The profits the club has made over the years first went to clearing the debts and then transfer fees, I'm sure I'll be corrected but some has also been put aside for training facilities (I can recall Rule saying the club would put a million into it.)

Now with people threatening to boycott the games and merchandise those profits will fall.

So where will the board make the cuts?

Well the first would be transfer fees.

Then either playing staff wages (the salarly cap) or non playing staff.

So by boycotting your ensuring the squad gets or we get cheaper backroom staff.

So, as I don't know what salaries coaches earn, who's cheaper than Agar?

People are considering boycotting as a means to an end,ie get a coach in that can move the club and team forward,thus giving us some success on the field.
If this where to happen the jump in profits would more than compensate for any drops in profit incurred during the boycott,[which incidently I don't think will happen
As regards who is cheaper than our present incumbent,Well I'd like to suggest NOT MANY !!!

If income fell we'd either spend less on the cap or the coach.

I can tell you now Wayne Bennett would struggle to break the top 4 with only a million to spend on the cap.

Playing devil's advocate it looks like the boycott has already started (12500 for Leeds at home !). That said who knows how many more fans would come back thru the gates if we started playing a more attractive attacking brand of rugby ? For the sake of this point, imagine 2000 more paying adults at £23 a pop, thats £46k on one game alone. Can the club afford to keep him ?

A very relevant point.

But would our board personally fund the extra money for a big name coach?

That my friend is a completely different argument and based on the evidence available the answer is no

Agree, the boycott has already started, 4000 less for the Leeds game than watched the corrosponding fixture in September.
Will be lucky to break the 10K for the Crusaders game.
The board need to act quickly, a top coach would pay for himself imo by adding thousands back on the gates.

They paid 100k+ for a loose forward who wont play there much this season. I would much rather the club put the money into a quality coach.

As for who is cheaper, maybe Harris at Crusaders.

But who's going to fund a top coach?

Hull FC are self sufficient and work on a budget, if the budget is lowered then we'd stop spending the cap and lower the standard of players.

They did indeed but that came out of the budget.

With falling income those signings will be a thing of the past.

If the board is too short sighted to realise a new quality coach would generate a boost in attendance then they really should not be in the job. There is obviously still money available because we were offering money for Sammutt and Chase by all accounts.

Good, we have paid transfer fees for no reason.

And as for cheaper than Agar, a few people posting on here seem as clueless, some may even appreciate having some self-perceived power.

Even though I don't agree with the point your trying to make we would be better served being 100K lower than the cap and having a decent coach.

We may even wait till Horne is off the cap and use that extra 50K on a coach, if your right in us having a budget.

And we got Obst.

They maybe a few more bob spare, if the rumours that we are still looking for players is true, but tumbling attendences may see the board put that money else where.

Another load of scarmongering bull5hit. Are you on the same payroll as Paul M and Kosh?

Regarding the Boycott,Personally think it will only affect the Walk Up crowd,and yes our crowd against Leeds was clearly down on the corresponding fixtures from previous years,However we have 9000 pass holders who I think will still attend,I certainly will,unless other arrangements take precedent,the only boycott I am subscribing to is not to waste my money attending Away fixtures.
End of the year I would still expect us to pass 10000 avarage,that to me would not constitute a boycott,Think the penny would drop a lot quicker if we boycotted Passes,because if they didn't have the fallback position of 9000 passholders and relied more on attracting walk up supporters,does anyone honestly think we would have had to endure the DROSS we have in recent times.

I agree, I don't believe, if you're recruitment is organised, transfer fees are needed.

What annoys me is we have paid money for a waste of space, money for a player (too much money) and then play him out of position and then paid money for a player and kept him on the bench.

so, in all, we've wasted about 200K, all because our coach is better at sharpening shears and selling heather than he is coaching.

It both annoys me and pleases me tbh.

I'm pleased the board is backing the coach, I just think their backing the wrong one.

So what you're saying is that we should shell out more money as fans, lining the pockets of the shareholders so that we can one day use that money to invest in a decent coach? Not sure the Board will see an increase in revenue as a driver to sack Agar and spend more on a new coach.

"lining the pockets"?

I doubt they've made much profit from their shares over the years, whilst I don't like the board I don't think they are fleecing us.

I think some people go to RL games for different reason.

If the board want us to challenge for trophies every season they'll see it weather the stadiums full or not.

Nail on head, lets hope someone has the guts to stand up and admit what a mistake it was promoting Agar and make the decision to change.

Promoting him was not necessarily a mistake at the time.

Not getting rid of him now would be.

I don't see the obsession with a big name coach, we just need someone who will introduce more attacking structure to the side, get more out of the forwards and just get more generally out of the squad, after three seasons it's obvious Agar can't do this, I'm sure there are these coaches about who are not "big name."