posted Sep 4, 2008

Unfortunately if the FA do nothing to halt the downward spiral of foreign owners coming into the league then clubs like Blackburn will struggle to maintain their position and the Premierleague will be entirely made up of city teams with large populations that the foreign owners can fleece for their own pockets.

I just wonder how many of the owners who have bought into the Premierleague brand have noticed the trend of diminuishing attendances at games (surely to increase with the credit crunch and impending 'recession') and introduced price reductions ala Rovers, Wigan and Bolton??

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

We do have to remember though that we have received a couple of big bonusses, Duff a £17m profit, Bentley £10m or so.

I don't have a problem spending less than Stoke or Hull as they are a long way behind in the first instance.

Also, though traditional in many ways you have to remember the legacy of Walker. I think it gives an amount for transfer business and there is an amount achieving interest that pays the difference between full capacity and actual attendance.

Furthermore, last years TV revenue increased was offset by the club reducing prices.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

But are attendances going down? Yes clubs like us do not get as large gates, but Chelsea is sold out every game now, which never used to be the case and i expect Man City to follow suit.

Because of this there appears to be no problem to the F.A. As in life it's a case of the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

Attendances mean jack to the FA hence the 39th game. So long as it's a corporate brand their ivory tower is safe and well...

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

I feel everytime a club is taken over that Rovers slip another place nearer the Championship.I do not know if i am the only fan with concerns but after the transfer window had ended I realised Rovers are left in a vunerable position relying on Paul Ince to maintain a worse side than last year in the Premiership this year.
The fact is there are now mega rich clubs out there who are waiting for the Xmas window to take our best players by offering their agents untold wealth.What chance have we got unless Paul Ince can work MH type of miracles?I am still disappointed that after 6 weeks without Bents we never looked like finding a replacement so any failure this year is down to our very poor summer transfer policies and the targetting of inferior players.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

I think I am correct in saying this is the same situation as last year, re-inforcing how well we did last year and how well we will again have to do this year to remain competitive and present in the Premier League.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

"I feel everytime a club is taken over that Rovers slip another place nearer the Championship"

So that would be why we finished higher than Citeh, the Barcodes, Sunderland, West Ham, Pompy and were only 2 points behind Villa. Even with all these takeovers we finished higher than the previous season.

We are a well run club, we do not need millions upon millions of pounds worth of investment to improve. We require a stable environment, committed players and a manager that knows the game, who can mould a team and commands the respect of his players.

What ever money is thrown around off the pitch, on it, it is still 11 vs 11 and the football will do the talking.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 4, 2008

i i agree with the rifle in a way, you can pump as much cash into a club as you like but could still fail miserably - i mean look at QPR (or crystal palace i forget which one) and they are the richest club in england yet are floating mid table mediocrity in the championship, sunderland and west ham have pumped huge amounts of cash into their teams and west ham are yet to raise above us (at a seasons end) since then and sunderland still look quite a poor team

money does nothing if you don't know how to use it, although i hate to admit it O'neill, Hughes, ferguson all know how to use money well, chelsea and ambromovich are also very good with their targets whereas liverpool have never really been - arsenal are a good example of a team with limited funds achieveing great things, they are quite as hard done to as us but they dont have the unlimited funds of chelski, manu, city and sunderland

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 5, 2008

I don't want to ruin your dreams or anything but just ask yourself how a club like Rovers won the Premiership and how did a middle of the league club like Chelsea win it and could win it again this season.Money Money Money without it your luck will only last so long.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Sep 5, 2008

Its not about ruining dreams, its about having a balanced view rather than an overly pessimistic view.

Rovers as a club has been steadily improving, sure where nowhere near challenging for the title, but if we had shown up every game last season and had a few more decisions go our way we would have finished higher still. The point is that without massive investment we have a capable side that gets results and finishes higher than teams with higher wage bills and transfer budgets.

Lets not forget the results we had against the top 4 last season. I don't recall us being outclassed in any of those games.

"I feel everytime a club is taken over that Rovers slip another place nearer the Championship"

Whilst that maybe what you feel, you should realise that this is not happening. The facts prove otherwise.

"and how did a middle of the league club like Chelsea win it"

Chelsea were regular top six finishers and actually qualified for the champions league the season before Abramovich bought them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FA_Premier_League_2002-03

add comment | complain about this comment