whey Accrington

[frenchgull]

Can somebody tell me why Accrington Stanley with crowds or twelve Huneed people can complete in Div 2 when we have twenty percent more attendences and can only struggle in the national conference.Please Mr chief executive get in your car and go and have a word.They have a very good manager who knows this level and have football clubs around but they have NO Money.Can anybody enlighten me why Torquay can not compete with Accrington .

[ferrarilover]

Portsmouth attract more fans than Bournemouth.

The Bristol Rovers forum is >>>>>> over there.

Matt.

[frenchgull]

Bournemouth has a chairman that has got a Bob or two so counteracts the crowd numbers.

[yellowmonkey]

I think some of this maybe down to location and getting in the required players, we are in the arse end of nowhere so struggle to get decent players. But that is only my opinion.

[Dave]

The answer for me is in something I've posted on this forum many a time "it's got nothing to do with what a football club does not have, it's all about how they use the resources they do have"

As said above Portsmouth in League 2, Bournemouth in the premier league. Bristol Rovers spent millions plus to achieve relegation from League 1 to the conference, spending money guarantees you nothing, spending money on the right things at the right times tends to improve your chances of success.

Accrington have John Coleman as their manager, not going to be a hypocrite, I agreed with the club when they relieved Martin Ling of his job, however what I will say is, if our club at the time had only used the money to back Martin Ling that was used to sack him, how different things could have been, and it may never have got to the point where a decision had to be made.

While Accrington were concentrating on having a fit for purpose team, TUFC compounded their previous error by paying out an equal amount to sack Martin Ling's replacement, so that's by my reckoning around £200k that could be used to bring players in that could have kept us in the league.

Whilst I'd be the first to say a professional club needs a proper training ground, it's all about what you can afford, what were Accrington doing while TUFC were spending a kings ransom on Seale (£ white elephant £) Hayne, and so the list could go on.

Our club can no longer rely on 3,000 gates to build it's future on, the only way forward is copying the Barnet model, where their club is funded by other revenue streams.

[Dazza]

Accrington were Founder members of the League and in the heart of the area where the greatest number of league clubs and therefore players reside. simples.

[Dave]

You've still got to pay them. The only advantage I can see for a club like Accrington over us, is the ability to bring in better loan players due to their location.

[Dazza]

They are also closer to wealthy Chairmen potential.

[Gulliball]

You've still got to pay them. The only advantage I can see for a club like Accrington over us, is the ability to bring in better loan players due to their location.

You're missing his point. The North West has a collection of football clubs, and therefore football players. Every year a large number become available and Accrington are able to offer them deals. If you live in the North West then it is better to stay in the region, even on a lower wage at Accrington, than relocate to Torquay (which is also much more expensive). 99% of the time our recruitment policy has to involve convincing the player (and possibly his family) to move to the other end of the country, which means we have to make it worthwhile or we're left with players without a better offer. They also have a pool of players released from Premiership clubs and local non-league hotspots to draw from.

That is certainly a massive advantage.

We briefly experienced a similar thing in 2002-2004, when Plymouth rose through the divisions and improved their squad accordingly, because it left very good lower division players surplus to requirements. Craig Taylor, Brian McGlinchey, Martin Gritton, Martin Phillips etc moved to us because they didn't have to relocate, and we knew how good they were because of the local connections. Even ones who didn't work out ideally like Broad, Wills, Evans etc gave us more options. In recent years Plymouth and Exeter have been in the same league as us, so haven't been releasing players of the quality that would benefit us. Luke Young is the only player we've really benefitted from his location helping in terms of convincing him to sign here. Imagine we were surrounded by 10 clubs releasing Luke Youngs every summer, and we'd unearth far more gems too. Even Berry this season, our best signing in my opinion, only signed for us originally on a non-contract because he was from Argyle and didn't have to move.

Now, our location has not changed since 1899, so this cannot be used as an excuse for us - but if you're trying to compare us to other clubs then it's not a fair comparison.

[Jerry]

Accrington were Founder members of the League and in the heart of the area where the greatest number of league clubs and therefore players reside. simples.

No they weren't, that was a completely different club. Stanley didn't join the league until the 1920's.

[frenchgull]

But who pays for these players, yes they have more choice than us but where do they get the money to pay for them unless they play for 100 quid just to be a pro footballer and stay off the dole!.
,

[yellowforever]

Accrington have hired better managers and have recruited better players. Simple as that.

Added in 3 seconds:
Accrington have hired better managers and have recruited better players. Simple as that.

[Gulliball]

Well, being in the football league is worth £600k. The difference between our gate receipts and there's will be a fraction of that. Accrington have the smallest budget in L2, but this has been true for 10 years and they continually outperform other sides. They are a well run club spending their money well, with a manager who knows the local scene and is able to exploit the advantages it brings.

We can be a well run side, we can have a good manager and can challenge in L1/L2 when this happens. However we will never be Accrington and can't compare ourselves to them. In the last 10 years they have outperformed bigger, better, richer and other centrally located sides - it's what they're doing well rather than us having a god given right to do better than them because we average a few hundred more.

[Dave]

But who pays for these players, yes they have more choice than us but where do they get the money to pay for them unless they play for 100 quid just to be a pro footballer and stay off the dole!.
,

That's the point I was making above, Billy Kee has not signed for Accrington on £200 a week, going back to my first post, I would suggest that Accrington are ploughing virtually all their resources into the first team, therefore while I doubt they are the best payers and location does help them, they are paying relatively good money to attract the player. Where as our club over the last few years spent a small fortune on everything else but the team.

In answer to an above post, yes I do see where Dazza is coming from, and I fully understand where Gulliball is coming from also, but on the flip side where did the likes of David Graham, Joe Kuffour, Alex Russell come from and so many more down the years come from.

Just to add, I have been referring to us as football club in the past, now non-league the difference in income of course is vast, the reason why we had to go back up at the first time of asking.

[Gulliball]

Being Accrington does not equal only having £200 per week. They are small, but still get quite a lot of money for being in the league, topped up by gate receipts/cup runs/player sales. They have a wage budget and allocate it accordingly. Quite well, given their league positions in the last 10 years.

Every side can find the occasional Alex Russell, Rodney Jack, Eunan O'Kane from nowhere. Accrington have the location and local knowledge to make it a regular strategy in a way that we can never do.

The point that we have wasted money in recent years is the important one. We've had a benefactor, had 3000 gates, had a good manager or two - and blown it all. We haven't been well run and are facing the consequences now with the new owners. Accrington have been well run for all this time and consistently spent their resources well. My issue is that these two things are not related - you can't just say now that we should be performing better than Accrington because we average 1725 this season and they average 1481. Those 244 extra people don't give us a right to be better. Each side is where it is because of how it is run - we need to focus on ourselves and run ourselves in a much better fashion. Looking to Accrington won't help, for all the reasons mentioned in this thread, so throwing toys out the pram because a smaller side is currently above us is meaningless.