Re: Full time? : Sun Aug 30, 2015 10:39 am  

We aren't close enough to the £ numbers to make an informed decision but I am a believer in the saying that if you accept mediocrity that is exactly what you will get! That longer term view from the BOD and RM is admirable but if we stay out of the middle 8's for a couple of seasons then that loss of revenue could prove a real stumbling block to future progression.

Re: Full time? : Sun Aug 30, 2015 11:15 am  

Going FT will not mean we will be anymore successful than what we have achieved this year-we could end up not even making the top 4 like London and fev. People often think if we go FT then we will be automatically better-I disagree. If its the same player standard but they are getting each a 100 Pounds more will it increase our standards? And would a quality player often be prepared to drop down a league with the chance we might get promoted? I feel we are in a phrase where there is a hope one Championship club has a small chance of promotion and that we should throw everything to get it-but then forget how they actually intend to stay there! I would rather us spend money on things that will be rewarding us long term rather than chasing a goal that for now is unrealistic. I have a feeling some clubs will be busting a gut and bank balance to get/to stay in SL and that it will hurt them in the future when they realise that they could have used that money in a better way. For now we are best staying PT and working hard without the potential of going bust-we saw how we was very lucky to ecape that last time.

Re: Full time? : Sun Aug 30, 2015 12:24 pm  

The Lucky Black Cat wrote:

Going FT will not mean we will be anymore successful than what we have achieved this year-we could end up not even making the top 4 like London and fev. People often think if we go FT then we will be automatically better-I disagree. If its the same player standard but they are getting each a 100 Pounds more will it increase our standards? And would a quality player often be prepared to drop down a league with the chance we might get promoted? I feel we are in a phrase where there is a hope one Championship club has a small chance of promotion and that we should throw everything to get it-but then forget how they actually intend to stay there! I would rather us spend money on things that will be rewarding us long term rather than chasing a goal that for now is unrealistic. I have a feeling some clubs will be busting a gut and bank balance to get/to stay in SL and that it will hurt them in the future when they realise that they could have used that money in a better way. For now we are best staying PT and working hard without the potential of going bust-we saw how we was very lucky to ecape that last time.

Superb.

Re: Full time? : Sun Aug 30, 2015 7:50 pm  

The Lucky Black Cat wrote:

Going FT will not mean we will be anymore successful than what we have achieved this year-we could end up not even making the top 4 like London and fev. People often think if we go FT then we will be automatically better-I disagree. If its the same player standard but they are getting each a 100 Pounds more will it increase our standards? And would a quality player often be prepared to drop down a league with the chance we might get promoted? I feel we are in a phrase where there is a hope one Championship club has a small chance of promotion and that we should throw everything to get it-but then forget how they actually intend to stay there! I would rather us spend money on things that will be rewarding us long term rather than chasing a goal that for now is unrealistic. I have a feeling some clubs will be busting a gut and bank balance to get/to stay in SL and that it will hurt them in the future when they realise that they could have used that money in a better way. For now we are best staying PT and working hard without the potential of going bust-we saw how we was very lucky to ecape that last time.

With respect TLBC surely being full time means most of our players will not have to play matches after shining up ladders or braying lump of rock or wood all day etc?

Being a full time athlete allows time to fine tune what pay the bills, your body, in the gym or on the track whatever? There will also be a psychological aspect of course and a professional mindset.

If we cannot go FT, we should be looking at what we need to do (financially) to get to a half-way house maybe with half or most of the team being FT as despite our best efforts, this could backfire.

Our realistically nearest benchmark rivals (Eagles) have realized this....

Re: Full time? : Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:43 am  

The other point is that, as we all discovered in 1995, it's very difficult to find sufficient players to make the leap in a single close-season.

Re: Full time? : Mon Aug 31, 2015 10:26 am  

griff1998 wrote:

The other point is that, as we all discovered in 1995, it's very difficult to find sufficient players to make the leap in a single close-season.

Agreed and just as difficult to get them all to gel as a team.

Looks like half the team is being dismantled with further discussions with others underway to see who stays and who goes, no wonder he is scouring and he will have to do a Brillo job of it.

Some good players on their way out, MA must been thinking he has taken this squad as far as he can.

If Eagles are an example to follow all this and more is involved in going FT and it will be interesting to see out it works out.

Re: Full time? : Mon Aug 31, 2015 10:35 am  

Encouraged wrote:

With respect TLBC surely being full time means most of our players will not have to play matches after shining up ladders or braying lump of rock or wood all day etc?

Being a full time athlete allows time to fine tune what pay the bills, your body, in the gym or on the track whatever? There will also be a psychological aspect of course and a professional mindset.

If we cannot go FT, we should be looking at what we need to do (financially) to get to a half-way house maybe with half or most of the team being FT as despite our best efforts, this could backfire.

Our realistically nearest benchmark rivals (Eagles) have realized this....

I agree with this poster,it's good to Concentrate on rugby and not delivering milk or working as a postman,we need to compete we must be looking at better than 4th next year ,the top 2 is not out of reason,I like to attack my opponents let's show our rivals we mean business.

Re: Full time? : Mon Aug 31, 2015 12:32 pm  

Mr Jagger wrote:

.... and not delivering milk ........

Am I in some kind of time warp ?

Who delivers milk these days ? The night-soil man ?

Re: Full time? : Mon Aug 31, 2015 12:38 pm  

Ill still go with the people we can afford and that Richard and the board think can strengthen us full time or part time. Just when we are getting back upto speed I'd hate us to change tact, stick to the plan I say, in 12 months time with the development we've already seen we may all be applauding the cautious costed approach. We haven't lost 3 on the bounce because we are part time, its because the other sides played better, our curve is still massively positive. We've waited this long, another 12 months banking the finances and building wont do any harm, if other clubs want to go boom or bust, good luck to em, they cant and wont all succeed.

Re: Full time? : Mon Aug 31, 2015 1:30 pm  

No disrespect to anybody but perhaps the full time money doesn't add up to a day job and part time pay. If you're a teacher then that jib is going to last longer than playing RL so if it were me I'd being keeping that stability along with PT rugby money. If you're in a lower paid manual job then FT may well give you significantly more money over 5 or 6 years so you'd take it. As I don't know what jobs our players have then it's hard to quantify which way would be best but I'd hate to lose a good player on the basis of pushing him to FT.