Now Fletcher backs Brent

Peace at last.

Tringreen wrote:

Peace at last.

Hi ya Tring, please exp......... maybe not

This is one of the problems I have with the ambition camp. We all do have ambition also honestly we do. But, when it comes to what would you do questions the answers dry up. Having a go at something always involves somebody with money. Their money by the way and not ours. We the supporters would gladly spend all of it for them as long as it isn't us that ends up broke. There is also always an assumption you have to take on trust in the argument that somebody out there has money and wants to spend it on our club. I have seen little evidence on that score so far in my several years of support.

Just because somebody wants the club not to go down the route it just has again, the spend within means faction, it does not mean they believe implicitly in whoever happens to be the chairman. It is more a fear that if it goes tits up again it will be for the last time so in my opinion caution can be excused. There is also an assumption that had money been spent then the outcome several times over would have been a good one. By that I mean promotion to the top league. Just because other clubs have done it does not show one jot of evidence that it would have been the same for us. As said previously, a theory untested so you can put your own outcome on it in the knowledge that it can never be proved to be unfounded hope.

People are right to watch Brent closely and especially given the last couple of years with previous Board members. However, not everything the man does is specifically to line his own pockets in terms of Argyle. I really cannot see what he has done wrong so far. There are plans to finish the ground and give it facilities that will benefit the club. He gave funds to sign players and we have stayed in the football league. All other projects he has on the table that we know about has nothing to do with Argyle and everything to do with his other business interests. He has made the right noises about his ambitions for promotion and it is yet to be seen who we sign and how many. I'm not green tinted in that I can't judge for myself if he does put a foot wrong. My green tints only involve match results in that I can't bring myself to predict an Argyle loss. It seems to me that Brent is being judged as much for the failure of previous Boards rather than himself and he hasn't been here long enough to be fair in judgement about the man himself. Before he is criticised for not going for it we have to get back to where we came from first and that might be a few years off yet.

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

.......
People are right to watch Brent closely and especially given the last couple of years with previous Board members. However, not everything the man does is specifically to line his own pockets in terms of Argyle. I really cannot see what he has done wrong so far. There are plans to finish the ground and give it facilities that will benefit the club. He gave funds to sign players and we have stayed in the football league. All other projects he has on the table that we know about has nothing to do with Argyle and everything to do with his other business interests. He has made the right noises about his ambitions for promotion and it is yet to be seen who we sign and how many. I'm not green tinted in that I can't judge for myself if he does put a foot wrong. My green tints only involve match results in that I can't bring myself to predict an Argyle loss. It seems to me that Brent is being judged as much for the failure of previous Boards rather than himself and he hasn't been here long enough to be fair in judgement about the man himself. Before he is criticised for not going for it we have to get back to where we came from first and that might be a few years off yet.

Broadly I agree with you. I also think that Mr Brent has done all he has said he would do, so far. We may have wanted him to do more but, give him his due, he has stated what he was willing to do and he has done it, so far. The test will come in the next season or two. We'll see then if his work will go beyond lower league mediocrity. A concern of mine is that he has failed to answer the direct question, "Are you expecting to make more money from your involvement than you will be putting in?". Mr Brent simply reiterated that he had been a reluctant buyer. Peter Jones at the Cherry Tree, in response to that question, said very strongly that it was James Brent or oblivion. That may be undeniable (I know some people have questioned it) but, taking it at face value, we may need to be grateful. However, the essential question remains unanswered - will he gain personally more than the club from his involvement?

But, so far, I am reasonably satisfied with what he has done.

I dont like this "sustainable" bit.Its like putting the cart before the horse in terms of progress.JB and the board need to kick start things with a bit of investment on the playing side,rather than waiting for money through the turnstiles.This "sustainabilty" could lead to a year of mediocrity.

Will be relieved if it's only a year

Some info on the consortium from Vital in 2007-

Quote :

Late last year a group of wealthy and committed Argyle fans formed a consortium and approached Argyle chairman Paul Stapleton with an offer of £5 million. The consortium comprised of Kevin Ball, Julian Seaward, Chris Garden, Peter Jones and Di Thompson, three of the consortium would have contributed their own personal money towards the £5m on offer but part of the plan was that three current directors would have to leave the club.

Of course Argyle fans will recognise Jones from his successful time as Vice-Chairman at Argyle and would be happy to see him back at the club. It's fair to say that since Jones left the club the communication from PAFC to the fans has been poor. Thompson is Chief Executive of Camelot who operates the national lottery and is also a former Businesswoman of the Year and her expertise and experience would have benefited the club enormously.

The consortium were against the purchase of the Home Park freehold from Plymouth Council, which meant the club had to spend £2.7 million that could have been used elsewhere.

With a sound and robust business plan in place the new Argyle board of directors would have comprised Paul Stapleton as chairman, Tony Wrathall, Nic Warren, Julian Seaward and Peter Jones, with Di Thompson on board as a non-executive director. The three new directors would have represented the interests of Ball and Garden. There was also scope for a supporters' representative on the board and further investment from private individuals.

Read more: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Thanks for rooting that out Ali, I'm sure it'll be of great interest to TCM, although as an Argyle fan he must have had his head buried under a pillow if he wasn't aware of it at the time.

Anyway, what's done is done and I wouldn't like it all to kick off again between two esteemed members of this site.

Putting a squad together on a shoestring can be done. We did it in the early 2000's and witnessed two promotion seasons. Of course, at that time we also had a shrewd and experienced manager who knew how to get the best out of average players. If we are to progress with a cheap as chips (for cheap, read "sustainable") squad then we must back that up with experience on the touchline. Not just the manager, but also in the coaching set up.

The problems then really start when you get to the Championship. "Sustainable" will not be an option as things stand, if we want to stay in that league, let alone get up to the higher echelons of it. JB has already said that for the final push he will have to hand on the baton. Fair enough.

The way football finance is at present, it is simply not possible to get to the Premiership unless you have:

a) Been there recently and have parachute payments to help; or
b) Get into a significant amount of debt.

Debt itself is not a problem, as long as it is serviceable debt.

The real problems start when a club takes on way too much debt which becomes unserviceable, as we as Argyle fans know all too well.

I have absolutely no problem with our club taking on debt in the form of investment. A sugar daddy, who has money to burn, would of course be lovely. In the absence of oil being discovered in abundance under HP however, investment is absolutely necessary to get to where I'm sure most of us want to be. In taking on debt though, it is absolutely imperitive that checks and balances are in place to ensure that the starry eyed in the boardroom (or just outside licking the windows) don't chase the dream to the point where debt becomes unmanageable.

We must not be allowed to get in that position again.

There are investors out there who have been willing to put money into the club. It's all about choosing the right investors at the right time. Furthermore, if it means that someone has to sacrifice their own self interest and put the interests of the club first, then that is absolutely what should happen.

Unfortunately, as has been proved in the past, giving up the car parking spot is a sacrifice too far it seems.

oddball wrote:

I dont like this "sustainable" bit.Its like putting the cart before the horse in terms of progress.JB and the board need to kick start things with a bit of investment on the playing side,rather than waiting for money through the turnstiles.This "sustainabilty" could lead to a year of mediocrity.

That's why he identified those he thought were local tribal leaders, gave them treats, silly hats and titles, so that they would rabble rouse and bring the punters through the turnstyles. It won't work ...... a] they're not clever or sophisticated enough b]they only appeal to the dull, already hooked variety of the potential fanbase and c] their methods of thought control [silencing the educated w@nkers] have now been exposed and they are totally discredited.

The only way to bring the fans out in numbers is to produce a winning team and with Fletcher in the driving seat and no investment from the owner , that would appear to be unlikely to happen.

SirCumfrance wrote:

Putting a squad together on a shoestring can be done. We did it in the early 2000's and witnessed two promotion seasons. Of course, at that time we also had a shrewd and experienced manager who knew how to get the best out of average players. If we are to progress with a cheap as chips (for cheap, read "sustainable") squad then we must back that up with experience on the touchline. Not just the manager, but also in the coaching set up.

The problems then really start when you get to the Championship. "Sustainable" will not be an option as things stand, if we want to stay in that league, let alone get up to the higher echelons of it. JB has already said that for the final push he will have to hand on the baton. Fair enough.

The way football finance is at present, it is simply not possible to get to the Premiership unless you have:

a) Been there recently and have parachute payments to help; or
b) Get into a significant amount of debt.

Debt itself is not a problem, as long as it is serviceable debt.

The real problems start when a club takes on way too much debt which becomes unserviceable, as we as Argyle fans know all too well.

I have absolutely no problem with our club taking on debt in the form of investment. A sugar daddy, who has money to burn, would of course be lovely. In the absence of oil being discovered in abundance under HP however, investment is absolutely necessary to get to where I'm sure most of us want to be. In taking on debt though, it is absolutely imperitive that checks and balances are in place to ensure that the starry eyed in the boardroom (or just outside licking the windows) don't chase the dream to the point where debt becomes unmanageable.

We must not be allowed to get in that position again.

There are investors out there who have been willing to put money into the club. It's all about choosing the right investors at the right time. Furthermore, if it means that someone has to sacrifice their own self interest and put the interests of the club first, then that is absolutely what should happen.

Unfortunately, as has been proved in the past, giving up the car parking spot is a sacrifice too far it seems.

I don't think that your statement that we did it "on a shoe string" is entirely correct when talking about the Sturrock era.Certainly no major transfer fees were paid,but there is no way that players such as Coughlin,Worrell,Hodges,Evans,Keith etc would have come down here and accepted average fourth division wages-they were all playing at a higher standard at the time and would have been paid accordingly.I would suspect that Nic Warren would have provided the bankrolling at the time-there is no chance that those players wages could have been met out of the gates we were getting at the time-Argyle averaged 4900 in 2000/1 and were severely hampered by HP being a one sided stadium until Xmas of 2001/2.I would also say that the Warnock promotion was financed partly by the sale of players from the ashes of Shilton's team and Dan's pocket=certainly wasn't a shoe string compared to most clubs in the division at that time.

Greenskin wrote:

SirCumfrance wrote:

Putting a squad together on a shoestring can be done. We did it in the early 2000's and witnessed two promotion seasons. Of course, at that time we also had a shrewd and experienced manager who knew how to get the best out of average players. If we are to progress with a cheap as chips (for cheap, read "sustainable") squad then we must back that up with experience on the touchline. Not just the manager, but also in the coaching set up.

The problems then really start when you get to the Championship. "Sustainable" will not be an option as things stand, if we want to stay in that league, let alone get up to the higher echelons of it. JB has already said that for the final push he will have to hand on the baton. Fair enough.

The way football finance is at present, it is simply not possible to get to the Premiership unless you have:

a) Been there recently and have parachute payments to help; or
b) Get into a significant amount of debt.

Debt itself is not a problem, as long as it is serviceable debt.

The real problems start when a club takes on way too much debt which becomes unserviceable, as we as Argyle fans know all too well.

I have absolutely no problem with our club taking on debt in the form of investment. A sugar daddy, who has money to burn, would of course be lovely. In the absence of oil being discovered in abundance under HP however, investment is absolutely necessary to get to where I'm sure most of us want to be. In taking on debt though, it is absolutely imperitive that checks and balances are in place to ensure that the starry eyed in the boardroom (or just outside licking the windows) don't chase the dream to the point where debt becomes unmanageable.

We must not be allowed to get in that position again.

There are investors out there who have been willing to put money into the club. It's all about choosing the right investors at the right time. Furthermore, if it means that someone has to sacrifice their own self interest and put the interests of the club first, then that is absolutely what should happen.

Unfortunately, as has been proved in the past, giving up the car parking spot is a sacrifice too far it seems.

I don't think that your statement that we did it "on a shoe string" is entirely correct when talking about the Sturrock era.Certainly no major transfer fees were paid,but there is no way that players such as Coughlin,Worrell,Hodges,Evans,Keith etc would have come down here and accepted average fourth division wages-they were all playing at a higher standard at the time and would have been paid accordingly.I would suspect that Nic Warren would have provided the bankrolling at the time-there is no chance that those players wages could have been met out of the gates we were getting at the time-Argyle averaged 4900 in 2000/1 and were severely hampered by HP being a one sided stadium until Xmas of 2001/2.I would also say that the Warnock promotion was financed partly by the sale of players from the ashes of Shilton's team and Dan's pocket=certainly wasn't a shoe string compared to most clubs in the division at that time.

I accept your point of not exactly being on a shoestring (bad choice of wording from me), but at the time we were one of the few clubs who returned accounts that were in the black. That may not have been the sustainable model we are now talking about, and may well have been because of NW pumping in the cash (I'm not an "insider" so I don't know). The point I'm (badly) trying to make is that we have achieved the sustainable success, but with the wily old trout at the helm. That's a term of endearment before anyone gets the wrong idea.

This present sustainable squad, coupled with an inexperienced manager and backroom staff will achieve no more than mid table mediocrity.

Genuine question, does anyone know the standard, composition and numbers of our scouting network? Have we even got one anymore? Or do we rely on freelance scouts?

So folks you are being asked to believe that this successful businessman known as James Brent has put the success of his business venture in the hands of the local yokels and is relying on them to bring home the bacon. I have a bucket full of elastic bands and pointy sticks in my possession so you can poke them in your ears to stretch your imagination enough to get your head around that one.

Or you can believe that he is quite astute and may well be overseeing his own venture into the football business all by himself. I think it is worth waiting to see who is signed on and what the squad can do before we write off another season. It's a bit naive of me I know but I've never had a crystal ball to see into the future so I'm not so clued up as some others may be. In the meantime we should all stay at home until a handful of matches have been played and a proper assessment of failure can be made.

I have no idea what the squad who achieved the promotions were paid and even less what any of them cost now. I discount Evans in that as I think he was on the way out of the game and was coming home for him. There were certainly no super stars in the squad at the start and it would be interesting to know the facts of wages and transfer fees just to see a comparison between then and possibly now. Any anoracs out there with figures to hand?

Charlie Wood wrote:

Thanks for rooting that out Ali, I'm sure it'll be of great interest to TCM, although as an Argyle fan he must have had his head buried under a pillow if he wasn't aware of it at the time.

Anyway, what's done is done and I wouldn't like it all to kick off again between two esteemed members of this site.

no i remember it,just couldnt remember who it was or the amount,maybe they could lend us 5 mil for the transfer fund, now that would be handy,,sorry for not remembering charlie

Sensiblegreeny wrote:

So folks you are being asked to believe that this successful businessman known as James Brent has put the success of his business venture in the hands of the local yokels and is relying on them to bring home the bacon. I have a bucket full of elastic bands and pointy sticks in my possession so you can poke them in your ears to stretch your imagination enough to get your head around that one.

Or you can believe that he is quite astute and may well be overseeing his own venture into the football business all by himself. I think it is worth waiting to see who is signed on and what the squad can do before we write off another season. It's a bit naive of me I know but I've never had a crystal ball to see into the future so I'm not so clued up as some others may be. In the meantime we should all stay at home until a handful of matches have been played and a proper assessment of failure can be made.

I have no idea what the squad who achieved the promotions were paid and even less what any of them cost now. I discount Evans in that as I think he was on the way out of the game and was coming home for him. There were certainly no super stars in the squad at the start and it would be interesting to know the facts of wages and transfer fees just to see a comparison between then and possibly now. Any anoracs out there with figures to hand?

Well,its fairly obvious that people playing in the SPL,which was not such a poor relation back in those days,would not have come down here for the peanuts paid by most clubs in the division at the time.Would you have,in their position? And believe me,if Argyle hadn't signed Mickey Evans,there would have been plenty of offers from elsewhere-he was always highly regarded by managers in the lower divisions [and higher ones] and would have found a decent club with no trouble at all-he was only 28 when he rejoined us,far from washed up.And Sturrock would also have been a desirable commodity at the time-top player with a good reputation in football and reasonably successful manager prior to coming here-he wouldn't have been cheap either.

I must admit Greenskin that I had thought Evans was older than that but it may just have been his electric pace that fooled me. I still think to some extent he was coming home though even if he could have signed elsewhere. I don't dispute the wages we paid were higher than others offered either. I simply don't know what we paid then which is why I asked the question and it was genuine. As for Sturrock I hadn't heard of him before he came here but I don't doubt his credentials and fame. Maybe he was the reason why the Scottish fraternity came here as in football often it is the fame of the manager and his contacts that sway decisions rather than always money. I also have no idea what clubs in Scotland were paying either at that time utside of the big two of course.