Whilst, on paper, everyone would agree with that and is the obvious thing, that very rarely works in football. Football is almost a law onto its self.
How many football clubs produced a profit, even of 1p, in the last 5 years in the top five divisions of English football?
Now, let’s say we go down the route of budgeting property, spending only what we make, and so on. We are 2nd at Christmas, 3 points behind the leaders. They splash the cash in January (forgetting the no transfer window in the NL for a minute). They spend money on a striker, a winger and a goalkeeper (or whatever positions), whereby we “blew our beans” in the summer. Our main centre forward is out for the next couple of months, all of us on SZ agree (will never happen) we need a striker. The football department identifies the guy who top of the table signed. He would come to us for sensible wages, and a nominal transfer fee, but we have no budget. We tail off without this striker, and the leaders win the divisional comfortably and we land in the play offs, and fail.
We would all be saying we should have signed X, Y & Z. Top of the tables striker made the difference, he comes out and says he would have signed for us. We’d be blaming the board for “not showing ambition” and so forth.
That’s why football is different. It’s a massive balancing act. Living within our means, whilst trying to show ambition, keeping fans happy, whilst keeping accountants happy.
What we need to do, whether FF or somewhere else or remain at Roots Hall is to maximise our revenue streams. As has been said before, we need to make money 365 days a year, not 23.
