|
Post by wiganshrew2 on Aug 5, 2010 14:42:54 GMT 1
I didn't realise how many clubs had gone into administration, either. It puts things into perspective, doesn't it?
|
|
|
Post by tvor on Aug 5, 2010 15:02:47 GMT 1
You are comparing Shrewsbury Town pre 1983 when all league gate receipts were shared with Shrewsbury town post 1983 when the away team ceased to get a share of home attendances. During that time we have seen many of the smaller clubs drop divisions and be kept there by financial restrictions, and larger clubs grow in stature. Just to add a bit of balance to the debate. This period has also seen many sides of comparable size and statute to STFC reach tier 2 and consolidate there for a reasonable numbers of seasons. Some examples are Southend, Peterborough (pre McAnthony's millions), Walsall, Port Vale, Crewe, Tranmere, Sc***horpe and Grimsby.
|
|
|
Post by ThrobsBlackHat on Aug 5, 2010 15:25:42 GMT 1
Just to add a bit of balance to the debate. This period has also seen many sides of comparable size and statute to STFC reach tier 2 and consolidate there for a reasonable numbers of seasons. Some examples are Southend, Peterborough (pre McAnthony's millions), Walsall, Port Vale, Crewe, Tranmere, S****horpe and Grimsby. Good points, although how many of those ended / will end in financial meltdown? Walsall is through commercial development of a new stadium. Sc***horpe is through commercial development of a new stadium. Crewe was through development of a youth system. Grimsby and Southend have been flirting with financial disaster for several years so I will leave them out of it, which leaves Port Vale and Tranmere which I do honestly think are slightly bigger clubs than us, and both have been skint. What Roland has done in his 15 years is the commercial development of a new stadium, and also help to develop something of a youth system. Results on the pitch are the final piece of the jigsaw, but Sc***horpe were building their operation at Glandford Park a good ten years before they went on their current run to the championship. Steve would have been there after 3 years saying the chairman had not been a success.
|
|
|
Post by nicko on Aug 5, 2010 16:21:33 GMT 1
Leave him alone. He's a Town fan, this a Town message board and all sorts gets posted on here. If you don't like, don't read, easy. It's my opinion Nick, nothing wrong with that. Steve has the chance to defend his position just like he does when he slates the chairman or doesn't stand for a minutes' silence on remembrance day. If you don't like what I write you can ignore it too. Yes and in my opinion I fail to see why anyone feels the need to comment on what Steve chooses to post on here, especially when it's content is usually interesting, sometimes relevant and worthy of debate, like this thread. Also why bring up the fact he chooses not to stand for a minutes silence? I do ignore some of your posts, especially if it's to do with golf. Apologies to the others for ruining a good debate. Anyhow, there's no doubt that RW's stewardship has seen a down turn in league status, but that was born of necessity and a sensible approach to how the Club was run with the resources available at GM. His long term goal was to secure the long term future of the Club by moving from GM to NM. This he achieved and it will be his legacy and he should be applauded for it, despite of any real/imagined/perceived/traits in personality and mis-management as chairman. It can't be denied Steve that during the past two seasons he gave resources to the previous manager to have a real go at promotion, which despite being garbage on the day, we were still in with a chance of until the 88th minute back in May '09. Fair play to you for sticking to your guns Steve, but on this you're so wrong.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2010 16:30:28 GMT 1
My concern Nick is that Steve is using B&A as a vehicle to promote his personal work rather than to contribute to the B&A community. If he was contributing to many other debates regularly and posting links I'd say fair enough but given that it's been more of a case of self promotion in recent times I felt it right to raise the concern. Good post otherwise
|
|
|
Post by Steve Rogerson on Aug 5, 2010 17:14:24 GMT 1
My concern Nick is that Steve is using B&A as a vehicle to promote his personal work rather than to contribute to the B&A community. If he was contributing to many other debates regularly and posting links I'd say fair enough but given that it's been more of a case of self promotion in recent times I felt it right to raise the concern. Good post otherwise No Ant, why don't you be honest about it? You just look for excuses to have a go because of the Remembrance Day stuff (which has been debated on here at length before) as was shown by you bringing it up though it has no relevance at all to this thread. If you want to have a go at me, fine, but don't hijack threads to do it.
|
|
|
Post by andygroundo on Aug 5, 2010 17:22:39 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by Steve Rogerson on Aug 5, 2010 18:11:11 GMT 1
Crikey, never even knew about that thread. My bookmark brings me straight in on the main messageboard.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2010 22:54:50 GMT 1
Gay Meadow was a quirky ground I don't really miss it now. You have no soul.
|
|