- Joined
- Aug 13, 2008
- Messages
- 8,879
It's a sticky situation.
Do we save money for the stadium or do we use money on players?
Personally I believe you need a stable squad playing at a good enough level to warrant a new stadium, after all what's the point of having a new stadium if we can't sign the players we want and get relegated as a consequence, Tillys unhappy and leaves and we are back to League 2 football we won't be filling 23,000 seats a week.
Or do we go for the stadium option meaning that once it's built in a few years we should be making more money giving us a better chance of signing the players we need to make it to a higher level.
So while signing players is sustainable in the short term the stadium is sustainable in the long term, we can all slag Ron off as much as we like but it's a very tough decision he's had to make but we won't see if it was right for a few years yet.
Do we save money for the stadium or do we use money on players?
Personally I believe you need a stable squad playing at a good enough level to warrant a new stadium, after all what's the point of having a new stadium if we can't sign the players we want and get relegated as a consequence, Tillys unhappy and leaves and we are back to League 2 football we won't be filling 23,000 seats a week.
Or do we go for the stadium option meaning that once it's built in a few years we should be making more money giving us a better chance of signing the players we need to make it to a higher level.
So while signing players is sustainable in the short term the stadium is sustainable in the long term, we can all slag Ron off as much as we like but it's a very tough decision he's had to make but we won't see if it was right for a few years yet.