I think, of the press received so far, this is by far the most positive. McKay comes out in a good light. He is not being treated as a criminal by this journalist, but is quite open about the problems which Manderic and Redknapp are now facing, and he isn't.

I know you and Alex still have your reservations Fuzzy, but I believe that this is the only possible way to keep our great club in the Championship. As we know that has to be the main priority before talk of play offs etc.

Good luck to McKay and let's hope at the end of the season we are no lower than fourth from bottom, that would be success.

The other possibility is even worse in my opinion, and that is to sell the club to whoever will buy it and us not know what would be in store. At least JR still has a say in the goings on, and that has to be a safety valve.

If true, then it's a good story and may just work!

The "control" situation fascinates me. McKay initiates and Saunders has the power of veto. Where do the Board come into this? Is JR really content to observe?

Never thought i'd be saying this.............but i'm enjoying the madness!!

..............3 points on Saturday anyone??

This is a little tongue in cheek but we're all men of the world here "so how many of us know a scotsman to do anything for nothing"By the way that goes for Yorkshiremen too!!!!!

Whether we like it or not NY we have to embrace it.

I think we will take stick for this very strange but original set up by other supporters and the more successful we are the more stick we will get.

But we are just a pub team having a laugh, in other words I think we have to portray the same mentality as we have done in the past.

The days are gone when everyone liked us, but will that make us stronger now the world is against us? that’s the way Sir Alex motivates his boys with the siege mentality.

My fingers are crossed we can be successful with this system without losing our integrity and becoming a Leeds.

Only time will tell.

As you know Alex, we have differed strongly over SoD and DS etc, but I honestly believe that had we stayed as we were, we would be well on our way to Div One. At least, good or bad, this gives us a chance to stay up.

As has been said before, whether we like it or not it is a decision made by the men at the club with the money. They say what goes, the speccies have no say unless they have someone with money to invest.

And, Canadian, they do say that a Yorkshireman is a tight Scotsman who taught the Scots to put long pockets in their trews.

Madness? cunning? ulterior motives? Who knows, but looks like Willie already has players lined up to come in January so even continuity in a strange way. However we are a fickle lot so if we lose on Saturday it will be the worse plan ever. Have a feeling though the Dingles will have to score at least 3 to beat us if the Copps, Sharp Diouf trio play

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/football/doncaster/willie_mckay_exclusive_i_ve_never_done_anything_wrong_apart_from_be_successful_1_3972240

Now its official :

Makay

has done nothing wrong except being successful.......................

says Makay

Is that a pig I see overhead?

There is only one thing certain for me and that is he is a very clever man.

The one part of that story I liked was where it said OTHER owners and ceo's from the Championship had called to ask why he didn't offer the deal to them.

I remember the nay sayers complaining about the deal and saying that we would be looked down upon by other clubs. I seem to remember my comment that all other clubs would be jealous and being sneered at, funny how that doesn't seem to be the case.

It's time for everyone to get behind the manager, club and players, whoever they are and let's get out of the hole we are in and climb the table.

Don't get me wrong NY I am behind the new system albeit with reservations. Come what may I will support Donny to the end but I reserve the right to be critical.
You know as well as I do there are parts of football that stinks and it is centred around the money/agents and when it comes to the very honest section of society that are called chairmen of football clubs are you really surprised they would like to jump on board if they could? Its not a matter of being sneered at but greed at what appears to be “a perfect system” or is it fools gold?
The one thing about this system I like is that it involves reducing the overheads so we become less dependant on our directors so if it fails and I certainly hope it doesn't we start again debt free or there about,s

How long can we keep Sean and Richard doing their landscaping business? Pay them up and let them get on with their lives. Its the honourable thing to do for two very honourable men. Its time to move on for all of us.

We have to pay them until they get new jobs or their contract runs out Alex. The problem is the club ( not individuals) does not have the resources to pay them up fully.

We shouldn't be crying for them as they are being paid their full contract whilst doing nothing.

http://www.doncasterfreepress.co.uk/sport/football/rovers/no_deal_done_for_moustapha_bayal_sall_says_saunders_1_3974601

He sounds like he would be a good acquisition but possibly not available till mid Feb.

NY, there I was thinking Bramall disliked Sean so much he would pay anything to get rid of him! perhaps he has a soft spot for him after all.

I'm with Donaldo in that the leadership is all very confusing (or are they just confused!). I can say that JR also has a veto on any acquisition oor Wullie may wish to make (he says so here http://www.doncasterroversfc.co.uk/page/News/0,,10329~2496474,00.html).

With all due respect to JR, I do find myself at times wondering how he has run such successful businesses as he has. The only things that seem defined about the deal with McKay are the length of the deal (2 years) and McKay's fee (£100 per week). The rest is done on the basis of handshakes, nods, winks and gentlemen's agreements. Is this how JR built up Transform and MYA? I doubt it!

In the press it all seems very confused. Take this week. A blog is published in the Guardian that says we're signing Moustapha Bayal Sall according to Willie. The next day, Dean is saying that's not true and that he's never even spoken to the player. What comes across is that the head (whoever that is) doesn't know what the legs are doing!

Is it bad reporting or is the "a nod's as good as a wink" approach to this deal with McKay causing communication lines to be genuinely muddled?

Onto what Willie has said. Apparently he's in it for the buzz. I'm not sure I can pinch enough salt with which to take that. The amount of salt needed might just sort out the A18 this winter!

That said, I think it highly likely that he is not making money from the Rovers directly. The man is not stupid. He knows that there isn't any money at the Rovers for him to make! The only money that he may make from Rovers directly could be a fee should we achieve the objective stated by the board.

That objective (as I understand it) is to reduce the wage-bill to £4M without the club being relegated. Should he achieve this perhaps there is a "gentleman's agreement" that Willie will get something for his trouble. As seems to be the case should we promoted to the premier league .

The other three parties he could be making money from are the selling club, the buying club or the player. My guess would be that he invoices a consultancy fee to the buying club for a percentage of the players wages in much the same way as a recruitment consultant.

Is there any problem with that? Well no, not as such but we have to remember, to earn money and prove his concept, McKay has to move players on from Donny. Those players have to be in the "shop window"

Now, Rovers have stated that team-selection remains Dean's responsibility. But how free is he? If Willie has brought in a player on the understanding that he is going to be in the shop-window and then Dean decides that he doesn't fit in what happens? Who's problem is it? That will depend on the contract (unless we can do it with a gentleman's handshake).

Willie believes that with this method of working, Donny could become a premier league side. Or if we get the fuzzy end of the lollipop, we could end up relegated with a much reduced playing staff.

The question that we are in the process of answering is "can more skilled players more than compensate for a policy that intrinsically causes instability in the squad?"

My view is that the success of Man Utd. in comparison with Chelsea and more recently Man City already answers this question.

In any case, I'm sure we'll have fun finding out.

Forgive me for my ignorance but if Willie Mac and DRFC are to get a percentage of a transfer fee for these players in the shop window. How does this fit in with Diouf & Chimbonda who, as I understand it, don't actually belong to a club and are just looking to to get a contract somewhere?

First of all, McKay and JR both say McKay not getting any cut of any transfer fee. Rovers get the cut (40% if you believe what McKay says in the Guardian article).

But you're right. For players like Diouf and Chimbonda, there will be no transfer fee. So Rovers don't get any cut. We just get the benefit of their talent while they play for us.

Thanks for clearing that up Fuzzy, but then doesn't this go against the reasoning behind the "new financial model" where I thought the idea was to get as big a cut as possible to being the debt down? We could end up with more of these players and as you say just get the benefit of their playing experience but not the benefit of a reduction in the debt. Which is the better option, if any?

I'm not sure we're in debt. We're loss-making but the loss is cleared each year by the Directors releasing more shares in the club and then buying them up. Its a good arrangement for the Rovers in that we do not owe the directors anything. Its also good of the directors to clear our losses in this manner.

The idea of the McKay-Model is that we reduce our wage bill by reducing our permanent squad. The players we get rid of are replaced by "Shop-Window" players for whom we pay less wages (max £2000 per week has been quoted).

This is why I say, if it doesn't work, we could be up a certain creek without any players to paddle us out!

These are issues which do not bear much analysis. In some ways I almost do not want to think about it. Looked at from the McKay perspective, there has to be a core squad of longer term contract players to fill in the gaps between the loan players (with the numbers limited by League rules) and the short term out-of-contract ones like Diouf.

We have a stock of such long term contract players at the moment, but despite what they say about competition for places the nature of the arrangement gives the imports precedence. I wonder whether Illunga who has held his place since he arrived is really better than permanent alternatives and how O'Connor, Spurr and Chambers rate their chances of displacing Chimbonda. All things being equal, given the policy, the imports will get the nod. How many players will stay or sign up in the future when selection is on these terms?

At best the shop window will display a variety of goods. Some may be eminently saleable and considerably more competent than the permanent players. Some might lack motivation, be out of form and not worth their place yet guaranteed window space. A cohesive balanced combination of talent which would constitute a solid team will not be a principal objective yet the retention of Championship status would be necessary for the success of the scheme.

To make the model viable the permanent staff would be a relatively small number of utility players who were infinitely flexible, prepared to sit on the bench and not ambitious for regular first team football.

Can we really see this working?

The Copps interview after the Ipswich game was interesting when he was asked about how the longer term players felt about this situation - he said what is important is that the shorter term players give 100% in scrapping to help the club get out of its current position - i.e. to get up the league. He seemed happy with the effort that Chimbonda in particular is putting in and also seemed comfortabe with Illunga and Diuof - but it had been very frustrating for him not to have started the previous games because he is committed to fighting for the club and he thought he'd done enough against Ipswich to justify starting the next game. I think these statements highlight that the club is effectively walking a tightrope. The only way that this approach can be successful is if DS is completely objective and fair when picking the team. If the short term players deserve their places, then fine - everyone happy. If they don't and yet are still preferred over the longer term players then motivation will go through the floor and the Rovers camp will become a very unhappy one. Justice is a basic human need, isn't it? Most of us can adapt to a new situation as long as we accept that it is fair and we will stay motivated to improve our lot - but we can become very negative and dissatisfied if we believe that we have been unfairly penalised.

This loan player comment is totally spurious as there is no club in the Championship and lower thatr can exist without fiv, six or seven loan players at any given time.

Most of those loans are younger Premier players (like we have done, JET, Lalkovic and Mason) who come and go for a month here and a mnoth there. How is their allegience different from older, established players on lomger loans looking for new clubs?

As for comittment, already Ilunga and Chimbonda have got oinvolved in the local community by visiting schools etc.
The interviews I've heard don't show them to be anything other than comitted Rovers players doing all they can to win football matches.

For God's sake stop being so pessamistic and neagative. Give the plan a chance, some of the players you are defending have proved not to be up to the Championship and should therefore be let out on loan to Div One and Two teams like Wilson to Walsall.

Sorry for the above typo's.

NewYankee, what you are missing, is the the fact that although loans are restricted, short term contract players are not. Nothing stops the Rovers having a team made up of loans and pay-as-you-play players.

That is the ridiculous extreme of the current policy and, no, I don't see it going anywhere near that far . But please be aware that nothing stops all 11 players being " shop window" footballers.

Donaldo said something that's worth repeating.

"there has to be a core squad of longer term contract players to fill in the gaps between the loan players"

That is the complete opposite to how football clubs traditionally operate. If this is McKay's concept and it works, then it is truly revolutionary. It will mean that long-term contracts will be cut to just a few players. How many such players are going to be content with an arrangement that puts them at an unfair disadvantage
of selection?

Apparently, Wilson has become our first disillusioned player. He's doing well at Walsall; is looking to extend his loan and sees his future away from Donny.

The more sceptical will say that Wilson has been offered one contract too many by the Rovers. But what when it's Dumbuya, O'Connor, Friend or Spurr who feel the same way? Will anyone be interested in joining Donny on anything more than a short-term deal?

Taking the McKay method to the ultimate, it won't matter. If it works, players will sign short-term deals at the Rovers and move on to bigger clubs. Ultimately, they may do 3 months at Donny on £2k per week; move on to another club on a similar length deal for £20k per week (trial period) and be back at Donny for a couple of months should it not work out.

It's an interesting policy that flies in the face of the conventional view that stability breeds success.

Wow, food for thought.

It goes with out saying we are in uncharted territory.
The working life of a footballer is fragile and short when compared with the majority of jobs albeit extremely well paid. I have said for a long time there has to be a correction in wages that clubs pay. The authorities in football must enforce what they promised fairly that clubs must live within their income.

This leads me to McKay's system:

Will it work? We just don't know and as I see it we will have to embrace it but reserve the right to be critical.
It will in time reduce the wage bill but at what cost in real terms?
Morale I think will fall in our long term contracted players when replaced by Mac's short term contractors. Our players are trapped and will not be allowed to give their honest opinions of the situation they now face.

If the system looks like being successful we will have started the biggest change in football culture since the Bosman ruling in 1995. I can see football agents making money, clubs reducing their wage bills and players security being reduced.

To sum up there are some good parts and some bad parts to it. I will reserve my final judgement till the end of the season when it has all panned out.

Fuzzy, Tou are way off base with Mark Wilson, he has not featured in the first team under Saunders but did play in friendly matches as Saunders states. Everybody will get a chance!. Under SOD Mark became only a fringe player and there are many and I am not one on this site who have slagged him off so, he has done what he feels is best for his family and ensured the bills get paid rather than be out of work.