Viking Supporters Co-operative
Viking Chat => Viking Chat => Topic started by: Donnyjim on May 17, 2014, 08:26:17 am
-
As this clip clearly shows. We have never commanded big crowds. This was the first day of the season in 1973. I've been watching since 1981 and we only averaged 3000 ish for years. :scarf:
-
In the sixties when we were a fourth division club, we averaged the highest gates in the fourth, third and half of the second division.
-
Mr Hubert Bates was still on the Board.
-
And if you look at the rest, nobody really had a crowd of note!
-
We were a poor team during the early seventies and were applying for re-election most of the time
-
And if you look at the rest, nobody really had a crowd of note!
Grimsby 10709, looks like they are suffering the lost generation effect now, either that or the Humber Bridge eroded their support
-
You only have to look at the crowds at the Keepmoat and see the age groups that go. They're either people of my age or young kids, there's very little in between. Neither of my two are Rovers fans, and I've tried, but when they were teenagers the Rovers were in the Conference and them, and their friends weren't interested.
It's not one generation missing, it's more like two.
-
And if you look at the rest, nobody really had a crowd of note!
Grimsby 10709, looks like they are suffering the lost generation effect now, either that or the Humber Bridge eroded their support
I've just looked at the same thing and thought exactly the same.
-
Conceeding a last min goal.. sounds about right!..
-
Never is not quite right Jim
(http://i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee376/Davosthorne/Picture017_zps1f1ffad1.png) (http://s1224.photobucket.com/user/Davosthorne/media/Picture017_zps1f1ffad1.png.html)
-
Never is not quite right Jim
(http://i1224.photobucket.com/albums/ee376/Davosthorne/Picture017_zps1f1ffad1.png) (http://s1224.photobucket.com/user/Davosthorne/media/Picture017_zps1f1ffad1.png.html)
Only one attendance below 20k all season against an insignificant West Yorkshire club and the highest in excess of 32k, how did they all fit into BV, even with the old popstand and the higher terrace on the Rosso end?
-
What about the 80's when the gates were 20k, or the 50's when they were 30k?
I agree with silent majority, we haven't lost 1 generation, we've lost 2.
-
You only have to look at the crowds at the Keepmoat and see the age groups that go. They're either people of my age or young kids, there's very little in between. Neither of my two are Rovers fans, and I've tried, but when they were teenagers the Rovers were in the Conference and them, and their friends weren't interested.
It's not one generation missing, it's more like two.
I started going in 1992 when we were proper shit and got worse. No bugger at school then went to Belle Vue I can confirm. Well there was one lad who used to go with his dad and they would stand on the Main Stand terrace. You could easily pick them out from the Pop Side each game because for most of the time there was literally nobody else in their standing section. Dark days.
-
Season Avge Att.
1946-47 15,339
1947-48 22,317
1948-49 13,842
1949-50 18,252
1950-51 22,838
1951-52 21,078
1952-53 15,862
1953-54 16,983
1954-55 12,385
1955-56 12,414
1956-57 12,375
1957-58 11,129
1958-59 6,664
1959-60 5,247
1960-61 4,754
1961-62 4,471
1962-63 6,303
1963-64 6,371
1964-65 8,570
1965-66 10,398
1966-67 7,906
1967-68 7,852
1968-69 10,211
1969-70 8,561
1970-71 4,478
1971-72 4,125
1972-73 2,259
1973-74 2,395
1974-75 2,975
1975-76 6,056
1976-77 4,631
1977-78 3,228
1978-79 3,000
1979-80 4,321
1980-81 5,412
1981-82 5,234
1982-83 3,541
1983-84 3,778
1984-85 4,103
1985-86 2,804
1986-87 2,408
1987-88 1,913
1988-89 2,159
1989-90 2,706
1990-91 2,831
1991-92 2,058
1992-93 2,411
1993-94 2,478
1994-95 2,585
1995-96 2,090
1996-97 2,091
1997-98 1,715
-
Post-war home average attendance (League only) figures up to the time we went out of the League in 1998.
Our attendances fell off a cliff from around 1969-1970, which was around the time I started watching Rovers. The first game I went to had a crowd of over 10,000 (against Bristol Rovers, so not much away support) and a few weeks later we had nearly 20,000 for the Boxing Day (1969) game v Rotherham.
There was still potential for big crowds as shown by the 20,000+ crowds for the Liverpool FA Cup replay (on a midweek afternoon) in 1973-74 and for the League Cup tie with Hull in 1975-76. We didn't get 20K gates in the 1980s but again there was potential for a big attendance for an important game.
I've always blamed the "Leeds United" effect as our period in the doldrums in the early 70s coincided with their period of greatest success. However, the drop from 1968-69 to 1972-73 is so dramatic that there must have been other factors in play.
SM is right though, we've lost at least two generations.
-
1957-58 11,129
1958-59 6,664
What caused that near-50% drop? Relegation to tier 3 I presume.
Anyone fancying graphing attendances and league position over the years?
-
But you also should look at other clubs' attendances in a similar period too - I suspect that attendances were great all round in the 50s as there was f**k all else to do on a Saturday afternoon, no footy on TV to make folks become plastic Mancs etc etc.
Makes the arguments over attendances in recent seasons seem irrelevant really...
-
THE watershed was that disaster of alienating Peter Doherty and the subsequent rapid descent through two relegations and the lower reaches of the Football League . The whole infrastructure of the club decayed from First team to Youth team to backroom through admin and commercial.
But then came the Miners' Strike .. the Thatcher victory.. the loss of work ... the disappearace of big employers like NCB, Plant Works , Pilks, International Harvesters , Ford ...
The decline in the way the club was managed was exacerbated by the decline of Donny as a thriving Industrial and Market town. Folk sort solace by linking their football dreams with other clubs that were successful . And therein lies the realities of the reason for allegiances of many so called supporters today is my analysis . Loyalty has been replaced as a badge by Artificial Allegiance.
-
1957-58 11,129
1958-59 6,664
What caused that near-50% drop? Relegation to tier 3 I presume.
Anyone fancying graphing attendances and league position over the years?
Raw material here- I'd have a go but I'm just about to go out for the day. Too nice to be sitting inside producing graphs!
Season Level League Position
1946-47 3 3 (North) Champions
1947-48 2 2 21st Rel
1948-49 3 3 (North) 3rd
1949-50 3 3 (North) Champions
1950-51 2 2 11th
1951-52 2 2 16th
1952-53 2 2 13th
1953-54 2 2 12th
1954-55 2 2 18th
1955-56 2 2 17th
1956-57 2 2 14th
1957-58 2 2 22nd Rel
1958-59 3 3 22nd Rel
1959-60 4 4 17th
1960-61 4 4 11th
1961-62 4 4 21st RE.
1962-63 4 4 16th
1963-64 4 4 14th
1964-65 4 4 9th
1965-66 4 4 Champions
1966-67 3 3 23rd Rel
1967-68 4 4 10th
1968-69 4 4 Champions
1969-70 3 3 11th
1970-71 3 3 23rd Rel
1971-72 4 4 12th
1972-73 4 4 17th
1973-74 4 4 22nd RE.
1974-75 4 4 17th
1975-76 4 4 10th
1976-77 4 4 8th
1977-78 4 4 12th
1978-79 4 4 22nd RE.
1979-80 4 4 12th
1980-81 4 4 3rd Prom.
1981-82 3 3 19th
1982-83 3 3 23rd Rel
1983-84 4 4 2nd Prom.
1984-85 3 3 14th
1985-86 3 3 11th
1986-87 3 3 13th
1987-88 3 3 24th Rel
1988-89 4 4 23rd
1989-90 4 4 20th
1990-91 4 4 11th
1991-92 4 4 21st
1992-93 4 FL 3 16th
1993-94 4 FL 3 15th
1994-95 4 FL 3 9th
1995-96 4 FL 3 13th
1996-97 4 FL 3 19th
1997-98 4 FL 3 24th Rel
-
1957-58 11,129
1958-59 6,664
What caused that near-50% drop? Relegation to tier 3 I presume.
Anyone fancying graphing attendances and league position over the years?
I've got it somewhere. Will upload it in a bit.
-
There you go.
League position is such that 1=Tier1 Champions etc.
(http://oi58.tinypic.com/mw4mc8.jpg)
-
Actually, the following graph is probably more informative. Instead of showing the Rovers' attendances, I've divided that by the average attendance for the whole Football League. So that accounts for big long trends of football becoming less or more popular nationally
(http://oi58.tinypic.com/30xdjz7.jpg)
You can see now that from the War up to the end of the 70s, our attendances pretty well tracked our league performance. It is from the mid-80s that the two diverged, and attendances were crap even when we were moderately successful on the pitch.
The obvious thing is to blame the economic woes of the period, but that doesn't quite explain it. Barnsley was hit as hard as us, but they had decent crowds when they did well in the 80s. Maybe it was the long-term air of neglect that permeated OBV? I dunno.
-
I think the state of the ground had a big part to play I used to chat to loads of folks who followed the club results but wouldn't go to BV because it was a Shack!
-
TRB is exactly right with the attendances falling of a cliff ca 1970, and as others have said that is clearly two generations lost.
However the most visible stand-out buck-the-trend part of both of BST's graphs for me is 1998-9 when we were relegated down to the Conference and doubled our attendances. It shows the backlash against the Richardson era, and the sheer relief when we found our club was not about to die. IMHO 1998-9 is the most important season in our entire history, and one person who never seems to gain the credit he deserves is Ian Snodin.
It is also interesting that the rise in attendances for the first 1.5 seasons in the Keepmoat is drowned by the increase in reaching the Championship for the first time.
-
Actually, the following graph is probably more informative. Instead of showing the Rovers' attendances, I've divided that by the average attendance for the whole Football League. So that accounts for big long trends of football becoming less or more popular nationally
Great use of stats BST. The only thing that doesn't allow for is the league position or number of games won, and the quantum leaps made between leagues, all of which are factors influencing our crowds.
I think most of the factors people have mentioned are important, and all the club can do is work on the kind of things it has done which put it in the best position to maximise crowds as the many other variables come into play.
Watching Rovers was not a fashionable thing to do when I was at school (70s), in fact it felt a bit grubby even if affordable. That suited me, not most people. I think that's changed significantly - both in being more fashionable, and less affordable.
-
As this clip clearly shows. We have never commanded big crowds. This was the first day of the season in 1973. I've been watching since 1981 and we only averaged 3000 ish for years. :scarf:
A brace from Alan Warboys for Bristol Rovers!
-
Smash and Grab.
And did you spot the friendly against Third Lanark? Another badly used club. They died though. Like Clydebank did a generation later. I believe Third Lanark's ground is still there.
BobG
-
Smash and Grab.
And did you spot the friendly against Third Lanark? Another badly used club. They died though. Like Clydebank did a generation later. I believe Third Lanark's ground is still there.
BobG
Cathkin Park record attendance 45,554 v Rangers
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nWeXr4ZL9A4
(http://www.footballgroundguide.com/old-grounds-and-stands/cathkin22.jpg)
-
In the early 80's Rovers could quickly put four or five thousand on a crowd with three or four wins. One defeat though and they all quickly disappeared. Something for me went a miss in the promotion season of 83/84 and it happened again this century. In our first promotion at the turn of the 80's we were getting crowds regularly above 7,000-8,000 and there were 12,000 in for the final home game. In 83/84 when we won promotion again, we struggled for 5,000 all season.
Same again early this century. Crowds were up massively in our fourth division title winning season but dropped off in the third tier. Even the promotion season of 2007/08 it was only on average about 8,000 in a new ground. Crowds picked up in our first season in the championship but have been on the decline since and last season when we won League One, we struggled to get over 8,000.
I remember Peter Wetzel putting an add in the Daily Express in the mid 80's asking why fans stayed away.
We were playing in the lower divisions whilst Sheffield Wednesday were in the First Division, their neighbours in the second and so were Leeds and it was the same price to watch them as it was Rovers. No wonder it was easy for us to lose a few generations of fans back then.
You can see the trend though, our fanbase grew between 2003-2006 when only Sheffield United were doing anything, as both Wednesday and Leeds were struggling. Is it a coincidence that our crowds have dropped since both of them got back into the championship?
-
PS. I always knew when there was a decent crowd at Belle Vue. We had cars parked in our road (Rufford Road).
-
and when you could see no more bare terrace ( when we still had the big Rosso kop) it meant we had 20,000 .. that was late 50's.
-
Since the 60s, only occasionally were Rovers the talk of the town. It had to be something exceptional to tear people away from their normal lives. The same applies today. The difference since the Keepmoat is we have a stadium that can cater for ladies and kids. At BV, if the kids couldn't get to the front they couldn't see the action. Toilets? Say no more!
-
I can only remember on a couple of occasions the Rosso end being almost full. I remember Sheff Utd, Huddersfield and Rotherham coming to BV in the 80's and almost filling the whole away end.
-
The high post war attendances were maybe a result of a lack of things to do, people getting more into the football as a result of it being taken from them during the war years and finally a purple patch for Rovers at the time. Think the attendances post 50's are more reflective of where were at. I wonder how many teams were overhauled as a result of the war. Probably the majority.
-
1879
Might be a coincidence, but in both the examples you quote, there was a massive recession between the two promotions.
-
No-one appears to be factoring in the tribal element that infiltrated football during the Seventies. Violence and hooliganism became the norm and blighted the game. Missile throwing was rife. With open terraces, little in the way of segregation, no CCTV it was no place for families or women. Normal fans were driven away. Ee lad, but it weren't a great atmosphere. Lots of singin' and rawpin'? Er no. It was awful. And if I remember rightly only 16,000 turned up for the Liverpool game which was played on a Wednesday afternoon. And didn't the highest 4th division average came in a season when home games were staged on a Friday night.
-
TRB is exactly right with the attendances falling of a cliff ca 1970, and as others have said that is clearly two generations lost.
However the most visible stand-out buck-the-trend part of both of BST's graphs for me is 1998-9 when we were relegated down to the Conference and doubled our attendances. It shows the backlash against the Richardson era, and the sheer relief when we found our club was not about to die. IMHO 1998-9 is the most important season in our entire history, and one person who never seems to gain the credit he deserves is Ian Snodin.
It is also interesting that the rise in attendances for the first 1.5 seasons in the Keepmoat is drowned by the increase in reaching the Championship for the first time.
I couldn't agree more Dutch.
The Snodins brought respectability and credibility back to the club after the dark days.
They started from the lowest base in the club's professional history and I still wish they had been given a little longer to show they could bring success as well.
The Endsleigh Challenge Trophy final in 1999, watched by over 7,000, was probably one of the happiest nights I've had at Belle Vue.
-
No-one appears to be factoring in the tribal element that infiltrated football during the Seventies. Violence and hooliganism became the norm and blighted the game. Missile throwing was rife. With open terraces, little in the way of segregation, no CCTV it was no place for families or women. Normal fans were driven away. Ee lad, but it weren't a great atmosphere. Lots of singin' and rawpin'? Er no. It was awful. And if I remember rightly only 16,000 turned up for the Liverpool game which was played on a Wednesday afternoon. And didn't the highest 4th division average came in a season when home games were staged on a Friday night.
Liverpool attendance was 22,499.
Although we shouldn't discount the affect of hooliganism and the generally poor public image of football (a problem that continued right through the 80s) it would have affected all clubs, not just Rovers. And although there were incidents, usually at "big games" I don't recall Rovers having a particular hooligan problem- certainly no more so than other clubs of a similar size.
One schoolfriend once told me that the reason he preferred Elland Road to Belle Vue on a Saturday was because "there's no aggro at Donny." I think he was one of those who got a vicarious thrill from seeing things "kicking off" rather than being an active participant.
-
No-one appears to be factoring in the tribal element that infiltrated football during the Seventies. Violence and hooliganism became the norm and blighted the game. Missile throwing was rife. With open terraces, little in the way of segregation, no CCTV it was no place for families or women. Normal fans were driven away. Ee lad, but it weren't a great atmosphere. Lots of singin' and rawpin'? Er no. It was awful. And if I remember rightly only 16,000 turned up for the Liverpool game which was played on a Wednesday afternoon. And didn't the highest 4th division average came in a season when home games were staged on a Friday night.
Liverpool attendance was 22,499.
Although we shouldn't discount the affect of hooliganism and the generally poor public image of football (a problem that continued right through the 80s) it would have affected all clubs, not just Rovers. And although there were incidents, usually at "big games" I don't recall Rovers having a particular hooligan problem- certainly no more so than other clubs of a similar size.
One schoolfriend once told me that the reason he preferred Elland Road to Belle Vue on a Saturday was because "there's no aggro at Donny." I think he was one of those who got a vicarious thrill from seeing things "kicking off" rather than being an active participant.
And it was played on a Wednesday because of the winter of Discontent, a lot of people were either on strike or on short time.
-
Strictly speaking, the "winter of discontent" was 1978-79. But in early 1974 there was a lengthy dispute between the Coal Board and the NUM which led to the "three day week" and eventually to Ted Heath calling a General Election- which he lost.
There were a lot of people either on strike or for whom Wednesday was a non-working day. Also the game could not be played in the evening as floodlights could not be used. Sadly as a schoolboy at the time we did not get the "benefit" of the three day week and our headmaster made it clear that he'd be watching very carefully for those who were absent that afternoon. So I missed the game, although my dad (who worked shifts) was able to go.
-
I'm 33. Whilst theres no set age at which someone starts following a club or attending games I'd say the teenage years are a good bracket to focus on meaning 1993-1999 is the age that me and my friends started choosing clubs and attending games. During that time I progressed through 3 schools and I'd say during that time I encountered barely 10 die hard Rovers fans and another 20-30 who would attend casually. Based on that and the apathy of the rest of my classmates I'll always have the gut feeling that we lost a generation of fans. There was even a handful who found the actions of Richardson quite funny and that the club were a joke.
It would be very interesting to see our season ticket base broke down by age bracket <20, 20-30, 30-40 etc to see if theres a dip in certain brackets.
-
No-one appears to be factoring in the tribal element that infiltrated football during the Seventies. Violence and hooliganism became the norm and blighted the game. Missile throwing was rife. With open terraces, little in the way of segregation, no CCTV it was no place for families or women. Normal fans were driven away. Ee lad, but it weren't a great atmosphere. Lots of singin' and rawpin'? Er no. It was awful. And if I remember rightly only 16,000 turned up for the Liverpool game which was played on a Wednesday afternoon. And didn't the highest 4th division average came in a season when home games were staged on a Friday night.
Liverpool attendance was 22,499.
Although we shouldn't discount the affect of hooliganism and the generally poor public image of football (a problem that continued right through the 80s) it would have affected all clubs, not just Rovers. And although there were incidents, usually at "big games" I don't recall Rovers having a particular hooligan problem- certainly no more so than other clubs of a similar size.
One schoolfriend once told me that the reason he preferred Elland Road to Belle Vue on a Saturday was because "there's no aggro at Donny." I think he was one of those who got a vicarious thrill from seeing things "kicking off" rather than being an active participant.
And it was played on a Wednesday because of the winter of Discontent, a lot of people were either on strike or on short time.
I was on the night shift at Rockware at the time and we went to Liverpool on the Saturday and then the home game on the Wednesday.
If you believe that there were only 22,499 then you are mistaken. There were certainly more than that there. :scarf:
-
No-one appears to be factoring in the tribal element that infiltrated football during the Seventies. Violence and hooliganism became the norm and blighted the game. Missile throwing was rife. With open terraces, little in the way of segregation, no CCTV it was no place for families or women. Normal fans were driven away. Ee lad, but it weren't a great atmosphere. Lots of singin' and rawpin'? Er no. It was awful. And if I remember rightly only 16,000 turned up for the Liverpool game which was played on a Wednesday afternoon. And didn't the highest 4th division average came in a season when home games were staged on a Friday night.
Liverpool attendance was 22,499.
Although we shouldn't discount the affect of hooliganism and the generally poor public image of football (a problem that continued right through the 80s) it would have affected all clubs, not just Rovers. And although there were incidents, usually at "big games" I don't recall Rovers having a particular hooligan problem- certainly no more so than other clubs of a similar size.
One schoolfriend once told me that the reason he preferred Elland Road to Belle Vue on a Saturday was because "there's no aggro at Donny." I think he was one of those who got a vicarious thrill from seeing things "kicking off" rather than being an active participant.
And it was played on a Wednesday because of the winter of Discontent, a lot of people were either on strike or on short time.
I was on the night shift at Rockware at the time and we went to Liverpool on the Saturday and then the home game on the Wednesday.
If you believe that there were only 22,499 then you are mistaken. There were certainly more than that there. :scarf:
My father in law ended up being a supervisor at Rockware, and my Uncle worked there for many years as well
-
If you believe that there were only 22,499 then you are mistaken. There were certainly more than that there.
That's possibly true but I am only quoting the official attendance. Gates were often understated in those days. Nowadays when clubs seem to work on the basis of "tickets sold" it seems more common for attendances to be overstated.
-
Thing is, it's not just us, every team in Donny gets terrible gates, for a town of it's size there's a problem but how do you change it?? I don't know
-
The majority of people in donny cannot afford it. No other reason.
-
The majority of people in donny cannot afford it. No other reason.
I don't think that's entirely true, there are clubs in depressed areas of a similar size that have maintained higher average attendances than Rovers. Blackburn and Burnley for instance.
Geography and history have a part to play, other factors too.
-
difference being that they are ambitious, whereas we are where the board want us to be!
-
difference being that they are ambitious, whereas we are where the board want us to be!
What complete and utter tosh!!
-
Difference being that they have a 50-100 year heritage that cements the local football team into every sinew of kids as they are growing up.,
Whereas we had a handful of decent years in the 50s and 60s, bookended by utter dogshite for a century.
Comparing us to Burnley or Blackburn is f**king daft.
If Doncaster Rovers had been a top flight club for most of the period 1890-1980, then got back to the top flight a few years ago (like Burnley)...
Or if we'd been in the top 2 levels for most of our existence, winning the PL 20 years ago (like Blackburn)...
...I suspect that we'd have a bit better than 6-7k home fans at the KMS.
But we didn't. So comparisons like that are daft. f**king daft.
-
The point I was trying to make was if Rovers had won the FA Cup a couple of times back in the nineteenth century, the club would have cemented a bedrock of support for generations to come and things might have been different.
It is the clubs relative failure over it's entire history that makes it so much harder to sell the club to the town now in what is a golden era.
-
I understood the point you were making, RD. But in the case of Burnley and Blackburn they have both enjoyed a lot more success since the second world war than we have.
If you're looking for a team that won things in the dim and distant past, try Bury who won the FA Cup twice in the 1900s. Without looking it up I can guarantee that their crowds will be smaller than ours.
Truth is, there are all sorts of reasons as to why we don't seem to attract the level of support that we should (or think we should). I still believe that long period from 1958 until 2003 when we won nothing of note and a successful period was a few seasons in the Third Tier did immense damage to our support base.
-
The lost generation exists, I know, I'm one of them.
My grandad attended between 1948 up until he died a couple of years ago but did stop going in the 70s when he said "all the trouble started" so it must have been pretty bad.
-
Difference being that they have a 50-100 year heritage that cements the local football team into every sinew of kids as they are growing up.,
Whereas we had a handful of decent years in the 50s and 60s, bookended by utter dogshite for a century.
Comparing us to Burnley or Blackburn is f***ing daft.
If Doncaster Rovers had been a top flight club for most of the period 1890-1980, then got back to the top flight a few years ago (like Burnley)...
Or if we'd been in the top 2 levels for most of our existence, winning the PL 20 years ago (like Blackburn)...
...I suspect that we'd have a bit better than 6-7k home fans at the KMS.
But we didn't. So comparisons like that are daft. f***ing daft.
Just as a matter of interest Billy, who would you compare us to?
-
What we have not mentioned but which is a big factor in OUR decline is the TV media. When there were regular crowds of 20,000 at Belle Vue there was very little Tv exposure as witnessed by the fact that you can only see Alick Jeffrey on TV clips ONCE against Bristol Rovers and for 30 seconds. The annual cup final was the only certain game on TV . To see the top stars you bought Charles Buchan's Football monthly .
Since the 70's ;football has taken wall to wall presence in every home. If your club is in the Premiership it benefits from the exposure .. if not ...
-
Savvy
Difficult to say. There are never perfect comparisons. You'll not find another club from a small-ish town, within a much larger but far-flung borough, with several bigger rivals close by and an almost century-long record of near-unbroken underachievement.
How about Walsall? Similar size town and borough. Similar big local rivals. Similar League record (we were a bit better 60 years ago - they were a bit better 30 years ago, we've been similar on average for the last 15 years).
-
Similiar size town as in geographical distance or number of inhabitants? I seem to remember JR comparing us with Middlesboro and Blackburn a while ago.
-
Savvy
I seem to remember Ryan saying several things that don't bear up to even cursory scrutiny.
Similar size as in number of inhabitants.
We ARE a similar size town to Blacburn and a Middlesborough. Of course, both of them have a far better historical record than us which kind of makes any direct comparison a bit pointless.
-
Oh right, I see, we have to use somewhere with a similiar size as us, but the same amount of ambition to get a more realistic comparison of where we fit into the grand scheme of things. makes perfect sense!!!
-
Savvy
No. That's not remotely what I said. I never mentioned ambition.
-
Never said you did Billy, after all its a word that's sadly lacking throughout the club nowadays! How do we compare with big clubs like Wigan, Reading, Swansea?
-
Well aye. I'll see your Wigan, Reading and Swansea and raise you Luton, Oxford, Bristol Rovers, Tranmere, Carlisle, Notts County, Plymouth, Grimsby, Lincoln, Stockport, Oldham.
Every one of those has had big advantages over us at some time in my lifetime, be it bigger gates, bigger catchment, historical success or recent success. Every one has been seen as a similar level club as us at some time in my lifetime.
I wouldn't swap our position or club management with any of them. Our ambition hasn't been so bad.
-
If we move the goal posts a bit and rephrase the question to 'Which other club has a 50 year history of mismanagement on the scale that DRFC has suffered?' Who would you come up with? My suggestion: Wednesday - but I don't think they've had it as badly as the Rovers.
BobG
-
Nobody had it as bad as Rovers during the Richardson years, but over a 50 year period I don't think we've done too badly.
-
Ye Gods man! You don't recall the 20+ year idiocies of Hubert Bates then? The fatuous Boards of the 70''s? Rovers are unequivocally amongst the worst led clubs of the last 60 years.
BobG
-
Ye Gods man! You don't recall the 20+ year idiocies of Hubert Bates then? The fatuous Boards of the 70''s? Rovers are unequivocally amongst the worst led clubs of the last 60 years.
BobG
Bob, please enlighten us about the "the 20+ year idiocies of Hubert Bates", and I don't mean the usual hearsay about him being anti-Catholic/anti-Irish.
Have you got anything else?
-
He sounds like a serial killer with that name.
-
Hubert Bates was much maligned for being frugal with his money, which compared to our present board was somewhat limited. His lack of desire to take Rovers to the next level (up) resulted in the Rovers fans hating him, some still to this day. Funny though how these same people consider the present day frugality to be the correct policy!
-
Hubert Bates was much maligned for being frugal with his money, which compared to our present board was somewhat limited. His lack of desire to take Rovers to the next level (up) resulted in the Rovers fans hating him, some still to this day. Funny though how these same people consider the present day frugality to be the correct policy!
Is the frugality of that period really comparable to the current situation? I think investment at the moment is proportionally higher now, however you measure it.
-
So are the rewards.
-
So are the risks.
-
So is the risk of lacking risks. It tends to lead to relegation.
-
So is the risk of lacking risks. It tends to lead to relegation.
Apart from the season before last when virtually a whole squad was recruited whilst cutting the playing budget when we got promoted. Yet this season when a bit of money was thrown at it during the January transfer window we got relegated!
-
The difference there was paying peanuts for a league one side which wouldn't have stood a chance in the championship. To survive in the Championship you have to invest competitively, or get relegated.
-
The difference there was paying peanuts for a league one side which wouldn't have stood a chance in the championship. To survive in the Championship you have to invest competitively, or get relegated.
Everyone seemed to think we invested well in the January transfer window, yet we got relegated
-
Investment doesn't guarantee success but the lack of it does guarantee failure.
-
Strangely enough our biggest spend ever on players salaries was during the 2011/12 season, otherwise known as the experiment. That £10m had us relegated with several games to go. So much for ambition and reaching out for the PL.
-
Investment doesn't guarantee success but the lack of it does guarantee failure.
Here we go round in a full circle again, the L1 title was a failure then?
-
Investment doesn't guarantee success but the lack of it does guarantee failure.
Here we go round in a full circle again, the L1 title was a failure then?
No it was a huge success, based on a massive amount of luck.
-
Investment doesn't guarantee success but the lack of it does guarantee failure.
Here we go round in a full circle again, the L1 title was a failure then?
No it was a huge success, based on a massive amount of luck.
But you said lack of investment guarantee's failure, in this case it did n't guarantee it
-
But it does, and it did - eventually!
-
But it does, and it did - eventually!
When did failure eventually occur?
-
But it does, and it did - eventually!
When did failure eventually occur?
When we couldn't sustain our Championship status.
Are you saying we won the League one title BECAUSE of our lack of investment, or DESPITE it?
-
But it does, and it did - eventually!
When did failure eventually occur?
When we couldn't sustain our Championship status.
Are you saying we won the League one title BECAUSE of our lack of investment, or DESPITE it?
We're getting there, the first time we lost our championship status we invested heavily in the experiment, when we bounced straight back we had a vastly reduced budget (less investment), by your reasoning we should have failed, we didn't. The second time we lost our championship status we invested in players like Miete, Tamas, Sharp and extended Wellens contract, but still got relegated, where you say we were lucky to win L1, I'll counter that with we were unlucky to be relegated.
-
Ye Gods man! You don't recall the 20+ year idiocies of Hubert Bates then? The fatuous Boards of the 70''s? Rovers are unequivocally amongst the worst led clubs of the last 60 years.
BobG
Bates was a peripheral figure on the Board for many of those years - just another director with not a massive amountl of influence.
There was a period when he did seem to be dictating matters in not a good way but I don't think he was an ogre who affected us for decades.
Does anyone remember if and when he was chairman?
-
I was of the understanding that the experiment was the cheapest option for survival! if that was heavy investment it surely wasn't financial, was it?
The vastly reduced budget for the following league one season proved to be enough to win the league, albeit rather fortunately. That just proves the difference in the quality of the two leagues more than anything else.
We did buy some quality players last season, and at one bit it looked like we would survive, despite the injuries/lack of strength in depth/biased refereeing, etc. It turned out the squad wasn't strong enough to overcome those elements though.
Perhaps just a little more money spent might have pulled us up to a mid-table position, thus benefitting the overall investment.
-
Maybe so - but I think (and I may well be very left field here) that pd's january requests were for the board to fund deals for sharp, meite and tamas with should have been enough to see us safe - we got his targets and unfortunately still came up short. The board (according to both pd and gb) have pretty much always given pd what he asked for - maybe (and it's pure speculation obviously) asking for a couple more players would've delivered! Let's not forget we lost khumalo, picked up bowery, lost sharp to indiscipline and wellens to injury! I think the board carried out the manager's requests and would've gone further had the right questions been asked! We should've been safe with games to spare but various things transpired against us - tough to take but we got up the previous season in a similar manner although we should've (in my opinion) been up well before we were as well as safe well before we weren't the following season - is there any blame attached to anyone - probably not!
-
BB
Lack of strength in depth last season?
Turnbull
Johnstone
Wabara
Quinn
Neill
Tamas
Jones
Khumalo
McCullough
Meite
Husband
Stevens
Cotterill
Duffy
Forrester
Coppinger
Wellens
Keegan
Furman
Brown
Robinson
Macheda
Sharp
Bowery
24 players there. Every one of them was capable of doing a job in a lower-table Championship side. Not one of them was out of their depth in a side finishing in, say 18th place. Most are a good bit better than that.
How much more strength or depth do you think we should have had?
-
When was every member of that squad available for selection at any one time? When was every member of that squad at the club at one time?!!
I'd have quite liked to see a Mecheda/Sharp combination..........Jones/Tamas........Fernandez/Forrester......
-
BB
You're missing the point. We couldn't possibly have a squad of that quality and depth at any given time. The point is that we invested to bring in players of that quality as and when we needed them.
I'm saying to you, how far over and above that investment do you think we should have gone?
-
And you're missing my point, which is the quality of the squad at any one time wasn't good enough to be safe from relegation. That squad might well have been impressive to us, but I doubt many other Championship team's supporters would be so content with it.
-
Tough one to call! In my opinion 5 (technically 6 I suppose) games probably condemned us to our fate.
Home draw with Barnsley
Away loss to Yeovil
Home losses to Brum and Bolton
and the unfortunate happenings away at Charlton.
1 point (eventually) from those 18 were significant.
On the flip side tho there were other unexpected good results too!
-
Strangely enough our biggest spend ever on players salaries was during the 2011/12 season, otherwise known as the experiment. That £10m had us relegated with several games to go. So much for ambition and reaching out for the PL.
As I recall, that investment was aimed at keeping us in the division not on getting us promoted to the Premiership!!!
-
BB
We ultimately went down because of two dreadful runs. One in Dec, one in April.
In both cases, we were hit by injuries or loss of form from key players in those spells, at a time when we didn't have the option of bringing in new faces.
Now, you might say that we should have had another 5-6 Championship quality players in the squad, who would have taken £5k a week to warm the bench if we hadn't been hammered by injuries. They would have been cover - an insurance policy against the sort of injury problems that we ended up dealing with.
Maybe you're right. Maybe we should have spent another £1.5m on wages as insurance.
Just suppose that we HAD done that, and we'd been even more unlucky with injuries and still gone down. Would you have been happy to accept that the club had done its best and had just had a bad rub? Or would you still be complaining that not enough had been spent?
Presumably there is a line somewhere? I'm interested in where you think it is.
-
Strangely enough our biggest spend ever on players salaries was during the 2011/12 season, otherwise known as the experiment. That £10m had us relegated with several games to go. So much for ambition and reaching out for the PL.
As I recall, that investment was aimed at keeping us in the division not on getting us promoted to the Premiership!!!
No. Definitely JR's attempt at the Premiership and he confirmed that. Just the same as his introduction of a hedge fund takeover as another attempt at the same.
-
Bristol City's losses in the season they were relegated were £13m. They went down with a total debt of £60m, which you could say was money spent trying to compete in the Championship. This is the debt on crowds of 16-17k. So if £60m wont keep you in the Championship - how much should we have spent on our average crowds (to bring this back to topic)?
-
The converse side of that being Cardiff who aimed high, have had 1 season in the premiership and come away with 62.5 million plus paracute payments for two years. Probably set the club up for the next decade, you'd have thought John Ryan might have thought of that..........hang on a minute!!!!
-
Strangely enough our biggest spend ever on players salaries was during the 2011/12 season, otherwise known as the experiment. That £10m had us relegated with several games to go. So much for ambition and reaching out for the PL.
As I recall, that investment was aimed at keeping us in the division not on getting us promoted to the Premiership!!!
No. Definitely JR's attempt at the Premiership and he confirmed that. Just the same as his introduction of a hedge fund takeover as another attempt at the same.
Can you direct me to the link? Must have missed that statement!
-
Ye Gods man! You don't recall the 20+ year idiocies of Hubert Bates then? The fatuous Boards of the 70''s? Rovers are unequivocally amongst the worst led clubs of the last 60 years.
BobG
Bates was a peripheral figure on the Board for many of those years - just another director with not a massive amountl of influence.
There was a period when he did seem to be dictating matters in not a good way but I don't think he was an ogre who affected us for decades.
Does anyone remember if and when he was chairman?
For me, Bates was very much the power behind the throne on the Rovers board. He did have a spell as Chairman around 1965-67. During that time Rovers did win promotion from Division Four but Bates was criticised by Bill Leivers, who resigned as manager mid-way through the promotion season citing boardroom interference. Bates was also roundly abused by Rovers fans after the club sold Tony Coleman and Laurie Sheffield in the first half of the 66-67 season.
-
Bristol City's losses in the season they were relegated were £13m. They went down with a total debt of £60m, which you could say was money spent trying to compete in the Championship. This is the debt on crowds of 16-17k. So if £60m wont keep you in the Championship - how much should we have spent on our average crowds (to bring this back to topic)?
I'll say it again.....Investment doesn't guarantee success but the lack of it does guarantee failure.
What part of the above do you not understand? What part of the above do you not agree with?
'Let's not fly abroad on holiday, the plane might crash'
'Let's not sign Lionel Messi, he might break his leg'
-
At the end of the day we were relegated on goal difference. No great shame in that for a club of our size. The main thing is building the supporter base... Has been the case for the past 40 odd years.
-
You make it sound like Cardiff were being run on prudent means and then all of a sudden decided to go for it and hey presto they succeeded. Generally you find the ambitious ones are the ones spending other peoples money.......until it runs out. A bit more cautious spending their own money. Of late there are more ciubs that have been badly damaged compared to those that have tasted the PL.
-
The converse side of that being Cardiff who aimed high, have had 1 season in the premiership and come away with 62.5 million plus paracute payments for two years. Probably set the club up for the next decade, you'd have thought John Ryan might have thought of that..........hang on a minute!!!!
or any of the other 22 chairmen of Championship clubs?
-
Bristol City's losses in the season they were relegated were £13m. They went down with a total debt of £60m, which you could say was money spent trying to compete in the Championship. This is the debt on crowds of 16-17k. So if £60m wont keep you in the Championship - how much should we have spent on our average crowds (to bring this back to topic)?
I'll say it again.....Investment doesn't guarantee success but the lack of it does guarantee failure.
What part of the above do you not understand? What part of the above do you not agree with?
'Let's not fly abroad on holiday, the plane might crash'
'Let's not sign Lionel Messi, he might break his leg'
The bit where you seem to think we didn't 'invest' in January. We brought in, among others, a £3m striker. How much more should we have spent that would have guaranteed to keep us up? How much should we spend that will guarantee us promotion next season?
-
Ye Gods man! You don't recall the 20+ year idiocies of Hubert Bates then? The fatuous Boards of the 70''s? Rovers are unequivocally amongst the worst led clubs of the last 60 years.
BobG
l
Bates was a peripheral figure on the Board for many of those years - just another director with not a massive amountl of influence.
There was a period when he did seem to be dictating matters in not a good way but I don't think he was an ogre who affected us for decades.
Does anyone remember if and when he was chairman?
For me, Bates was very much the power behind the throne on the Rovers board. He did have a spell as Chairman around 1965-67. During that time Rovers did win promotion from Division Four but Bates was criticised by Bill Leivers, who resigned as manager mid-way through the promotion season citing boardroom interference. Bates was also roundly abused by Rovers fans after the club sold Tony Coleman and Laurie Sheffield in the first half of the 66-67 season.
I that you'll find Tony Coleman went late in the season. I remember him getting sent off in a 4 1 home defeat and I'm sure that was about March.
The Rovers were on the crest of a wave when they finally went up in 1966.
The club must have been raking it in during the promotion season but didn't invest for the step up. Most fans felt let down by the board. More investment then might have saved us a lot of disappointment in the following years.
-
The converse side of that being Cardiff who aimed high, have had 1 season in the premiership and come away with 62.5 million plus paracute payments for two years. Probably set the club up for the next decade, you'd have thought John Ryan might have thought of that..........hang on a minute!!!!
or any of the other 22 chairmen of Championship clubs?
Ah but what if they end up like Bristol City? Surely they should think twice about taking such a risky gamble........The incentives are pretty impressive though!
-
Bristol City's losses in the season they were relegated were £13m. They went down with a total debt of £60m, which you could say was money spent trying to compete in the Championship. This is the debt on crowds of 16-17k. So if £60m wont keep you in the Championship - how much should we have spent on our average crowds (to bring this back to topic)?
I'll say it again.....Investment doesn't guarantee success but the lack of it does guarantee failure.
What part of the above do you not understand? What part of the above do you not agree with?
'Let's not fly abroad on holiday, the plane might crash'
'Let's not sign Lionel Messi, he might break his leg'
The bit where you seem to think we didn't 'invest' in January. We brought in, among others, a £3m striker. How much more should we have spent that would have guaranteed to keep us up? How much should we spend that will guarantee us promotion next season?
What 'bit' suggests that I seem to think we didn't invest in January? I thought our recruitments then would keep us up, but alas I was wrong.......the conclusion therefore is more investment was needed. Although..............................................
I'll say it again.....Investment doesn't guarantee success.......
-
You make it sound like Cardiff were being run on prudent means and then all of a sudden decided to go for it and hey presto they succeeded. Generally you find the ambitious ones are the ones spending other peoples money.......until it runs out. A bit more cautious spending their own money. Of late there are more ciubs that have been badly damaged compared to those that have tasted the PL.
The old saying in football is "standing still is falling behind" If the board don't wish to invest, why get involved in football because it would appear from what most chairmen say the rewards or risk don't match the return? It might be easy to spend someone else's money, but they won't be spending any of mine until there's a change of paradigm at the club!!
-
If my old Dad is to be believed, and there's not many who wouldn't, it was Hubert Bates Esq who was behind the departure from the Rovers of Peter Doherty. Bates didn't like Roman Catholics. I'd like to know why you believe that that departure wasn't a disaster of earth shattering proportions for DRFC Lifelong.
BobG
-
The converse side of that being Cardiff who aimed high, have had 1 season in the premiership and come away with 62.5 million plus paracute payments for two years. Probably set the club up for the next decade, you'd have thought John Ryan might have thought of that..........hang on a minute!!!!
I suppose most people would be tempted to think it was a gamble that paid off. But that would be a simplification of the Cardiff City story and you should, to get a good understanding of their predicament, look a little deeper. Cardiff started their push for the PL in 2003, so it's took them 10 years. You then have to look at the ownership of Sam Hamman and the debts he imposed on them, followed by Peter Ridsdale and his consortium that again took them to the brink of administration. Hammans loans came back to haunt them some years later. Rids dale then promised everyone the ' golden ticket' which was a season ticket for five years which was promised to be spent on players, it never was, it went to pay the tax bill.
Earlier this year their accounts showed they are £118m in debt. £66m of that is owed to their current owner, and vast proportions are still owed to Hamman, their life president. They're in a financial mess, they've had their shirt and badge changed. All for one season in the PL. 10 years of financial catastrophe and gambling all for 38 games of football, the majority of which they lost.
-
I've thought for a while almost every club in this country would be better off if the PL simply didn't exist. It's an effing disaster for most clubs who try to get there. It comes off, occasionally, for some - but that tends to depend on them having someone a bit special in the managers seat. That or, for the privileged few, some Arab or Russian with a few hundred million to throw around - which rather makes the point of the whole exercise rather bizarre anyway.
It would be an unmitigated disaster for DRFC if we ever managed to sneak a way in there. I hope we never do. Championship is trouble enough.
Many thanks for that summary SM. A salutary tale that far too many in this country shut their eyes to.
BobG
-
So Savvy, what in your mind is a blueprint for fulfilling your ambition? How far along the way do you join the party?
-
If my old Dad is to be believed, and there's not many who wouldn't, it was Hubert Bates Esq who was behind the departure from the Rovers of Peter Doherty. Bates didn't like Roman Catholics. I'd like to know why you believe that that departure wasn't a disaster of earth shattering proportions for DRFC Lifelong.
BobG
Bob
You keep repeating this unsubstantiated allegation. As I asked you earlier in the thread, have you got any other examples of Bates' failures etc?
As far as I know, he was the proprietor of a small sports shop on East Laith Gate (forget what it was called, Harrisons perhaps?) so I can't imagine there was a lot of money flowing from that - perhaps he was running the club on a frugal basis just like Bramall & Watson and therefore could not afford to retain players and maybe that was the real reason behind Doherty's departure.
-
If my old Dad is to be believed, and there's not many who wouldn't, it was Hubert Bates Esq who was behind the departure from the Rovers of Peter Doherty. Bates didn't like Roman Catholics. I'd like to know why you believe that that departure wasn't a disaster of earth shattering proportions for DRFC Lifelong.
BobG
Bob
You keep repeating this unsubstantiated allegation. As I asked you earlier in the thread, have you got any other examples of Bates' failures etc?
As far as I know, he was the proprietor of a small sports shop on East Laith Gate (forget what it was called, Harrisons perhaps?) so I can't imagine there was a lot of money flowing from that - perhaps he was running the club on a frugal basis just like Bramall & Watson and therefore could not afford to retain players and maybe that was the real reason behind Doherty's departure.
Wasn't Ray Harrison the proprietor of Harrisons sports
-
If my old Dad is to be believed, and there's not many who wouldn't, it was Hubert Bates Esq who was behind the departure from the Rovers of Peter Doherty. Bates didn't like Roman Catholics. I'd like to know why you believe that that departure wasn't a disaster of earth shattering proportions for DRFC Lifelong.
BobG
Bob
You keep repeating this unsubstantiated allegation. As I asked you earlier in the thread, have you got any other examples of Bates' failures etc?
As far as I know, he was the proprietor of a small sports shop on East Laith Gate (forget what it was called, Harrisons perhaps?) so I can't imagine there was a lot of money flowing from that - perhaps he was running the club on a frugal basis just like Bramall & Watson and therefore could not afford to retain players and maybe that was the real reason behind Doherty's departure.
Wasn't Ray Harrison the proprietor of Harrisons sports
It was called Harrison's Sports and Ray Harrison was there but it was Hubert Bates money behind it in the sixties.
A lot of their Sunday League team were Rovers juniors or ex juniors.
-
So Savvy, what in your mind is a blueprint for fulfilling your ambition? How far along the way do you join the party?
My blueprint would be as follows;
Have a boardroom full of people who have the interest of Doncaster Rovers at their heart, not people who openly admit to not having an interest in football.
Have a boardroom full of people who are committed to improving the club's stature within the football league, just because we have been primarily a lower league club in our history that should not be a reason for seeing our future as a league one club!!!!
Having a boardroom full of people who are committed to getting us into the championship and keeping us in the divison to the point where we become an established championship side, which I believe is where a town the size of Doncaster deserves to be, and, had it not been for a lack of investment we would have still been there now!
Employing a manager capable of getting us back into the championship and then having a target of 61 points a season (the average) in order to keep us in the division until we become an established championship team.
Having a boardroom full of people committed to providing the necessary funds to maintain championship status, and not expecting the manager to sell the family silver at the end of the season to balance the books. Please note that doesn't include putting bids in for Messi/Suarez et al, pure and simply players of the quality to keep us in the division.
This would give me the confidence to start putting back some of my disposible income back into the club in the same manner as I have done previously. I missed 9 games throughout the whole of the conference experience, including friendlies, Macmillian trophy etc, was one of the 29 or so who watched Adriano Rigoglioso score the screamer at Hereford that night and was at the Gateshead friendly with about 20 or so others!!! My first season was 1969 in the era of Ogston, Wilcockson, Clish, Flowers, Robertson, Hasleden or Rabjohn etc.
From 18 onwards I've travelled the length and breath of the country following this team, and we always used to talk in the car of being able to compete at league 2 level as it was, because Rotherham spent most of their time in that league at the time, we always used to talk about having a new ground to bring more people in, we always used to talk about someone coming in with a bit of money to take a punt on getting us there. We put up with the lack of skill and the lack of money, but then as now we would not have put up with a lack of ambition!!!!!!
-
Cool story, now tell me where you find this room full of people who are both Rovers fanatics and multi multi millionaires? Do you not think if they were out there they would have invested already?
-
If my old Dad is to be believed, and there's not many who wouldn't, it was Hubert Bates Esq who was behind the departure from the Rovers of Peter Doherty. Bates didn't like Roman Catholics. I'd like to know why you believe that that departure wasn't a disaster of earth shattering proportions for DRFC Lifelong.
BobG
Bob
You keep repeating this unsubstantiated allegation. As I asked you earlier in the thread, have you got any other examples of Bates' failures etc?
As far as I know, he was the proprietor of a small sports shop on East Laith Gate (forget what it was called, Harrisons perhaps?) so I can't imagine there was a lot of money flowing from that - perhaps he was running the club on a frugal basis just like Bramall & Watson and therefore could not afford to retain players and maybe that was the real reason behind Doherty's departure.
You need to remember that in 1958 the maximum wage was still in force for professional footballers, so they were nothing like as difficult to retain as they are now.
Even in the 1960s, the wages they earned were nothing like they are today, even allowing for inflation. By the same token, clubs did not need wealthy patrons to bankroll them, so it was possible to find a small-time local businessman like Hubert Bates on the board.
It really isn't possible to compare the directors of then with people like Terry Bramall and John Ryan.
-
Cool story, now tell me where you find this room full of people who are both Rovers fanatics and multi multi millionaires? Do you not think if they were out there they would have invested already?
Did you read my post? who said anything about multi millionaires? Apparently we have millionaires on the board already, but what good are they if they are not prepared to invest. The current board don't even appear to have a coherent view of the future of the club let alone be prepared to invest!!
-
Cool story, now tell me where you find this room full of people who are both Rovers fanatics and multi multi millionaires? Do you not think if they were out there they would have invested already?
Did you read my post? who said anything about multi millionaires? Apparently we have millionaires on the board already, but what good are they if they are not prepared to invest. The current board don't even appear to have a coherent view of the future of the club let alone be prepared to invest!!
I think this bit from your blueprint sort of says we need multi millionaires
Having a boardroom full of people committed to providing the necessary funds to maintain championship status, and not expecting the manager to sell the family silver at the end of the season to balance the books
-
So if they're not prepared to invest are the players being paid with magic beans?
-
Cool story, now tell me where you find this room full of people who are both Rovers fanatics and multi multi millionaires? Do you not think if they were out there they would have invested already?
Did you read my post? who said anything about multi millionaires? Apparently we have millionaires on the board already, but what good are they if they are not prepared to invest. The current board don't even appear to have a coherent view of the future of the club let alone be prepared to invest!!
I think this bit from your blueprint sort of says we need multi millionaires
Having a boardroom full of people committed to providing the necessary funds to maintain championship status, and not expecting the manager to sell the family silver at the end of the season to balance the books
You interpret how you wish fella!
-
Cool story, now tell me where you find this room full of people who are both Rovers fanatics and multi multi millionaires? Do you not think if they were out there they would have invested already?
Did you read my post? who said anything about multi millionaires? Apparently we have millionaires on the board already, but what good are they if they are not prepared to invest. The current board don't even appear to have a coherent view of the future of the club let alone be prepared to invest!!
I think this bit from your blueprint sort of says we need multi millionaires
Having a boardroom full of people committed to providing the necessary funds to maintain championship status, and not expecting the manager to sell the family silver at the end of the season to balance the books
You interpret how you wish fella!
How much would you consider the necessary funds to be?
-
Bristol City's losses in the season they were relegated were £13m. They went down with a total debt of £60m, which you could say was money spent trying to compete in the Championship. This is the debt on crowds of 16-17k. So if £60m wont keep you in the Championship - how much should we have spent on our average crowds (to bring this back to topic)?
Bristol city should NOT have gone down, any half decently run club could reach the play offs with that budget.
Perhaps Bristol city's relegation was linked to an ex player of theirs (and ours) Touched on by dn4ever in another thread about Said players seedy underworld life.
-
My blueprint would be as follows;
Have a boardroom full of people who have the interest of Doncaster Rovers at their heart, not people who openly admit to not having an interest in football.
Have a boardroom full of people who are committed to improving the club's stature within the football league, just because we have been primarily a lower league club in our history that should not be a reason for seeing our future as a league one club!!!!
Having a boardroom full of people who are committed to getting us into the championship and keeping us in the divison to the point where we become an established championship side, which I believe is where a town the size of Doncaster deserves to be, and, had it not been for a lack of investment we would have still been there now!
Employing a manager capable of getting us back into the championship and then having a target of 61 points a season (the average) in order to keep us in the division until we become an established championship team.
Having a boardroom full of people committed to providing the necessary funds to maintain championship status, and not expecting the manager to sell the family silver at the end of the season to balance the books. Please note that doesn't include putting bids in for Messi/Suarez et al, pure and simply players of the quality to keep us in the division.
That's an impressive tick box list, I'm sure we'd all say was highly desirable.
I detect your view of the current regime may be influenced by a certain outgoing chairman. Clearly TB and DW etc ARE interested in the club. They may not be as fanatical as JR but they are shrewd businessmen.
IMHO I think they invested in the manager that JR appointed sufficiently to keep us up. I don't think it's their fault we went down.
Shrewd businessmen are always on the lookout for new opportunities/new investors whilst trying to be as successful as possible with what resources a manager says he needs.
I think they regime we have is probably closer to what you desire than you actually think. The alternative of what the takeover had on offer was further away from what you desire once you remove the spin.
To date, TB and DW have put in more than what was on the table from those behind Sequentia (Who don't give a toss about Doncaster Rovers FC). TB and DW can sustain this club in the longer term whilst there is little evidence, and more uncertainty, about what the objectives of the hedge fund were once JR was out of the way.
I suspect there is very little that can be said to change your view. Unless a couple more very wealthy local businessmen emerge from the shadows then what we have is the best you are likely to get and personally, I am grateful to them.
-
Cool story, now tell me where you find this room full of people who are both Rovers fanatics and multi multi millionaires? Do you not think if they were out there they would have invested already?
Did you read my post? who said anything about multi millionaires? Apparently we have millionaires on the board already, but what good are they if they are not prepared to invest. The current board don't even appear to have a coherent view of the future of the club let alone be prepared to invest!!
I think this bit from your blueprint sort of says we need multi millionaires
Having a boardroom full of people committed to providing the necessary funds to maintain championship status, and not expecting the manager to sell the family silver at the end of the season to balance the books
You interpret how you wish fella!
How much would you consider the necessary funds to be?
As I said, sufficent funds that would enable a manager to achieve an average season of 61 points! Given that the long term ambition of the club would be to increase the fan base by being one of the "vogue" clubs. Let's face it the other local clubs who historical have played at a higher level and therefore attracted the interest of younger supporters (Leeds and Sheff Wed) are both doing their best to put them our way. Don't forget if we'd have stayed up, we'd have been at their level, so rather than be frowned upon as lower league minions, we'd have been eating at the same table as them! Up to 4 years ago I thought that this WAS the glorious plan, how wrong was I.
-
Aye I'm sure they couldn't get us relegated fast enough.
-
Cool story, now tell me where you find this room full of people who are both Rovers fanatics and multi multi millionaires? Do you not think if they were out there they would have invested already?
Did you read my post? who said anything about multi millionaires? Apparently we have millionaires on the board already, but what good are they if they are not prepared to invest. The current board don't even appear to have a coherent view of the future of the club let alone be prepared to invest!!
I think this bit from your blueprint sort of says we need multi millionaires
Having a boardroom full of people committed to providing the necessary funds to maintain championship status, and not expecting the manager to sell the family silver at the end of the season to balance the books
You interpret how you wish fella!
How much would you consider the necessary funds to be?
As I said, sufficent funds that would enable a manager to achieve an average season of 61 points! Given that the long term ambition of the club would be to increase the fan base by being one of the "vogue" clubs. Let's face it the other local clubs who historical have played at a higher level and therefore attracted the interest of younger supporters (Leeds and Sheff Wed) are both doing their best to put them our way. Don't forget if we'd have stayed up, we'd have been at their level, so rather than be frowned upon as lower league minions, we'd have been eating at the same table as them! Up to 4 years ago I thought that this WAS the glorious plan, how wrong was I.
A lot of waffle to avoid the question, I'll ask you again, what do you consider sufficient funds?
-
We were crying out for a decent striker for much of the season. When Sharp arrived our results lifted us into 3rd place in the form league, until Wellens got injured and our main creative supply to the forwards was missing.
Had we recruited Sharp, or a player of similar quality at the start of the season, I'm quite sure we wouldn't have been relegated.
It was obvious from the start of the season that a proven striker was needed, so it isn't a case of hindsight.
What's more, the investment of a couple of million quid in a new striker pre-season would have probably kept us up, and paid for itself about three times over by holding onto the six million quid lost due to our impending relegation.
-
If my old Dad is to be believed, and there's not many who wouldn't, it was Hubert Bates Esq who was behind the departure from the Rovers of Peter Doherty. Bates didn't like Roman Catholics. I'd like to know why you believe that that departure wasn't a disaster of earth shattering proportions for DRFC Lifelong.
BobG
Bob
You keep repeating this unsubstantiated allegation. As I asked you earlier in the thread, have you got any other examples of Bates' failures etc?
As far as I know, he was the proprietor of a small sports shop on East Laith Gate (forget what it was called, Harrisons perhaps?) so I can't imagine there was a lot of money flowing from that - perhaps he was running the club on a frugal basis just like Bramall & Watson and therefore could not afford to retain players and maybe that was the real reason behind Doherty's departure.
You need to remember that in 1958 the maximum wage was still in force for professional footballers, so they were nothing like as difficult to retain as they are now.
Even in the 1960s, the wages they earned were nothing like they are today, even allowing for inflation. By the same token, clubs did not need wealthy patrons to bankroll them, so it was possible to find a small-time local businessman like Hubert Bates on the board.
From Tony Bluff's book (start of 1950/51 season):
" ...Peter Doherty now upped his demands on the supporters with a call for average gates of 30,000...money was needed for his progressive policies and that had to come through the turnstiles"
Seems like it was ever thus.
It really isn't possible to compare the directors of then with people like Terry Bramall and John Ryan.
I think you'll find I did exactly that ;)
-
And if the "proven striker" got six studs through his Achilles' tendon on day one? Or if the striker turns out to have forgotten where the back of the net is, like the one that Bournemouth spent £2.5m on. Or like the one that we brought in on loan in January.
What then?
Spend another £2m on another proven striker presumably?
-
All together now.......Investment doesn't guarantee success but the lack of it does guarantee failure.
We'll get there eventually!
-
All together now.......Investment doesn't guarantee success but the lack of it does guarantee failure.
We'll get there eventually!
We haven't had a lack of investment.
-
Cool story, now tell me where you find this room full of people who are both Rovers fanatics and multi multi millionaires? Do you not think if they were out there they would have invested already?
Did you read my post? who said anything about multi millionaires? Apparently we have millionaires on the board already, but what good are they if they are not prepared to invest. The current board don't even appear to have a coherent view of the future of the club let alone be prepared to invest!!
I think this bit from your blueprint sort of says we need multi millionaires
Having a boardroom full of people committed to providing the necessary funds to maintain championship status, and not expecting the manager to sell the family silver at the end of the season to balance the books
You interpret how you wish fella!
How much would you consider the necessary funds to be?
As I said, sufficent funds that would enable a manager to achieve an average season of 61 points! Given that the long term ambition of the club would be to increase the fan base by being one of the "vogue" clubs. Let's face it the other local clubs who historical have played at a higher level and therefore attracted the interest of younger supporters (Leeds and Sheff Wed) are both doing their best to put them our way. Don't forget if we'd have stayed up, we'd have been at their level, so rather than be frowned upon as lower league minions, we'd have been eating at the same table as them! Up to 4 years ago I thought that this WAS the glorious plan, how wrong was I.
A lot of waffle to avoid the question, I'll ask you again, what do you consider sufficient funds?
You haven't asked me before though have you?
-
The only football supporters in the country, right now who are totally happy with the level of investment in their club are Man City.
-
Is that an opinion or an actual fact?
-
It's an opinion and on second thoughts I think it's wrong.
There will be Man City fans who think they need to see much more investment to build on where they are now.
-
All this b*llocks about investment again, all well and good provided we stay within FFP rules. We can't take unlimited £millions of extra cash from the owners can we? Now in League 1, the FFP rules are related to player wages and turnover.
-
Well said IDM, it's a point that's perpetually ignored by the dreamers.
-
Just a thought though - in League 1, if we do keep the wages within the FFP constraints on turnover, does that then mean we can use other forms of investment to support the club outside the first team squad? By that I mean training ground or stadium upgrades (if required), youth set up etc - all expenses that would in theory come from all the club's income regardless of FFP?
This would free up as much of the turnover as possible for the first team squad? I don't advocate silly spending, but if FFP in this division only applies to turnover/wages, could we not use "investment" (or underwriting losses) for off field stuff?
-
All this b*llocks about investment again!
-
Its SO,SO, simple. Recruit 10 players for a million each, pay them 20K a week for a years contract, that's about 20 million all told. As DRFC lose about 5 million a year, its only 4 years losses rolled into 1. If successful 60 odd million comes to club ( 2 promotions ), if not, ah well, DRFC tried. :crying: :crying:
-
Now you're talking!
-
Well said IDM, it's a point that's perpetually ignored by the dreamers.
The dreamers, or the dare to dreamers?
-
I've had a dream........Dead vivid it was!
-
Stick to your 'dead vivid' dreams BB, I like you much more that way.
-
Bristol City's losses in the season they were relegated were £13m. They went down with a total debt of £60m, which you could say was money spent trying to compete in the Championship. This is the debt on crowds of 16-17k. So if £60m wont keep you in the Championship - how much should we have spent on our average crowds (to bring this back to topic)?
Bristol city should NOT have gone down, any half decently run club could reach the play offs with that budget.
Perhaps Bristol city's relegation was linked to an ex player of theirs (and ours) Touched on by dn4ever in another thread about Said players seedy underworld life.
City had the Championship's lowest turnover last year.
McIndoe left them several years ago.
-
Do you get a prize if you get more that 150 replies to thread? ;-)
-
Has somebody lost the brake for this roundabout? It seems to have been going around and around forever.
-
Bristol City's losses in the season they were relegated were £13m. They went down with a total debt of £60m, which you could say was money spent trying to compete in the Championship. This is the debt on crowds of 16-17k. So if £60m wont keep you in the Championship - how much should we have spent on our average crowds (to bring this back to topic)?
Bristol city should NOT have gone down, any half decently run club could reach the play offs with that budget.
Perhaps Bristol city's relegation was linked to an ex player of theirs (and ours) Touched on by dn4ever in another thread about Said players seedy underworld life.
City had the Championship's lowest turnover last year.
McIndoe left them several years ago.
Aye, but here's a spooky thing. Every single club that McIndoe has signed for has been relegated since he left them.
Jinx, ah tell thi.
-
I'll give you an example of the current mentality that stops Rovers and clubs outside the PL getting good crowds.
I was at a fund raising function for Retford United tonight and Paul Mayfield brought along some Donny stuff for raffle prizes.
A couple of people nearby won DVDs from the promotion season, now I'll admit it's not everybody's cup of tea, but these were on tables where blokes consider themselves football fans.
The DVDs were being chucked about from one to other as nobody wanted it, but they'll all be in pub watching Liverpool, Arsenal, Manchester's and the rest next season.
And that is a big part of the problem, it's all about watching big teams with a pint in your hand, putting no effort in on your own part to get to a game, putting no money in yourself other than buying ale, and deriding any other team apart from your own TV team as shit.
Sky has done a lot of good for some clubs and the profile of the sport, but it's also turned a lot of potential real football supporters into total halfwits.
-
I think that you've hit the nail on the head there Andy.
People used to have a pint go to the game then go to the pub and talk about it.
Now a lot meet at the pub and sit supping and analysing putting nothing in to their local team.
It is even more sad when they are sitting there with a Man Unt. Chelsea Arsenal etc. shirt on. Usually teams that they have had no historical affinity with.
When I was younger fans watched their local team and then had a favourite second team.
-
I think that you've hit the nail on the head there Andy.
People used to have a pint go to the game then go to the pub and talk about it.
Now a lot meet at the pub and sit supping and analysing putting nothing in to their local team.
It is even more sad when they are sitting there with a Man Unt. Chelsea Arsenal etc. shirt on. Usually teams that they have had no historical affinity with.
When I was younger fans watched their local team and then had a favourite second team.
And we get back to where we started actually. These guys are the sort of people who would have been growing up in the 90s when (a) Rovers were rubbish and (b) live televised football took off in a massive way, and fundamentally changed the way in which people "consume" the game.
That's one of the lost generations. The other was back in the 70s.
-
I'll give you an example of the current mentality that stops Rovers and clubs outside the PL getting good crowds.
I was at a fund raising function for Retford United tonight and Paul Mayfield brought along some Donny stuff for raffle prizes.
A couple of people nearby won DVDs from the promotion season, now I'll admit it's not everybody's cup of tea, but these were on tables where blokes consider themselves football fans.
The DVDs were being chucked about from one to other as nobody wanted it, but they'll all be in pub watching Liverpool, Arsenal, Manchester's and the rest next season.
And that is a big part of the problem, it's all about watching big teams with a pint in your hand, putting no effort in on your own part to get to a game, putting no money in yourself other than buying ale, and deriding any other team apart from your own TV team as shit.
Sky has done a lot of good for some clubs and the profile of the sport, but it's also turned a lot of potential real football supporters into total halfwits.
Thnk that clubs have got to think from a more business like point of view when it comes to supporters. Not one of the 92 league clubs have a devine right to the disposable income of fans, they have to realise that they have to have a product. People are not going to turn up year on year nowadays just because that's what they've always done! Take a look at the Supermarkets and how the big 4 have been shocked by the rise of Aldi and Lidl. Don't expect your target market to put up with sub-standard or highly priced poor quality product anymore!!!!!!!
-
By being a TV fan you miss out on so much.
By investing your time, money and emotions every win, loss or draw means so much, otherwise it must be more like watching a sports reality tv show, which runs a new series every August.
-
It's a tough decision to make when you're young with a certain amount of disposable income.
A 90 minute game at the Keepmoat (if I get a pie) can cost me £30 for what is generally a poor atmosphere. For the same amount of money I can have an afternoon in town watching a better standard of football with my mates and most of the time get my tea on the way home.
The lost generation isn't a Doncaster Rovers thing, its a national thing where young peoples priorities have changed. Look at all the out of town pubs being flattened around Doncaster - they failed to appeal to a changing market.
-
What you've written above just about sums up the problem. You'd rather get pissed with your mates watching Aston Villa v Stoke than actually support a proper club.
Don't you think pubs were open on a Saturday afternoon 30 years ago.
-
Don't you think pubs were open on a Saturday afternoon 30 years ago.
Actually no, they weren't. Shutting time after lunch was 3pm. All day opening didn't come in until quite late in the 80's...
-
Don't you think pubs were open on a Saturday afternoon 30 years ago.
Actually no, they weren't. Shutting time after lunch was 3pm. All day opening didn't come in until quite late in the 80's...
I think the pubs in the market place were ten until four on market days, Tuesdays and Saturdays. Race was great as well as it was 11 o'clock at night all week. :)
-
What you've written above just about sums up the problem. You'd rather get pissed with your mates watching Aston Villa v Stoke than actually support a proper club.
Don't you think pubs were open on a Saturday afternoon 30 years ago.
It is your right. Football was a lot more reasonably priced and wasn't paying for eye watering wages.
I'm a self confessed part timer. I work most Saturdays so miss the majority of the games regardless but don't and won't buy into this support your team at any cost. I have plenty of other hobbies away from football that takes its cut of my disposable income and will get to Rovers when I can afford it or when the price is reasonable. I won't make apologies for the fact I don't see value for money in a trip to the Keepmoat. I don't enjoy the experience one little bit like I used to and the closing of the singing section shows the club's apathy to trying to catch the young adult market.
I'm know there is plenty in my age range who feel exactly the same, it's the club at fault for the fact we'd rather sit in a pub with an atmosphere than a ground with none.