|
Post by Benny on Feb 22, 2020 2:22:53 GMT
Over time, clubs with higher income tend to have more success than those with less. Pretty obvious really. Might take a season or two, but Maidstone United will rise near the top. I'm guessing the plea for new investors fell on deaf ears.
|
|
|
Post by shamstone on Feb 22, 2020 3:36:17 GMT
What does it matter. If your part time players are shit or your full time players are shit. You’ll have a shit team.
|
|
|
Post by hongkongstone on Feb 22, 2020 3:54:35 GMT
It's a fantasy peddled by those who think we are still at the Ryman Premier League level. Note: The teams at the bottom of the NS are teams with part time players - Now that's a ringing endorsement for part time players. Or, to put it more accurately - teams throughout the NS are part-time, not just at the bottom. The current probable champions and at least one of the contenders may be full-time (or not - how do we know?), but presumably most of the rest of the top 7 are part-time? And at least one full-time team is stuck at 9th and doesn't look too likely to make it into the play-offs. The problem with the full-time/part-time argument is that both arguments are equally valid. We are 'full-time' already and are ambitious to get back into the NL, where full-time is generally accepted to be necessary, so it's not really likely that we'll revert to part-time (unless finances dictate that we do). On the other hand, we got to the NL as part-timers and had our most successful season there as part-timers. So, it is both possible and (simultaneously) unlikely. A bit like quantum physics... Add in the fact that no one can agree on what 'full-time' is, other than (at least) 3 days training a week - which part-timers couldn't attend anyway - and the whole debate becomes pointless. We are 'full-time' and will remain 'full time' - as long as we can afford it. Knowing your penchant for statistics is there a definitive list of which NL, NLS amd NLN teams are either full or part time? I can start you off by informing that York City have remained full time whilst they have been in the NLN. (was drinking with my York friend yestrday).
|
|
|
Post by sword65 on Feb 22, 2020 3:56:25 GMT
What does it matter. If your part time players are shit or your full time players are shit. You’ll have a shit team. Couldnt have put it better myself.
|
|
|
Post by Raymondo316 on Feb 22, 2020 4:10:54 GMT
It's a fantasy peddled by those who think we are still at the Ryman Premier League level. Note: The teams at the bottom of the NS are teams with part time players - Now that's a ringing endorsement for part time players. Or, to put it more accurately - teams throughout the NS are part-time, not just at the bottom. The current probable champions and at least one of the contenders may be full-time (or not - how do we know?), but presumably most of the rest of the top 7 are part-time? And at least one full-time team is stuck at 9th and doesn't look too likely to make it into the play-offs. The problem with the full-time/part-time argument is that both arguments are equally valid. We are 'full-time' already and are ambitious to get back into the NL, where full-time is generally accepted to be necessary, so it's not really likely that we'll revert to part-time (unless finances dictate that we do). On the other hand, we got to the NL as part-timers and had our most successful season there as part-timers. So, it is both possible and (simultaneously) unlikely. A bit like quantum physics... Add in the fact that no one can agree on what 'full-time' is, other than (at least) 3 days training a week - which part-timers couldn't attend anyway - and the whole debate becomes pointless. We are 'full-time' and will remain 'full time' - as long as we can afford it. Wealdstone are part time
|
|
|
Post by hongkongstone on Feb 22, 2020 4:39:11 GMT
Or, to put it more accurately - teams throughout the NS are part-time, not just at the bottom. The current probable champions and at least one of the contenders may be full-time (or not - how do we know?), but presumably most of the rest of the top 7 are part-time? And at least one full-time team is stuck at 9th and doesn't look too likely to make it into the play-offs. The problem with the full-time/part-time argument is that both arguments are equally valid. We are 'full-time' already and are ambitious to get back into the NL, where full-time is generally accepted to be necessary, so it's not really likely that we'll revert to part-time (unless finances dictate that we do). On the other hand, we got to the NL as part-timers and had our most successful season there as part-timers. So, it is both possible and (simultaneously) unlikely. A bit like quantum physics... Add in the fact that no one can agree on what 'full-time' is, other than (at least) 3 days training a week - which part-timers couldn't attend anyway - and the whole debate becomes pointless. We are 'full-time' and will remain 'full time' - as long as we can afford it. Wealdstone are part time So Michael Phillips went part time after being full time with us then?
|
|
|
Post by Benny on Feb 22, 2020 7:52:49 GMT
There's part time and then there's part time. Same with full time.
|
|
|
Post by daveu on Feb 22, 2020 8:34:36 GMT
Or, to put it more accurately - teams throughout the NS are part-time, not just at the bottom. The current probable champions and at least one of the contenders may be full-time (or not - how do we know?), but presumably most of the rest of the top 7 are part-time? And at least one full-time team is stuck at 9th and doesn't look too likely to make it into the play-offs. The problem with the full-time/part-time argument is that both arguments are equally valid. We are 'full-time' already and are ambitious to get back into the NL, where full-time is generally accepted to be necessary, so it's not really likely that we'll revert to part-time (unless finances dictate that we do). On the other hand, we got to the NL as part-timers and had our most successful season there as part-timers. So, it is both possible and (simultaneously) unlikely. A bit like quantum physics... Add in the fact that no one can agree on what 'full-time' is, other than (at least) 3 days training a week - which part-timers couldn't attend anyway - and the whole debate becomes pointless. We are 'full-time' and will remain 'full time' - as long as we can afford it. Knowing your penchant for statistics is there a definitive list of which NL, NLS amd NLN teams are either full or part time? I can start you off by informing that York City have remained full time whilst they have been in the NLN. (was drinking with my York friend yestrday). Oh god, you've just opened Pandora's box
|
|
|
Post by jdh80 on Feb 22, 2020 8:59:26 GMT
With this full time part time argument going on again maybe we should also remember that there will be four extra games in the nls next season as the league is growing to 24 teams.
It does make you wonder how some teams will cope with two extra home games if the weather is bad and they have to postpone games, they could come I stuck trying to fit them all in.
|
|
|
Post by sword65 on Feb 22, 2020 9:57:45 GMT
With this full time part time argument going on again maybe we should also remember that there will be four extra games in the nls next season as the league is growing to 24 teams. It does make you wonder how some teams will cope with two extra home games if the weather is bad and they have to postpone games, they could come I stuck trying to fit them all in. You are right they will struggle especially teams like Wussstone who are frightened of a bit of wind and rain. The league will probably solve this problem by trying to cram loads more games in before the end of September.
|
|
|
Post by jdl on Feb 22, 2020 12:53:43 GMT
Or, to put it more accurately - teams throughout the NS are part-time, not just at the bottom. The current probable champions and at least one of the contenders may be full-time (or not - how do we know?), but presumably most of the rest of the top 7 are part-time? And at least one full-time team is stuck at 9th and doesn't look too likely to make it into the play-offs. The problem with the full-time/part-time argument is that both arguments are equally valid. We are 'full-time' already and are ambitious to get back into the NL, where full-time is generally accepted to be necessary, so it's not really likely that we'll revert to part-time (unless finances dictate that we do). On the other hand, we got to the NL as part-timers and had our most successful season there as part-timers. So, it is both possible and (simultaneously) unlikely. A bit like quantum physics... Add in the fact that no one can agree on what 'full-time' is, other than (at least) 3 days training a week - which part-timers couldn't attend anyway - and the whole debate becomes pointless. We are 'full-time' and will remain 'full time' - as long as we can afford it. Knowing your penchant for statistics is there a definitive list of which NL, NLS amd NLN teams are either full or part time? I can start you off by informing that York City have remained full time whilst they have been in the NLN. (was drinking with my York friend yestrday). Oh God. I hate to think how much work that would involve - and the chances are you'd never be able to get satisfactory information on enough teams to make the exercise worthwhile. And you'd have to start by defining 'full-time'! Since writing my original post I've discovered that (apparently) Wealdstone are still part-time and that Michael Phillips, who presumably now earns more than we could afford to pay him, is now part-time, but on a 'full-time' salary! So, for those, who consider the definition of full-time to be more about money, is Philips a full-time player at a part-time club? Or is the whole argument utterly meaningless?!
|
|
|
Post by jdl on Feb 22, 2020 13:00:06 GMT
My opinion is still that it's the manager that counts most anyway. Get a good manager and, provided you're not completely strapped for cash, you'll be successful. Everything else is just noise to disguise the fact that your manager isn't up to it.
And, anyway, if things carry on as they are, with gates back to our IP level, and still declining, and Clowngate still to be paid for, the whole thing is academic. We won't be able to afford to stay 'full-time', whatever the definition.
|
|
|
Post by Fed up with PC views only on Feb 22, 2020 14:03:08 GMT
Knowing your penchant for statistics is there a definitive list of which NL, NLS amd NLN teams are either full or part time? I can start you off by informing that York City have remained full time whilst they have been in the NLN. (was drinking with my York friend yestrday). Oh God. I hate to think how much work that would involve - and the chances are you'd never be able to get satisfactory information on enough teams to make the exercise worthwhile. And you'd have to start by defining 'full-time'! Since writing my original post I've discovered that (apparently) Wealdstone are still part-time and that Michael Phillips, who presumably now earns more than we could afford to pay him, is now part-time, but on a 'full-time' salary! So, for those, who consider the definition of full-time to be more about money, is Philips a full-time player at a part-time club? Or is the whole argument utterly meaningless?! Yes it is! Our full timers don't seem to do a full days work every day, and are more like part-time by every other definition on any other profession. Its clearly not about how many hours they put in but what they are paid. Football is SO far removed from the real world!
|
|
|
Post by Raymondo316 on Feb 22, 2020 17:49:41 GMT
So Michael Phillips went part time after being full time with us then? I don't think he had much of a choice, he didn't get the offers he was expecting. It was late in pre season and Wealdstone were the only team interested so he took what he had available. Lets not forget he was pretty much begging to come back here just before he went on trial with Wealdstone.
|
|
|
Post by Benny on Feb 22, 2020 20:07:16 GMT
Hampton and Richmond unofficial highlights. youtu.be/4qrU-PMXDWEWhat a time to become an unofficial broadcaster.
|
|