Bury FC

So about 10k a month, 120k a year ? Not bad for the players I suppose. Unsustainable for a small club or a club with a small income

Originally Posted by Albert Tatlock

So about 10k a month, 120k a year ? Not bad for the players I suppose. Unsustainable for a small club or a club with a small income

There are players in the Conference earning £1k per week these days. The money in the game is nuts.

Unless the owners decide you don't need it obvs.

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

Yeah, you often get a situation at conference and conf n/s where teams can’t afford to get promoted. All about money at that level. But we know players can earn very good wages in the conference if you can make the difference, so no surprise League 1 salaries can be high.

But it all makes the management and ownership key. And means allowing a bloke who is prolific at liquidising his businesses and who doesn’t give a shit about football to buy a financially delicate club is potentially a dangerous move. Especially if the rest of the game turns a blind eye too.

You had a league there where last season Maidenhead were paying max £350 a week, and Salford £3000 a week for more than one player. It worked I guess. No FFP rules in National League.

Originally Posted by sweetleftfoot

You had a league there where last season Maidenhead were paying max £350 a week, and Salford £3000 a week for more than one player. It worked I guess. No FFP rules in National League.

You’ll get that kind of gap in some major European leagues. Obviously not as much financially doped like Sanford mind. But very normal for players in upper mid-table the conference to earn £500 per week. In league 1 the average is over £2k. Doubt you could find a third tier in the world that could come close.

Originally Posted by Hands of Scone

https://twitter.com/thellen72/status...301002240?s=20

Is that when they were in League 2? If so explained a lot. That wage bill is far above the average for that level.

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

You’ll get that kind of gap in some major European leagues. Obviously not as much financially doped like Sanford mind. But very normal for players in upper mid-table the conference to earn £500 per week. In league 1 the average is over £2k. Doubt you could find a third tier in the world that could come close.



Is that when they were in League 2? If so explained a lot. That wage bill is far above the average for that level.

bury were paying jermaine beckford 10k a week in league 2. madness.

got to feel for mansfield, who were beaten to promotion last season by bury playing players they couldn't afford to pay. they should get bury's place in league 2, imo.

the efl have £#%&!ed up massively in allowing this @#%&! to buy the club with his track record, and without any proof he could fund it. they've also dropped a massive %@#$&! by allowing bury and bolton to start the season.

Originally Posted by Jack Duckworth

i still can't believe how passively bury and bolton fans have taken all this.

blackpool fans got games abandoned/interrupted, boycotted anything to do with the club, stormed the directors box, visited the chairman's house/chairman's son's work place en masse etc.

what have these £#%&!ers done apart from talking in a gorpy accent outside the ground to ssn reporters?

steve dale must be pissing himself laughing this morning when he should be shitting himself with worry.

Tbf Blackpool are an exception when it comes to organised protests against parasite owners, most fans in this country take it with a shrug. I wrote extensively about this on the previous page

Originally Posted by Vedder

https://twitter.com/awaydays_/status...085693953?s=21

https://twitter.com/OystonIsOut/status/1113113438413357059?s=20

Originally Posted by Jack Duckworth

bury were paying jermaine beckford 10k a week in league 2. madness.

got to feel for mansfield, who were beaten to promotion last season by bury playing players they couldn't afford to pay. they should get bury's place in league 2, imo.

the efl have £#%&!ed up massively in allowing this @#%&! to buy the club with his track record, and without any proof he could fund it. they've also dropped a massive %@#$&! by allowing bury and bolton to start the season.

This is the problem with there being so much money in the top two leagues. Certain owners happy to risk a club in order to chase that prize. No issue for this @#%&! to just walk away now it hasn't worked out. Just file along with his other businesses that didn't work out.

The governing bodies were always so quick to judge/penalise us, but when it comes to looking out for what's important they're nowhere.

Originally Posted by windy waffles

Darren Gough made a good point yesterday.

If the big clubs did help out and keep them in the league, other smaller clubs would gamble, pay wages they can't afford to seek quicker promotions and if they fell onto a familiar situation, would just think 'Thats ok, the Premier League clubs will bail us out'...

That can't happen and this will just be a lesson to other clubs. As 'sad' as it is...

I see that point of view, but that doesn't mean we can't have ownership restrictions that actually mean something. Unlike now.

Many have acknowledged that Bolton's troubles are at least partly their own fault (comparable to Portsmouth and Leeds in recent years)

Bury, however, just fell into the hands of somebody who should never have been allowed to buy them in the first place.