If you're referring to ESF post you might want to re-read it. He says he stopped renewing is ST doesn't say he stopped watching them.Caboosegg wrote:Read the post again, he hasnt been going for 6 yearsNICKYKISS wrote:We don’t half have some strange fans! Only Wigan fans could throw their toys out the pram and say they’re not going anymore after winning a Grand Final. Yes we’ve lost two players we’d have loved to have kept (Bateman and Tomkins with Sutton being comfortably replaceable) and Lenagan is clearly cutting his cloth but there is so much to be positive about.
The likes of Greenwood and Hardaker are top players (if a little risky in Zaks case), we’ve took a couple of pints on Championship players that could pay off, we’ve got a promise of a more exciting brand of rugby to look forward to, a WCC against the Roosters, a trip to Barcelona and one of the most exciting crops of junior players we’ve had in years.
It could be worse.
Dear Mr Lenegan,
Re: Dear Mr Lenegan,
Re: Dear Mr Lenegan,
The club has been pretty successful under IL of that there is no doubt but despite this the forum (and rlfans as well) has not been a place of contentment among the fans over the standard of RL served up during the season for at least two years.
So I am hoping a change of coach will bring a different style and a more effective attack.
However I don't think anyone can deny the overall standard of SL has dropped. I don't see how it can't have when it's better players ship out to the NRL. This isn't IL's fault though his policy of letting players go and saying they could come back must have, in my view, encouraged some of ours to give it a try when otherwise they may not have.
As to running Wigan on a smaller budget, well I suppose you can do that and still win things if the overall standard is down but that will obviously result in a poorer spectacle. If all you care about is winning and stats and ignore declining standards across the board you won't have anything to complain about.
The problem as I see it is simply Wigan are making a loss and the reaction to this loss is, supposedly, cuts.
People can argue IL has put loads of money in all they want but saying he has a right to cut the budget as a result is missing the point. The point is what is he doing to increase the revenue so he doesn't need to cut the budget?
He's supposed to be a top businessman and people often say the club is being run as a business so can't afford a star player or whatever. Well businesses that run at a loss, year after year, either go bust or take action to stem the losses which often means replacing the CEO or chairman. I am not being controversial there, just stating the obvious.
It seems pretty clear IL has been juggling the finances for a while now. I am convinced letting Sam T go and replacing him with Hardaker was all about money. The trouble is if so, it shows you IL is now prepared to make a risky signing in Hardaker to save cash. What would he have done if Sam has insisted his contract were honored or there wasn't a convenient Hardaker looking for a comeback?
So the question I have is if Wigan continue to make losses, what next?
My view is IL needs to co opt some others onto the board. He's not got a monopoly on good ideas and he certainly isn't a source of practically limitless finance. He could do with seeking some other expertise and sources of finance. Running a pro sports club as a business and expecting them to be self financing is a tall order and not common. Many survive on "sponsorship" from board members and owners (the extreme example being Man City in the premier league and their Arab owners). I can't see IL letting anyone else own a bit of "his" club though and I think he is expecting a get of jail card in that the moves of SL clubs to take greater control will lead to bigger wads of "free" sponsorship money off TV rights. In the meantime we might have to get used to signings like Sammut because I am not sure IL is going to manage to raise the revenue sufficiently off his own bat. Hopefully I am wrong and we will get as mega sponsorship deal but I think that is wishful thinking.
So I am hoping a change of coach will bring a different style and a more effective attack.
However I don't think anyone can deny the overall standard of SL has dropped. I don't see how it can't have when it's better players ship out to the NRL. This isn't IL's fault though his policy of letting players go and saying they could come back must have, in my view, encouraged some of ours to give it a try when otherwise they may not have.
As to running Wigan on a smaller budget, well I suppose you can do that and still win things if the overall standard is down but that will obviously result in a poorer spectacle. If all you care about is winning and stats and ignore declining standards across the board you won't have anything to complain about.
The problem as I see it is simply Wigan are making a loss and the reaction to this loss is, supposedly, cuts.
People can argue IL has put loads of money in all they want but saying he has a right to cut the budget as a result is missing the point. The point is what is he doing to increase the revenue so he doesn't need to cut the budget?
He's supposed to be a top businessman and people often say the club is being run as a business so can't afford a star player or whatever. Well businesses that run at a loss, year after year, either go bust or take action to stem the losses which often means replacing the CEO or chairman. I am not being controversial there, just stating the obvious.
It seems pretty clear IL has been juggling the finances for a while now. I am convinced letting Sam T go and replacing him with Hardaker was all about money. The trouble is if so, it shows you IL is now prepared to make a risky signing in Hardaker to save cash. What would he have done if Sam has insisted his contract were honored or there wasn't a convenient Hardaker looking for a comeback?
So the question I have is if Wigan continue to make losses, what next?
My view is IL needs to co opt some others onto the board. He's not got a monopoly on good ideas and he certainly isn't a source of practically limitless finance. He could do with seeking some other expertise and sources of finance. Running a pro sports club as a business and expecting them to be self financing is a tall order and not common. Many survive on "sponsorship" from board members and owners (the extreme example being Man City in the premier league and their Arab owners). I can't see IL letting anyone else own a bit of "his" club though and I think he is expecting a get of jail card in that the moves of SL clubs to take greater control will lead to bigger wads of "free" sponsorship money off TV rights. In the meantime we might have to get used to signings like Sammut because I am not sure IL is going to manage to raise the revenue sufficiently off his own bat. Hopefully I am wrong and we will get as mega sponsorship deal but I think that is wishful thinking.