I think MK could have done something at Salford but failed to understand that building up a club to a standard that can start to compete at the upper end of the table from one of averageness in reality takes 5 years at the very very minimum.
It requires someone to appreciate that RL is very much a community sport and that throwing money at names/players that will just take the most coin isn't how you build a side up. Unfortunately a large proportion of fans want immediate results, they aren't prepared to wait for another seasons never mind 5 for their team to start nudging the top teams. The owner sees that and tries to improve things immediately so that sales/interest in the club turn around but often at the sacrifice of something else.
This is in part some of the differences to my mind of a benefactor owner and a purely businessman owner. The latter makes bold statements, makes decisions, acting and reacting on the basis of the club being solely a financial investment.
These differences in turn impacts everywhere, from not installing professionals at all levels of a club, making rash reactionary decisions to save face, cost cutting, allying blame elsewhere even turning on the fans/players/coach..
Some 'businessmen' owners aren't actually up to much in terms of understanding people and less so in terms of knowing the ins and out of what actually makes some organisations work, will have worked hard and/or got lucky money wise but with limited backgrounds in industry haven't ever worked as senior managers/CEOs within a traditional structure so in reality are just money men.
They come into situations of owning a sports club and try to micro manage when in fact they aren't qualified/don't have the know how/experience to do so, thus mistakes litter their (relatively) short tenure, they try to recover their money in any way they can and can at times put the club backwards as the risk financially starts to become a problem for them.
Benefactor owners are less likely to be in that situation IMHO.
Brian McDermott got it absolutely spot on. There are some extremely talented players at Salford, and he's caved their heads in day in and day out. We as humans can only take so much abuse before we lose confidence in what we do, and our own ability. The guy has made a few quid, and is desperate for fame but he's gone about it in the wrong way.
Post subject: Re: Benefactor & Businessmen owners.
Posted: Mon Aug 24, 2015 4:51 pm
Large Paws
Player Coach
Joined: Apr 29 2010 Posts: 585 Location: In two minds
knockersbumpMKII wrote:I think MK could have done something at Salford but failed to understand that building up a club to a standard that can start to compete at the upper end of the table from one of averageness in reality takes 5 years at the very very minimum.
It requires someone to appreciate that RL is very much a community sport and that throwing money at names/players that will just take the most coin isn't how you build a side up. Unfortunately a large proportion of fans want immediate results, they aren't prepared to wait for another seasons never mind 5 for their team to start nudging the top teams. The owner sees that and tries to improve things immediately so that sales/interest in the club turn around but often at the sacrifice of something else.
This is in part some of the differences to my mind of a benefactor owner and a purely businessman owner. The latter makes bold statements, makes decisions, acting and reacting on the basis of the club being solely a financial investment.
These differences in turn impacts everywhere, from not installing professionals at all levels of a club, making rash reactionary decisions to save face, cost cutting, allying blame elsewhere even turning on the fans/players/coach..
Some 'businessmen' owners aren't actually up to much in terms of understanding people and less so in terms of knowing the ins and out of what actually makes some organisations work, will have worked hard and/or got lucky money wise but with limited backgrounds in industry haven't ever worked as senior managers/CEOs within a traditional structure so in reality are just money men.
They come into situations of owning a sports club and try to micro manage when in fact they aren't qualified/don't have the know how/experience to do so, thus mistakes litter their (relatively) short tenure, they try to recover their money in any way they can and can at times put the club backwards as the risk financially starts to become a problem for them.
Benefactor owners are less likely to be in that situation IMHO.
Now this ^^^^^, is how you avoid a Radford bashing thread. You turn it into a, thinly veiled, Pearson bashing thread.
I was thinking of all the business owners that have come into not just RL clubs but other sports too but of course some of those factors relate to AP, he took over the running of FC on the basis he would make money, he certainly isn't a benefactor, not by a long stretch. MK threw money at Salford in a haphazard way, at least Pearson has being more controlled and got the aspect of investing straight away in the youth set up right. But there is no doubt that benefactor owners make decisions rather differently to those that are in it purely for the money, if you think that is thinly veiled Pearson bashing that's up to you, I'm just pointing out what I see as hugely important differences in how clubs are run by their owners
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
