Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

terrywebbisgod

The Salford revolution has begun

201 posts in this topic

I don't - I'd be very surprised if he hasn't or doesn't intend to. It was Parky and RW who suggested he shouldn't bother.

What I'm mainly suggesting is Dr. Koukash won't need telling how to do things and I think he has showed that in the latest MEN Interview. We already have Paul Anderson trying to tell him he was wrong to dismiss Veivers.

Warrington have done well I admit but you yourself know this was mainly driven by Moran's wealth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank God you're not rich and looking to take over a RL club!!!

So If I had a couple of million a year to spare and went to Castleford I'd get nowhere?

It's not rocket science hiring coaches, building facilities, and buying players is it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Local lad. Denis Betts

The article says young coach from Australia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Young and up and coming. Betts doesn't fit the bill. Even if you consider he was a great coach he would hardly be classed as up and coming. He has been around quite a while, Wigan have had how many coaches since he left ? 3 or 4 would be my guess

Think we are talking about someone unproven coming in to learn the ropes from a coach such as Sheens.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I'm mainly suggesting is Dr. Koukash won't need telling how to do things and I think he has showed that in the latest MEN Interview. We already have Paul Anderson trying to tell him he was wrong to dismiss Veivers.

Warrington have done well I admit but you yourself know this was mainly driven by Moran's wealth.

Warrington were a club on the up prior to Moran assuming majority control (although he was involved for a few years prior). There is no doubt though that his money helped, but it was certainly coupled with decent business acumen within the club. Pretty much one without the other is not far off useless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So If I had a couple of million a year to spare and went to Castleford I'd get nowhere?

It's not rocket science hiring coaches, building facilities, and buying players is it?

So if you have a couple of million pounds and your choice is to invest in a youth academy, 5 players, a team of scouts and development officers, facilities, marketing - which do you prioritise?

You'll soon lose your couple of million quid if you are reckless.

The person with good business acumen I suspect would go for the infrastructure options - you appear to like the buy players option and hope for success approach. Haven't we seen this fail time and again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you've got a point Dave, be interesting to see how Salford pans out.

For me I look back at Wigan under Whelan, racing through coaches, splashing out transfer fees, spending up to the cap, running the club at a loss (from memory). Where as his sucessor, runs the club at a profit, made a shrewd coach appointment, landed two trophies (plus a hub cap), when his hand was forced replaced the coach from within and it served him pretty well last season.

Good luck to Salford, I'm sure there's loads of stories in this and I hope there new owner finds success and establishes Salford as a force, rather than see him become Super Leagues equivalent to Des Johnson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he is looking to appoint a young up and coming coach with an older head it looks more like building for the future.

Dr Koukash has also spoken about having an interest in the ground and building training facilities and housing for the young players.

All are long term plans.

I hope he can build an academy on the lines of Wigan and Leeds rather than just buy players.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If he is looking to appoint a young up and coming coach with an older head it looks more like building for the future.

Dr Koukash has also spoken about having an interest in the ground and building training facilities and housing for the young players.

All are long term plans.

I hope he can build an academy on the lines of Wigan and Leeds rather than just buy players.

The reality is that he will have to do both - fans won't wait for 5-10 years to start bearing the fruit from youth development, but it would be good to see yet another team with a strong Academy setup who are then strong enough to hold onto them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you've got a point Dave, be interesting to see how Salford pans out.

For me I look back at Wigan under Whelan, racing through coaches, splashing out transfer fees, spending up to the cap, running the club at a loss (from memory). Where as his sucessor, runs the club at a profit, made a shrewd coach appointment, landed two trophies (plus a hub cap), when his hand was forced replaced the coach from within and it served him pretty well last season.

Good luck to Salford, I'm sure there's loads of stories in this and I hope there new owner finds success and establishes Salford as a force, rather than see him become Super Leagues equivalent to Des Johnson.

I almost used the Des Johnson example, but then it's probably unfair, as DJ was underhand and cheated.

Probably a better example is Hudgell at Hull KR - I'm surprised Parky has taken the stance he has as he always likes to use Hudgell as an example. NH has invested millions I believe, yet they are still nowhere near real success (ignoring the weekend just gone -_- )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.mancheste...koukash-1719879

Koukash fights back.

An up and coming young coach ? wonder who that could be??

Quite so, Dr K is learning rapidly about the long-term institutionalised negativity in our game. Indeed as a gesture of support, I am thinking of ditching my allegiance to Fev and switching to Salford.

Tell us again how long he has been the owner and why he has not already turned things round, got a new squad, doubled crowds and won trophies, invested in the grass roots and cured all known diseases? :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Quite so, Dr K is learning rapidly about the long-term institutionalised negativity in our game. Indeed as a gesture of support, I am thinking of ditching my allegiance to Fev and switching to Salford.

Tell us again how long he has been the owner and why he has not already turned things round, got a new squad, doubled crowds and won trophies, invested in the grass roots and cured all known diseases? :)

I don't think anybody has commented on him not doing the things you mention (apologies if I've missed it) - most are commenting on what he has done so far (sack a coach and be excitable in the media).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he's bang on with wanting club's to be able to sign 2 or 3 marquee players outside of the salary cap. If someone has the money let them spend it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think anybody has commented on him not doing the things you mention (apologies if I've missed it) - most are commenting on what he has done so far (sack a coach and be excitable in the media).

Ok, maybe a bit overstated but see post #90 # 35 #40 #56

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, maybe a bit overstated but see post #90 # 35 #40 #56

Not much in any of them.

Post 90 (mine) was actually a reply to Parky about hot air and bluster being 'good marketing' - not actually directly a criticism of his marketing efforts, as I actually disagree with Parky's point.

There's nothing in the others, there was a post questioning the dismissal of Veivers, - that is something he has done and is open to question. Time will tell us whether he was right to sack Veivers (it's a decision I'd have made to be fair if I had a top coach lined up) but people will have an opinion on such a big story right now.

As you say - 'a bit overstated' :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

he's bang on with wanting club's to be able to sign 2 or 3 marquee players outside of the salary cap. If someone has the money let them spend it.

I’m split on this one – the problem is that if we allow clubs to spend a £1m on a player or two on 5 year contracts, what happens when the rich backer gets bored and goes elsewhere? The club struggles and has to try and sell players to survive – I remember Warrington picking Jonathan Davies up on this kind of thing!

I do think that within reason we should look to do something to keep our top players though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see what business genius you need to offer players top wages, to offer clubs transfer fees to try to release them,

It's the easiest thing in the world to spend money. It requires no business genius at all. Even a business moron could get through a few tens of millions in no time running an SL club.

Spending it well is a rather different matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's nothing in the others, there was a post questioning the dismissal of Veivers, - that is something he has done and is open to question. Time will tell us whether he was right to sack Veivers

On the face of it, I think Phil Veivers can probably feel a little bit aggrieved, but the reality is we have no idea at all about what is going on inside the Salford club. None of us know who the influential people are, who the people who are resistant to change are, who the secret underated leaders are.

Unless you are right in the thick of it, you cannot have any kind of informed opinion on these kind of matters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warrington were a club on the up prior to Moran assuming majority control (although he was involved for a few years prior). There is no doubt though that his money helped, but it was certainly coupled with decent business acumen within the club. Pretty much one without the other is not far off useless.

Well I take your point Dave but only up to a point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m split on this one – the problem is that if we allow clubs to spend a £1m on a player or two on 5 year contracts, what happens when the rich backer gets bored and goes elsewhere? The club struggles and has to try and sell players to survive – I remember Warrington picking Jonathan Davies up on this kind of thing!

I do think that within reason we should look to do something to keep our top players though.

that's a danger and one that has happened to more than one football club but we have RL clubs going #### up or threatening to on a regular basis so might as well let some sugar daddy have his fun for a while. It could really start a buzz within the sport though and in the media and public consciousness outside of the regular RL fans.

Plus if one owner starts doing it then it might attract someone else with a load of dosh to buy another club and do the same. Some rich men love the kick of being in the spotlight and the adulation they get splashing the cash on a sports team - the Premier League is for the mega rich nowadays - that leaves a lot of multi millionaires out there with a hankering to be loved by the great unwashed. Come to RL rich dudes, we'll love you!*

I think it's more than worth the gamble - the sport needs something to get us rolling again and maybe Mr Koukash is the start of it.

* - well, a lot of people will hate your guts and RL Meltdown will be kept very busy but hey,dats showbusiness

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the face of it, I think Phil Veivers can probably feel a little bit aggrieved, but the reality is we have no idea at all about what is going on inside the Salford club. None of us know who the influential people are, who the people who are resistant to change are, who the secret underated leaders are.

Unless you are right in the thick of it, you cannot have any kind of informed opinion on these kind of matters.

Bloody hell Steve if our opinions need to informed then we are buggered! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have not been a supporter of the "spend as much as they want" philosophy in the past as it has led to perceived inequality and, generally speaking, most of us seem to be in favour of a level playing field. Now that my club is the one with lots of money (apparently), it would be rather hypocritical to change my view. However, if the salary cap is now seen to be holding the game back, perhaps we should look again. I do want a fair competition, though, not one where one or two mega-rich clubs suck all the talent away from the others. There has to be a way to achieve what we want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if it's managed well - i.e a marquee player is one that is of a specific type - a top nrl player, a top RU player or a top SL player who if he is not kept within SL would more than likely go to RU and there is a limit to how many you can have, 3 for example - then I think it could be a great positive. Clubs would not be able to just go out and impoverish other clubs' squads as the only players they could sign from them would be ones that are buggering off to RU anyway.

If you've got a marquee player (i.e an England international who is going to switch codes to RU to take the better pay on offer) and you can afford to keep him then you keep him, if you cant then surely it's better that he stays within SL than leaves the sport altogether?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if it's managed well - i.e a marquee player is one that is of a specific type - a top nrl player, a top RU player or a top SL player who if he is not kept within SL would more than likely go to RU and there is a limit to how many you can have, 3 for example - then I think it could be a great positive. Clubs would not be able to just go out and impoverish other clubs' squads as the only players they could sign from them would be ones that are buggering off to RU anyway.

If you've got a marquee player (i.e an England international who is going to switch codes to RU to take the better pay on offer) and you can afford to keep him then you keep him, if you cant then surely it's better that he stays within SL than leaves the sport altogether?

Another risk with this is suddenly agents spotting an opportunity to tout their players even more to Union knowing that they have an opportunity to get more money from a SL club.

Like I say, I support something changing in principle - we just need to be very careful here, as a seemingly minor change could have a big impact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



Rugby League World - June 2017

League Express - Mon 17th July 2017