[spireitenag]

freelander2, on 07 March 2017 - 02:41 PM, said:

Booth & Co have confirmed this afternoon that it is impossible to refute the former employee's claim.

Although it is highly unlikely to result in monies being repaid, it was more a point of principle.

So another Sutcliffe lie is outed !

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

I had a very interesting conversation with someone extremely well qualified to comment on youth football last evening.

Carson would have us believe Town's academy is costing upwards of two hundred grand a year to run, however my eminently knowledgeable source says it's very difficult to reach such a black-and-white conclusion.

It seems that few, if any clubs have a designated account into which grants, sponsorship and subsidies are placed solely for the use of their youth system. Indeed money often finds it's way into central funding to be used in a plethora of other areas. I'm not saying this is illegal - though I'm told the authorities are becoming increasingly interested - but my mate insists it's rare for the Mark Smiths of this world to receive everything they should.

An example: player 'A' approaches the end of his career and expresses an interest in pursuing a future in coaching. So his club offer him, say, an extra year but subsidise the extension with academy money under the auspices of him taking a few junior games. Or access the same 'pot' to employ a physio, kit-man, groundsman or assistant by saying they're also part of the junior set-up.

As I say, not necessarily illegal but no wonder academy losses can appear high.

Something else, too; if clubs of Town's level invest a hundred grand into youth they receive more than three times as much back from the FA/FL - a figure set to rise significantly over the next two years! Yet AC is supposedly considering abandoning our academy and denying the Club such vital finance? Surely he can't be serious.

Then how many current squad and/or first team players came through Mark Smith's ranks; five, six, maybe more? That fact might not feature in any profit and loss account, but it sure looks cost effective to me. Meanwhile an environment where even lads on schoolboy forms can join larger clubs for tens, sometimes hundreds of thousands of pounds confirms how stupid it would be to dramatically downgrade Town's youth system.

Perhaps MS isn't the best when it comes to presentations or balance sheets. He's a football man, through-and-through, so it's no surprise if someone with far more experience in such matters might offer a more convincing case. Maybe a second opinion from someone better versed in finance than football would elicit a different verdict, I dunno.

However the person with whom I spoke is convinced, absolutely certain that Chesterfield FC would lose a hugely valuable asset if they closed the current academy. We may not miss it this year, we may not miss it next year. But before too long the loss of our community based youth system that's taken several years to establish - and is now bearing fruit - would leave a gaping hole.

.

This post has been edited by MDCCCLXVI: 09 March 2017 - 04:02 PM

[Stockholm Spireite]

MDCCCLXVI, on 09 March 2017 - 03:58 PM, said:

I had a very interesting conversation with someone extremely well qualified to comment on youth football last evening.

Carson would have us believe Town's academy is costing upwards of two hundred grand a year to run, however my eminently knowledgeable source says it's very difficult to reach such a black-and-white conclusion.

It seems that few, if any clubs have a designated account into which grants, sponsorship and subsidies are placed solely for the use of their youth system. Indeed money often finds it's way into central funding to be used in a plethora of other areas. I'm not saying this is illegal - though I'm told the authorities are becoming increasingly interested - but my mate insists it's rare for the Mark Smiths of this world to receive everything they should.

An example: player 'A' approaches the end of his career and expresses an interest in pursuing a future in coaching. So his club offer him, say, an extra year but subsidise the extension with academy money under the auspices of him taking a few junior games. Or access the same 'pot' to employ a physio, kit-man, groundsman or assistant by saying they're also part of the junior set-up.

As I say, not necessarily illegal but no wonder academy losses can appear high.

Something else, too; if clubs of Town's level invest a hundred grand into youth they receive more than three times as much back from the FA/FL - a figure set to rise significantly over the next two years! Yet AC is supposedly considering abandoning our academy and denying the Club such vital finance? Surely he can't be serious.

Then how many current squad and/or first team players came through Mark Smith's ranks; five, six, maybe more? That fact might not feature in any profit and loss account, but it sure looks cost effective to me. Meanwhile an environment where even lads on schoolboy forms can join larger clubs for tens, sometimes hundreds of thousands of pounds confirms how stupid it would be to dramatically downgrade Town's youth system.

Perhaps MS isn't the best when it comes to presentations or balance sheets. He's a football man, through-and-through, so it's no surprise if someone with far more experience in such matters might offer a more convincing case. Maybe a second opinion from someone better versed in finance than football would elicit a different verdict, I dunno.

However the person with whom I spoke is convinced, absolutely certain that Chesterfield FC would lose a hugely valuable asset if they closed the current academy. We may not miss it this year, we may not miss it next year. But before too long the loss of our community based youth system that's taken several years to establish - and is now bearing fruit - would leave a gaping hole.

.

I could not agree more.

On another thread, I used an example of a Northampton Saints Rugby player. I'd like to use the same club to amplify your point in your final paragraph.

From 2001-04 the head coach was Wayne Smith (he of All Blacks fame). Smith closed Saints academy, preferring to work with the "finished product" instead of developing the youngsters and securing the future. This was despite of the academy producing the likes of Steve Thompson and Ben Cohen who won the world cup in 2003.

In 2004, the All Blacks came knocking and Smith joined them as an assistant coach to Graham Henry. In the 2006-07 season, Northampton were relegated from the premiership. Now, Saints bounced back the following year and were promoted back to the top table. But they had a squad that was just too high a calibre for the part-timers in the division below and financially, they were secure due to parachute payments.

In rugby, part of the TV revenues received were banked and ring-fenced in case of relegation. Current salaries could be paid, so players would stay instead of leaving because of a forced pay cut, and the immediate re-bound could be achieved. The longer you stayed in the premiership, the more years parachute payment you had banked away. After a number of years (5, I think), you could remove a year's payment and place it into the playing budget.

Northampton's fall from grace was fast. That's only 3 seasons, folks. For the next 3 seasons, they had to recruit established players and try to blood youngsters who may or may not have been ready. The danger is all too real. Make no mistake, 'numerals' and his pal have just highlighted a huge problem up ahead. The club's response to the academy and it's longevity could be like paddles on the heart or a stake right through it.

[Guest_freelander2_*]

MDCCCLXVI, on 09 March 2017 - 03:58 PM, said:

I had a very interesting conversation with someone extremely well qualified to comment on youth football last evening.

Carson would have us believe Town's academy is costing upwards of two hundred grand a year to run, however my eminently knowledgeable source says it's very difficult to reach such a black-and-white conclusion.

It seems that few, if any clubs have a designated account into which grants, sponsorship and subsidies are placed solely for the use of their youth system. Indeed money often finds it's way into central funding to be used in a plethora of other areas. I'm not saying this is illegal - though I'm told the authorities are becoming increasingly interested - but my mate insists it's rare for the Mark Smiths of this world to receive everything they should.

An example: player 'A' approaches the end of his career and expresses an interest in pursuing a future in coaching. So his club offer him, say, an extra year but subsidise the extension with academy money under the auspices of him taking a few junior games. Or access the same 'pot' to employ a physio, kit-man, groundsman or assistant by saying they're also part of the junior set-up.

As I say, not necessarily illegal but no wonder academy losses can appear high.

Something else, too; if clubs of Town's level invest a hundred grand into youth they receive more than three times as much back from the FA/FL - a figure set to rise significantly over the next two years! Yet AC is supposedly considering abandoning our academy and denying the Club such vital finance? Surely he can't be serious.

Then how many current squad and/or first team players came through Mark Smith's ranks; five, six, maybe more? That fact might not feature in any profit and loss account, but it sure looks cost effective to me. Meanwhile an environment where even lads on schoolboy forms can join larger clubs for tens, sometimes hundreds of thousands of pounds confirms how stupid it would be to dramatically downgrade Town's youth system.

Perhaps MS isn't the best when it comes to presentations or balance sheets. He's a football man, through-and-through, so it's no surprise if someone with far more experience in such matters might offer a more convincing case. Maybe a second opinion from someone better versed in finance than football would elicit a different verdict, I dunno.

However the person with whom I spoke is convinced, absolutely certain that Chesterfield FC would lose a hugely valuable asset if they closed the current academy. We may not miss it this year, we may not miss it next year. But before too long the loss of our community based youth system that's taken several years to establish - and is now bearing fruit - would leave a gaping hole.

Is your pal still working at the Football League?

[DIFH]

MDCCCLXVI, on 09 March 2017 - 03:58 PM, said:

I had a very interesting conversation with someone extremely well qualified to comment on youth football last evening.

Carson would have us believe Town's academy is costing upwards of two hundred grand a year to run, however my eminently knowledgeable source says it's very difficult to reach such a black-and-white conclusion.

It seems that few, if any clubs have a designated account into which grants, sponsorship and subsidies are placed solely for the use of their youth system. Indeed money often finds it's way into central funding to be used in a plethora of other areas. I'm not saying this is illegal - though I'm told the authorities are becoming increasingly interested - but my mate insists it's rare for the Mark Smiths of this world to receive everything they should.

An example: player 'A' approaches the end of his career and expresses an interest in pursuing a future in coaching. So his club offer him, say, an extra year but subsidise the extension with academy money under the auspices of him taking a few junior games. Or access the same 'pot' to employ a physio, kit-man, groundsman or assistant by saying they're also part of the junior set-up.

As I say, not necessarily illegal but no wonder academy losses can appear high.

Something else, too; if clubs of Town's level invest a hundred grand into youth they receive more than three times as much back from the FA/FL - a figure set to rise significantly over the next two years! Yet AC is supposedly considering abandoning our academy and denying the Club such vital finance? Surely he can't be serious.

Then how many current squad and/or first team players came through Mark Smith's ranks; five, six, maybe more? That fact might not feature in any profit and loss account, but it sure looks cost effective to me. Meanwhile an environment where even lads on schoolboy forms can join larger clubs for tens, sometimes hundreds of thousands of pounds confirms how stupid it would be to dramatically downgrade Town's youth system.

Perhaps MS isn't the best when it comes to presentations or balance sheets. He's a football man, through-and-through, so it's no surprise if someone with far more experience in such matters might offer a more convincing case. Maybe a second opinion from someone better versed in finance than football would elicit a different verdict, I dunno.

However the person with whom I spoke is convinced, absolutely certain that Chesterfield FC would lose a hugely valuable asset if they closed the current academy. We may not miss it this year, we may not miss it next year. But before too long the loss of our community based youth system that's taken several years to establish - and is now bearing fruit - would leave a gaping hole.

.

[Benno Spire]

MDCCCLXVI, on 09 March 2017 - 03:58 PM, said:

I had a very interesting conversation with someone extremely well qualified to comment on youth football last evening.

Carson would have us believe Town's academy is costing upwards of two hundred grand a year to run, however my eminently knowledgeable source says it's very difficult to reach such a black-and-white conclusion.

It seems that few, if any clubs have a designated account into which grants, sponsorship and subsidies are placed solely for the use of their youth system. Indeed money often finds it's way into central funding to be used in a plethora of other areas. I'm not saying this is illegal - though I'm told the authorities are becoming increasingly interested - but my mate insists it's rare for the Mark Smiths of this world to receive everything they should.

An example: player 'A' approaches the end of his career and expresses an interest in pursuing a future in coaching. So his club offer him, say, an extra year but subsidise the extension with academy money under the auspices of him taking a few junior games. Or access the same 'pot' to employ a physio, kit-man, groundsman or assistant by saying they're also part of the junior set-up.

As I say, not necessarily illegal but no wonder academy losses can appear high.

Something else, too; if clubs of Town's level invest a hundred grand into youth they receive more than three times as much back from the FA/FL - a figure set to rise significantly over the next two years! Yet AC is supposedly considering abandoning our academy and denying the Club such vital finance? Surely he can't be serious.

Then how many current squad and/or first team players came through Mark Smith's ranks; five, six, maybe more? That fact might not feature in any profit and loss account, but it sure looks cost effective to me. Meanwhile an environment where even lads on schoolboy forms can join larger clubs for tens, sometimes hundreds of thousands of pounds confirms how stupid it would be to dramatically downgrade Town's youth system.

Perhaps MS isn't the best when it comes to presentations or balance sheets. He's a football man, through-and-through, so it's no surprise if someone with far more experience in such matters might offer a more convincing case. Maybe a second opinion from someone better versed in finance than football would elicit a different verdict, I dunno.

However the person with whom I spoke is convinced, absolutely certain that Chesterfield FC would lose a hugely valuable asset if they closed the current academy. We may not miss it this year, we may not miss it next year. But before too long the loss of our community based youth system that's taken several years to establish - and is now bearing fruit - would leave a gaping hole.

.if the academy is closed that would be a disaster. I hope someone hasn't been talking the talk to AC and feeding him rubbish, if so it would be just like the clown disappearing from across the road.

[Wooden Spoon]

MDCCCLXVI said:

1489075134[/url]' post='1287470']
I had a very interesting conversation with someone extremely well qualified to comment on youth football last evening.

Carson would have us believe Town's academy is costing upwards of two hundred grand a year to run, however my eminently knowledgeable source says it's very difficult to reach such a black-and-white conclusion.

It seems that few, if any clubs have a designated account into which grants, sponsorship and subsidies are placed solely for the use of their youth system. Indeed money often finds it's way into central funding to be used in a plethora of other areas. I'm not saying this is illegal - though I'm told the authorities are becoming increasingly interested - but my mate insists it's rare for the Mark Smiths of this world to receive everything they should.

An example: player 'A' approaches the end of his career and expresses an interest in pursuing a future in coaching. So his club offer him, say, an extra year but subsidise the extension with academy money under the auspices of him taking a few junior games. Or access the same 'pot' to employ a physio, kit-man, groundsman or assistant by saying they're also part of the junior set-up.

As I say, not necessarily illegal but no wonder academy losses can appear high.

Something else, too; if clubs of Town's level invest a hundred grand into youth they receive more than three times as much back from the FA/FL - a figure set to rise significantly over the next two years! Yet AC is supposedly considering abandoning our academy and denying the Club such vital finance? Surely he can't be serious.

Then how many current squad and/or first team players came through Mark Smith's ranks; five, six, maybe more? That fact might not feature in any profit and loss account, but it sure looks cost effective to me. Meanwhile an environment where even lads on schoolboy forms can join larger clubs for tens, sometimes hundreds of thousands of pounds confirms how stupid it would be to dramatically downgrade Town's youth system.

Perhaps MS isn't the best when it comes to presentations or balance sheets. He's a football man, through-and-through, so it's no surprise if someone with far more experience in such matters might offer a more convincing case. Maybe a second opinion from someone better versed in finance than football would elicit a different verdict, I dunno.

However the person with whom I spoke is convinced, absolutely certain that Chesterfield FC would lose a hugely valuable asset if they closed the current academy. We may not miss it this year, we may not miss it next year. But before too long the loss of our community based youth system that's taken several years to establish - and is now bearing fruit - would leave a gaping hole.

.

Funnily enough a mate of mine coaches kids part time at Colchester, and he was saying that the interest generated not just young players, but a whole load of future fans means it's well worth it. They have coaches going to loads of the kids Saturday teams in midweek as well.

[dim view]

itsc, on 09 March 2017 - 09:15 PM, said:

It is a shame that we currently don't have a feeder system into the Academy now.

It is a shame.
If only your mate Ashley had kept his executive finger on the pulse eh? Does he know you think he's to blame?

[60s 70s Spireite]

itsc, on 09 March 2017 - 09:15 PM, said:

I think you will find it is costing around half a million to run the Academy but as you rightly say income with grant aid brings it down to about 167k loss last year. If you analyse and cost the items correctly you can run an accurate P & L for the Academy as a Cost Centre which is being done now.

Thing is a number of us struggle to see how the Academy does cost in fact cost the half million quoted by the club. Any breakdown and explanations would be ŵelcome.

[Mr Mercury]

itsc, on 09 March 2017 - 09:15 PM, said:

Interesting Post Chris

I think you will find it is costing around half a million to run the Academy but as you rightly say income with grant aid brings it down to about 167k loss last year. If you analyse and cost the items correctly you can run an accurate P & L for the Academy as a Cost Centre which is being done now.

I think the Club has to put something like 140k into the Academy in order to get funding back but that is not on a 3 times figure more like twice, the club would get an extra 65k of funding from the previous year.

I think out of the current players coming through MS is 4 or you may correct me on that Jake Beesley, Lawrence Maguire, Derek Daley and Curtis Morrison ? are there any more. I think lads who join other larger clubs only join for a set fee as part of the EPPP and is nothing more than around 40k but someone will correct me on that one as its a while since I last read the EPPP programme.

I think the whole academy will come under the microscope pretty soon as other areas of the business I guess.

It is a shame that we currently don't have a feeder system into the Academy now.

Just as an aside, and I must admit I thought the academy was a great bonus for a local club like ourself, but through lack of knowledge on my part, how would you be so aware of the apparent minute detail of a club academy and its apparent drain when so many experienced people only focus on its positives?

[Tha Knows...]

[quote name='MDCCCLXVI' timestamp='1489075134' post='1287470']
I had a very interesting conversation with someone extremely well qualified to comment on youth football last evening.

Carson would have us believe Town's academy is costing upwards of two hundred grand a year to run, however my eminently knowledgeable source says it's very difficult to reach such a black-and-white conclusion.

It seems that few, if any clubs have a designated account into which grants, sponsorship and subsidies are placed solely for the use of their youth system. Indeed money often finds it's way into central funding to be used in a plethora of other areas. I'm not saying this is illegal - though I'm told the authorities are becoming increasingly interested - but my mate insists it's rare for the Mark Smiths of this world to receive everything they should.

An example: player 'A' approaches the end of his career and expresses an interest in pursuing a future in coaching. So his club offer him, say, an extra year but subsidise the extension with academy money under the auspices of him taking a few junior games. Or access the same 'pot' to employ a physio, kit-man, groundsman or assistant by saying they're also part of the junior set-up.

As I say, not necessarily illegal but no wonder academy losses can appear high.

Something else, too; if clubs of Town's level invest a hundred grand into youth they receive more than three times as much back from the FA/FL - a figure set to rise significantly over the next two years! Yet AC is supposedly considering abandoning our academy and denying the Club such vital finance? Surely he can't be serious.

Then how many current squad and/or first team players came through Mark Smith's ranks; five, six, maybe more? That fact might not feature in any profit and loss account, but it sure looks cost effective to me. Meanwhile an environment where even lads on schoolboy forms can join larger clubs for tens, sometimes hundreds of thousands of pounds confirms how stupid it would be to dramatically downgrade Town's youth system.

Perhaps MS isn't the best when it comes to presentations or balance sheets. He's a football man, through-and-through, so it's no surprise if someone with far more experience in such matters might offer a more convincing case. Maybe a second opinion from someone better versed in finance than football would elicit a different verdict, I dunno.

However the person with whom I spoke is convinced, absolutely certain that Chesterfield FC would lose a hugely valuable asset if they closed the current academy. We may not miss it this year, we may not miss it next year. But before too long the loss of our community based youth system that's taken several years to establish - and is now bearing fruit - would leave a gaping hole.

.
[quote]

This is one for RGS to investigate

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

itsc, on 09 March 2017 - 09:15 PM, said:

Interesting Post Chris

I think you will find it is costing around half a million to run the Academy but as you rightly say income with grant aid brings it down to about 167k loss last year. If you analyse and cost the items correctly you can run an accurate P & L for the Academy as a Cost Centre which is being done now.

I think the Club has to put something like 140k into the Academy in order to get funding back but that is not on a 3 times figure more like twice, the club would get an extra 65k of funding from the previous year.

I think out of the current players coming through MS is 4 or you may correct me on that Jake Beesley, Lawrence Maguire, Derek Daley and Curtis Morrison ? are there any more. I think lads who join other larger clubs only join for a set fee as part of the EPPP and is nothing more than around 40k but someone will correct me on that one as its a while since I last read the EPPP programme.

I think the whole academy will come under the microscope pretty soon as other areas of the business I guess.

It is a shame that we currently don't have a feeder system into the Academy now.

Hmmm, interesting.

Despite being a self-admitted 'partner' to the disgraced Liam Sutcliffe's scandal ridden enterprise, overseeing the IT and allegedly donating high-end lap tops, you now claim to know nothing of it's finances or where information contained on those lap tops ended up.

But on the other hand you're happy to discuss the official academy's finances at length, suggesting some sort of in-depth knowledge when you've apparently no connection whatsoever?

Strange.

Oh, and PS: AC not your 'mate'? Well you were together in a pub before sitting alongside him at a meeting with 'BB' members. Seems pretty 'matey' to me.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

freelander2, on 09 March 2017 - 05:27 PM, said:

Is your pal still working at the Football League?

Something similar, I believe.

As an aside, though, I'm led to believe former Town player Adie Shaw, who made his first foray into youth coaching whilst with us and now occupies a pretty senior position in such circles, still takes a keen interest in events at CFC.

[dim view]

MDCCCLXVI, on 09 March 2017 - 11:57 PM, said:

Hmmm, interesting.

Despite being a self-admitted 'partner' to the disgraced Liam Sutcliffe's scandal ridden enterprise, overseeing the IT and allegedly donating high-end lap tops, you now claim to know nothing of it's finances or where information contained on those lap tops ended up.

But on the other hand you're happy to discuss the official academy's finances at length, suggesting some sort of in-depth knowledge when you've apparently no connection whatsoever?

Strange.

Oh, and PS: AC not your 'mate'? Well you were together in a pub before sitting alongside him at a meeting with 'BB' members. Seems pretty 'matey' to me.

Wor I want to know is why CFC's IT supplier is claiming that he will be involved in shaping CFC's Youth policy and the lives of those professionals currently involved in it. Can I be on that committee as well? I know as much about IT as he does.
For once in his CFC life, can't Carson do summat properly?

The reason why ITSC attended the meeting was that Carson wanted him to hear all the allegations about Sutcliffe and the DC. I'd like to know whether ITSC now has control of networked computers and backups at CFC that contain or contained DC financial data. Turner was a Director. Would he have put himself out by walking across the road in order to see the DC accounts?

[Looker-on]

dim view, on 10 March 2017 - 04:55 AM, said:

Wor I want to know is why CFC's IT supplier is claiming that he will be involved in shaping CFC's Youth policy and the lives of those professionals currently involved in it. Can I be on that committee as well? I know as much about IT as he does.
For once in his CFC life, can't Carson do summat properly?

The reason why ITSC attended the meeting was that Carson wanted him to hear all the allegations about Sutcliffe and the DC. I'd like to know whether ITSC now has control of networked computers and backups at CFC that contain or contained DC financial data. Turner was a Director. Would he have put himself out by walking across the road in order to see the DC accounts?

Doesn't financial data have to be kept for seven years? It'd be very illegal to get rid of any of it.