coopy100

I don't think anyone (certainly not me) is suggesting that quality hasn't dropped and that it is affecting crowds all over. The OF are suffering the same thing that all clubs are, other than quality reductions, the economic environment is biting hard and people just don't have the money to attend every game. Ergo, they attend the one's most likely to be competitive.

Indeed they don't have the money but many don't choose to go to games against the teams we generally compete against for league placings etc but do turn up for old firm games who are not our competition so I don't really agree with that. It would seem hatred of the OF brings the crowd out more than the promise of a competitive game. If the general standard of play improved then we would, I am sure, see bigger crowds.

 

I don't think that going to a 10 team league will do anything in the long run except cause an even further erosion of crowd numbers due to fan boredom in playing the same teams over and over again meaning less revenue meaning the fiscal reasoning you are applying to this will be a moot point in a few seasons. I also see that going to a 16 or 18 team league would be financial suicide so that can't be done either.

 

Either way I don't think that this change of numbers will have a big if any, impact and the only thing that will is a competitive league with a good standard of fitba being played week in week out. Anything else is just skirting round the major issue that affects scottish fitba at this point in time.

You would have to ask yourself where the logic would be in the move otherwise. McGhee was doing everything to reduce the current wage bill. This deal would be an opportunity to get a player in and reduce the bill by £1500-2000 a week. It's the only sensible explanation as to why McGhee agreed to it.

I think I see the flaw in your argument here.

Halfway through:

 

Been good so far.

Just watched the highlights, looked like a good team would have buried us yesterday.

Agree. Going by the highlights only hibs created a good few chances and our defence still looked quite pish. A decent team that can score goals would have beaten us.

Does anyone actually want to discuss a very important game in our battle against relegation or do you just want to rehash the same shit puns about a little spelling mistake?

Negative formations, tactics and playing guarded football is a global shift though. It's the modern game, very few clubs and even countries play genuine expansive football regardless of the stakes. Its competitiveness and relevance that brings excitement and crowds.

Indeed they are but I thought the old firm were seeing dwindling crowds as well. They are the only two clubs in the league that are truly competitive, with regards to cups and league. I think the quality of fitba on offer also has a large part to play on the amount of fans turning up. I don't think we are going to challenge for the league anytime soon but some decent play for the fans that go may lead to a bit of word of mouth and more fans come back.

Its been pish. First day was cheryl cole video. Pretty sure that set the tone.

Pitch inspection at 08.15am tomorrow. Hopefully the game is on and we can win two on the trot for the first time in what feels like a couple of years.

Players I would be unhappy to see leave - Fyvie, Pawlett, Hartley, Folly, Vernon, Jack, Robertson and Derek Young (low wage 100% player who is a good squad player).

 

The rest I wouldn't care to see go, hell I'd give some of them a piggy back down the road.

Pawlett is a strange one. Looks like he has the ability but also looks like he could be another Jamie smith in that he will be injured a lot of the time. As for the rest I still feel folly let's the game pass him by a lot of the time but could turn into a good player. Hartley may not have much left in the tank and unsure how much longer he can go on but I would keep him at this moment of time. Vernon is obvious and jack and five are just young uns so would definitely keep them. I wouldn't keep seek young though. As much as he gives 100 percent he's just not very good at football. If we are going to base our keeping of players on that then mackie would be a shoe in and I don't want him kept either as he's piss poor.

His cup record alone should be enough to get him on that list 

As much as I agree that his cup record was beyond pish I feel his league record alone, considering where we had been for the best part of a decade, means he does not deserve to even get a place in that list whatsoever.

Has Mulgrew been injured or was he just so pish at the start of the season he's been binned forever?

 

If players have to go who could it be? Ifil maybe, one of the strikers surely must go. Will Mackie survive another manager?

He was so pish against ict at the start of the season they forked out for another lb.

 

Got to be looking at strikers to free up wages so we can sign in a lb and rb. We don't need 780 strikers.

To be fair foster is as good a kirk broadfoot. Still kak though. If we get 500000 then I reckon we are doing well. Could be done with him just now but that is due to the signing policy of our ex manager rather than any indicator of fosters footballing ability.

For the record, in footballing terms I am in favour of a 16 team league not a 10 team league.

 

The problem here is that clubs have to balance up the risks associated with any decision. The risk you have highlighted that the product becomes more stagnant and therefor less desirable is a significant one. That said, it's a risk that may not come to fruition, it's speculative and however likely it might be its not guaranteed.

 

However, to take a decision that effectively writes off the income for 2 full home games, as well as 2 home game against the OF has an immediate and guaranteed impact on revenue. This, in a climate of austerity and already reducing income streams is just too difficult a decision to make for any business.

 

Personally, I would rather see the game invest in a more compelling and balanced product. To 'take the pain' as Bobo suggests for the benefit of the future. I would love to see a fundamental reshape of Scottish football so that those two disgusting and vile organisations that drag the game through the mire while bleeding it dry of all resource are forced to play on a level playing field. Unfortunately, it just isn't going to happen as long as the people who are trying to make economic sense of a business model are the decision makers. It just doesn't work I'm afraid.

I thought one of the reasons they moved to a 12 team league was public indifference was growing to such an extent that they needed to do something to freshen up the product so as to try and keep the fans going.

 

Either way it is a catch22. A larger league could lead to a further dilution of playing standards as you let lesser skilled teams in over a period of time, even if it is hard to believe there are such teams out there Another fear will obviously be the fact an already small pot is divided even further meaning less money for wages and a worse product. On the plus side it may alleviate some teams fear of relegation and encourage them to give youth a chance.

 

Ten team league could become boring as sorting through your sock drawer meaning less fans going which again reduces revenue which impacts on wages and standards fall again.

 

The only major way for anything of any note to happen is for a fair distribution of wealth from all revenue streams for all teams and that is not going to happen as it would threaten the old firm dominance and some clubs, like ours, survival.

 

Maybe he doesn't have a driving license.

Then he should get a train.

He is, Maybury is a rb.

ooops. I thought you were still talking about davidson. I shall whip myself into a bloody pulp as punishment.

Coopy, have a closer look, it's really just one bam constantly having the argument and yes it is quite tedious.

Aye I realise that but it doesn't help that you all raise to the bait though.

I was also under the impression that Davidson was a LB.

No harm in reminiscing in one of our better memories of recent years, I think most fans are acutely aware we haved moved on from Calderwood, hopefully we will be equally aware of the absence of Mark McGhee.

It is not the dewy eyed reminiscing I am bored of. It is the constant sniping at each other. We are in a shit state and have a new manager that we should all be getting behind, which I assuming we all will, and still the same arguements and petty point scoring about our ex ex manager continues unabated. Its been covered on all the forums over and over again and the same points are raised again and again and it is quite tedious now, in my opinion.

Brown supposed to be making a move for him according to Daily Retard. Decent player but always injured and at 34 a bit of short term fix.

Does it say anything about length of contract that will be offered? I'll happily take a short term fix at the present time.

Good result. Great game to watch but is it not time to move on from Jimmy Calderwood and what he achieved or did not achieve in his time with us?

Anyone who says McGhee ahead of Alex FUCKING CUNTING CUNT Miller obviously never followed us when that cunt managed us. 

 

McGhee was horrendously bad, undoubtedly, but McGhee would have had a hell of a lot more money to not spend on full backs had the aforementioned cunt never managed AFC.

 

The bottom line is that Miller held us in the same regard we held him.  The first appointment of Milne's regime; the writing was on the wall in ten foot high neon letters... 

 

The guy had 500 matches at Hibs and only won 95 of them, and yet we still hired him...

I'm glad to see someone else has the same cute little name for Alex Fucking Cunty Cunt Miller. He overwhelmingluy gets my vote as well.