magoo Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Money plays a massive part off today's non league..The days off Sammy purdie and bomber brown playing for the jersey are long gone...at a guess I'd say whitehill were closer to the bottom teams budget and infastructure than they are the top spenders... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grim O'Grady Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Ww have never been a wealthy club.there success has been thro a hard working loyal committees and a group off players in the 90s early 2000 that,at non league level were near untouchable...In the 90s they did pay decent bounus but that was self financed from Scottish Qualifying success and the fact apart from gala and spartans the rest were paying very little...there's no financial big guns behind whitehill,whilst I stated there not wealthy they have been run very well....In the new age off lowland league whitehill will be no where near the finances off the top six and everyone around whitehill is well aware off that fact.we were spoilt with success in the 80s 90s and early 2000s...getting our heads round mid table is where we are at.this coupled up with imo some poor signings over the last 3 years leads us to where we are in the lowland standings.....If whitehill never won another trophy or even a game in there remaining history we would still have enough in our locker to say it's been a hell off a journey Haha there's you Magoo moaning at SN about him making wild statements about WW finances without proof & you call out us about our finances that you have no factual evidence on. There's a word for someone like you but I'm far too polite to use it, haha Grimbo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surely not! Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Money plays a massive part off today's non league..The days off Sammy purdie and bomber brown playing for the jersey are long gone...at a guess I'd say whitehill were closer to the bottom teams budget and infastructure than they are the top spenders... But there are folk still playing for the jersey in some sides. I agree that there may not be too many and also agree that there are a good few teams with a bigger budget. Id also suggest that the league table doesn't necessarily show the same order as there will be a good few punching above their weight and a few more massively overachieving. Interesting to also hear that you mention the expectations now at whitehill aren't what they were. Is this reflected in the comments made at games or are there still committee men having a pop at the players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whatasaw Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Of that there's no doubt. I've played against the great whitehill team of the mid 90s and know what the success was built on. However, I do know that they have spent a bit this year, albeit probably less than some in the top six but definitely more than some in the top six. You alluded to the fact that there's been some poor signings and that's why I said you've wasted money when it's at a premium now. As an old timer with a bit of tradition about me id much prefer to see the likes of welfare pushing at the top of the league but times have changed- I just don't think it's as simple as money being the issue. Coaching, proper recruitment ( in terms of type of player and their character) can lead to success. Not all players want to go to the team paying the biggest bucks. Well said WW signed an entire team some good some average some not so good who signed them ? end of day results dictate what happens next but the signs are not too good just now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surely not! Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Money plays a massive part off today's non league..The days off Sammy purdie and bomber brown playing for the jersey are long gone...at a guess I'd say whitehill were closer to the bottom teams budget and infastructure than they are the top spenders... But there are folk still playing for the jersey in some sides. I agree that there may not be too many and also agree that there are a good few teams with a bigger budget. Id also suggest that the league table doesn't necessarily show the same order as there will be a good few punching above their weight and a few more massively overachieving. Interesting to also hear that you mention the expectations now at whitehill aren't what they were. Is this reflected in the comments made at games or are there still committee men having a pop at the players? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newcastle broon Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 He's the guy you signed from Bo'ness- for £1600. Public knowledge in the juniors what the asking price was for the lad. You were the ones who paid it. Ah the name rings a bell now. Mmm don't think that price can be justified but Al bring it up at the agm which must be on the horizon soon. But even if they did pay that they would have been recompensated elsewhere as players have left during the season or have I missed something. Anywhere back on football topic if grant did nae get a kick up the erse last night it's about time he did!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surely not! Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 I'd suggest the big spenders would be ek and spartans with gretna and colts near the top. Selkirk obv spent/promised a bit to folk and believe stirling pay their non students well ( Obv save money on the others!). City are a funny one because I can't see where the money comes from but they must be spending money to be where they are. Star prob won't be on much I'd imagine but probably deserve to be after being the only team to finish top 4 first two seasons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dal45 Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Sorry must have missed it, who was it Threave beat? Talking about yer knowledge of all clubs finances in the league!! hahaha you should do stand up comedy as well pal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magoo Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Haha there's you Magoo moaning at SN about him making wild statements about WW finances without proof & you call out us about our finances that you have no factual evidence on. There's a word for someone like you but I'm far too polite to use it, haha Grimbo indeed that's why I use the word GUESS we won't be at the top six spending levels....surely was quoting figures to the nearest pounds early on..I've hardly made any dramatic statements about any clubs spending...there's words to describe you...but they have all been stated before Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magoo Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 I'd suggest the big spenders would be ek and spartans with gretna and colts near the top. Selkirk obv spent/promised a bit to folk and believe stirling pay their non students well ( Obv save money on the others!). City are a funny one because I can't see where the money comes from but they must be spending money to be where they are. Star prob won't be on much I'd imagine but probably deserve to be after being the only team to finish top 4 first two seasons.not just about money...The infastructure behind some clubs are at a higher level Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newcastle broon Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 But there are folk still playing for the jersey in some sides. I agree that there may not be too many and also agree that there are a good few teams with a bigger budget. Id also suggest that the league table doesn't necessarily show the same order as there will be a good few punching above their weight and a few more massively overachieving. Interesting to also hear that you mention the expectations now at whitehill aren't what they were. Is this reflected in the comments made at games or are there still committee men having a pop at the players? The expectations are always there or why compete at all at any level!!! Not sure what your committee comment has to do with last night's result or indeed the finance of ww Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surely not! Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Talking about yer knowledge of all clubs finances in the league!! hahaha you should do stand up comedy as well pal. Nah mate. If I want a laugh I'll just head to a threave game ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surely not! Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Talking about yer knowledge of all clubs finances in the league!! hahaha you should do stand up comedy as well pal. Seems I knew a wee bit more than the welfare supporters as to who they signed and for how much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Mantis Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Is this reflected in the comments made at games or are there still committee men having a pop at the players? Anybody in particular you want to mention Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magoo Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Well said WW signed an entire team some good some average some not so good who signed them ? end of day results dictate what happens next but the signs are not too good just now current management signed them..along with poor signings in the last 18 months off mickys time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
surely not! Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Anybody in particular you want to mention Ha ha - this is what I meant! ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dal45 Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 I'd suggest the big spenders would be ek and spartans with gretna and colts near the top. Selkirk obv spent/promised a bit to folk and believe stirling pay their non students well ( Obv save money on the others!). City are a funny one because I can't see where the money comes from but they must be spending money to be where they are. Star prob won't be on much I'd imagine but probably deserve to be after being the only team to finish top 4 first two seasons. Give us some figures? to back up yer suggestions!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dal45 Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Nah mate. If I want a laugh I'll just head to a threave game ;-) I would expect a shcoolboy answer like that from you! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newcastle broon Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Seems I knew a wee bit more than the welfare supporters as to who they signed and for how much Considering we went such a long time without a game and given my location and magoo s I'm not in the least surprised but al look oot a blue Peter badge for ye. As I've previously said al be happy to mention the sum that you so confidently state at the agm whenever that is announced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newcastle broon Posted March 9, 2016 Share Posted March 9, 2016 Ha ha - this is what I meant! ;-) Think we all know who ye meant but...... Still don't know what it's got to do with last night's result or the signing of players. That's for the backroom staff to deal wi is it no ? Can you enlighten me please ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.