I think the board (only been in the job for around 2 years!) have been investing in facilities and improving the match experience. Some might say that a winning team could also 'improve' this experience. However, we have had a year's downturn compared to three decent years before so, on balance, it would be unfair to overly knock the club.
In terms of investing in the first team, it would need to be sustainable. With this in mind, we can only cut the number of players in order to boost the wages for the rest. We already have the youngest team in the league and so this might be difficult in the short term. In the longer term (i.e. in the close season) we will be able to 'ship out' some 'excess' playing staff but the question is always going to be who do you get in their place? Having people on a single year contract is useful for when you want to unload players but not if you want to keep them. Longer contracts run the risk of tying down players who turn out to be of little use. So what's the answer? We could offer higher wages for certain 'earmarked' positions/players and hope to tie them to a longer contract. But being a 'small' club we will run the risk of better players not fancying playing for us.
Our training facilities and the promise of development and possible sell-on has been the incentive for people to sign in the past. However, that seems to be breaking down now as cultural change in young players affects attitudes and a little bit of rot has set in with the Wintle/Dale/Lowery situations. There are even rumours that we're having difficulties with members of the youth team!
So, it's not simple or clear-cut how the current position is dealt with. At the same time we can be critical of management but this should be tempered with a little empathy. Once Lowery has gone, there has to be a 'new variant' of the model that deals with the changing attitudes and maintains our football club for the future.
Anyone got any (detailed) suggestions??