wished. They would be much stronger as individuals and as a unit.


Anyway, I don't think there is any point in discussing going fulltime unless we had a sound finical backer willing to put £100k per annum into the club, we drill up some additional significant sponsorship money or match day attendances rise by 20%.

The other viable option for going fulltime, which probably won't be popular, is to become a genuine feeder club to a local league team. This would involve having a core of 11 contracted fulltime players and then taking another 10 academy/reserve players on season long loans from the league side, with them paying their players wages in full or making a contribution towards them, thus allowing us to be fulltime, but with a low wage budget. The main problem with that is finding a league side with enough quality reserve team players year upon year, who would be happy to loan them out to a non-league team in order to gain experience and by happy to take the financial burden.

[fuertes]

I'm not sure if I am getting off the question a bit, however, In terms of "ability", I don't think there is much between the best part time footballers in the region (at altrincham) and the lowest paid full time footballers. The difference is part-time players never reach their maximum "ability" due to lack of training (i.e. they never reach full fitness and their skills on the pitch or not a representation of their potential). Going fulltime allows players to unlock their individual potential, improve fitness and focus on particular aspects of their game. This is also the case when looking at the team as a whole, a fulltime team can prepare for a game fully and focus on their next opponent.

So, with this in mind, If we were to go fulltime, would it be necessarily to sign lots of new "fulltime players". Most of our players could make the step up if they so wished. They would be much stronger as individuals and as a unit.

Anyway, I don't think there is any point in discussing going fulltime unless we had a sound finical backer willing to put £100k per annum into the club, we drill up some additional significant sponsorship money or match day attendances rise by 20%.

The other viable option for going fulltime, which probably won't be popular, is to become a genuine feeder club to a local league team. This would involve having a core of 11 contracted fulltime players and then taking another 10 academy/reserve players on season long loans from the league side, with them paying their players wages in full or making a contribution towards them, thus allowing us to be fulltime, but with a low wage budget. The main problem with that is finding a league side with enough quality reserve team players year upon year, who would be happy to loan them out to a non-league team in order to gain experience and by happy to take the financial burden.

Backers ploughing money in is both dangerous and, IMO, a bit dishonourable. In principle, it's no better than Man City/Chelsea type operations. The club is being propelled to a higher level than it can rightfully achieve on the back of its support, success and other endeavours. Of course, it's less offensive because it's on a small scale, but it's more or less the same thing.

That last point is interesting. f County were a much more stable club perhaps they'd have been an option. As it is, United and City are too high up and there's no other viable option that springs to mind.

[distancetraveller]

personally, I think being part time in this league is comparable to being a fulham bolton everton etc in the premiership. Those type of clubs wont win the premiership due to finances. we are never  going to compete with the big spenders mainly because of the geographical location of the club by that i mean we wont get big crowds due the utd/city factor. but I feel we can survive in this league being part time just like we did the last couple of seasons

I for one am proud to say we are "part time and proud of it"  (I have the badge to prove it) 

[62vintage]

I agree with distance traveller on this, and I also have `the badge`

[Jezza]

I'm proud we are part time because it means we haven't joined the sheep dip/money pit with all the rest...we are choosing to live within our means and compete on that basis.....and I am proud when our part timers gives a full time team a whipping....I am proud we are still one of the top part time non league clubs in the country.

If there was a way to become full time within our means I'd be just as proud.

There are still top quality part time players around...sadly many chase the money in lower leagues or get snapped up by a full time club because the wage difference these days is worth it....we've still got stu coburn, the best part time keeper in the world!