a frightening thought - but it could happen (1 Viewer)

Forums New posts
C

covboy1987

Well-Known Member
In one corner, a minority at the moment you have the supporters who say wherever the team play then the supporters should follow (sixfields or wherever) as the club is bigger than the owners and then in the other corner the majority saying starve them out financially and force them back to the Ricoh. Who is right and who is wrong? Similarities have been mentioned Brighton and Rotherham, and you look at their stories but the nearest similarity i can see is Wimbledon. Below is a frightening thought which on writing at first a bit of tongue in cheek, then suddenly dawned 'this could really happen'
Are we the new Wimbledon Franchise Model of sorts? play in a different area attract a new band of supporters from all areas to add to the loyal bunch that will return, use the local young lads as ball boys and the whole family start coming along share a ground, and with another club have the local council (Northampton) increase the capacity to 12,000 straight away as reported with room to exapand (very similar to new stadium thoughts) and hey presto, you suddenly have two streams of income and then you could then further down the road call yourself a franchise name 'the Bantams'' 'Northampton City' 'Northampton Skyblues' or simply 'Skyblues' the bit about the word Coventry are proud city could be just a note in the record books - the league have insisted the club must be back in Coventry within three years then suddenly five years is mentioned - at the end of that long period the club might say we have a stable great fan base shared costs no need to go back to Coventry, we have nothing to do with Coventry it will cost us to much to build a new stadium,and it will affect the financial fair play rules - league says okay we are impressed on your set up you can stay in Northampton?
 
T

thaiskyblue

New Member
covboy1987 said:
In one corner, a minority at the moment you have the supporters who say wherever the team play then the supporters should follow (sixfields or wherever) as the club is bigger than the owners and then in the other corner the majority saying starve them out financially and force them back to the Ricoh. Who is right and who is wrong? Similarities have been mentioned Brighton and Rotherham, and you look at their stories but the nearest similarity i can see is Wimbledon. Below is a frightening thought which on writing at first a bit of tongue in cheek, then suddenly dawned 'this could really happen'
Are we the new Wimbledon Franchise Model of sorts? play in a different area attract a new band of supporters from all areas to add to the loyal bunch that will return, use the local young lads as ball boys and the whole family start coming along share a ground, and with another club have the local council (Northampton) increase the capacity to 12,000 straight away as reported with room to exapand (very similar to new stadium thoughts) and hey presto, you suddenly have two streams of income and then you could then further down the road call yourself a franchise name 'the Bantams'' 'Northampton City' 'Northampton Skyblues' or simply 'Skyblues' the bit about the word Coventry are proud city could be just a note in the record books - the league have insisted the club must be back in Coventry within three years then suddenly five years is mentioned - at the end of that long period the club might say we have a stable great fan base shared costs no need to go back to Coventry, we have nothing to do with Coventry it will cost us to much to build a new stadium,and it will affect the financial fair play rules - league says okay we are impressed on your set up you can stay in Northampton?
Click to expand...
i think this the wicked witch's plan. if they do not get the ricoh.
 
NorthernWisdom

NorthernWisdom

Well-Known Member
Wimbledon really isn't the closest at all.

For a start, Wimbledon moved from an area with lots of competition and high prices, to an area with no competition, and lower prices.

The only place CCFC could move in a similar vein would be Telford?

And even then it wouldn't stack up compared to... leaving an area with no competition and relatively low prices.

Parallels with Rotherham pretty strong, in that rent agreement dispute motivates club to leave ground, and embark (yes yes, I know it's not an exact parallel!) on building a new one.

Bottom line is however, there *is* no cash cow waiting for SISU to move the club to Northampton permanently.
 
T

theferret

Well-Known Member
People keep repeating this nonsense about a permanent move. Presently, we have about 1000 supporters willing to travel 35 miles to watch their team play its fixtures away from its home on a temporary basis. That might feasibly increase to 3000 or so if the team continue to perform well and surprise us all by making a play-off push (still highly unlikely).

However, the moment it became clear that the long term future lay in Northampton, the vast majority of those people would stop going. The people I know who attended the Britsol City game all believe it is a temporary move and would all desert the club if it deserted the city permanently. Nobody would watch CCFC if it became a Northampton based franchise. Northampton can barely sustain the league football club it already has.

There are 3 possible outcomes. 1. SISU secure the Ricoh at a knock-down price. 2. They surprise us all and follow through on the new stadium plans. 3. The club dies completely. There is no option 4 - the club relocates to Northampton, Telford or Helmel Hempsted - because NOBODY would go and watch it.
 
C

CCFC88

Well-Known Member
There are no similarities betwen our situation and Wimbledon, their move was initiated by businessmen in MK who realised that there was a huge market, by far the largest city in the country without a football league team, instead of building one from the ground they wanted an instant football league team. They effectively bought an illusive golden share.

MK is an ever expanding wealthy city, Northampton is not, with a football team and a succesful Rugby team, there is no way the people of Northampton would abondon either to go to SISU FC.
 
fernandopartridge

fernandopartridge

Well-Known Member
theferret said:
People keep repeating this nonsense about a permanent move. Presently, we have about 1000 supporters willing to travel 35 miles to watch their team play its fixtures away from its home on a temporary basis. That might feasibly increase to 3000 or so if the team continue to perform well and surprise us all by making a play-off push (still highly unlikely).

However, the moment it became clear that the long term future lay in Northampton, the vast majority of those people would stop going. The people I know who attended the Britsol City game all believe it is a temporary move and would all desert the club if it deserted the city permanently. Nobody would watch CCFC if it became a Northampton based franchise. Northampton can barely sustain the league football club it already has.

There are 3 possible outcomes. 1. SISU secure the Ricoh at a knock-down price. 2. They surprise us all and follow through on the new stadium plans. 3. The club dies completely. There is no option 4 - the club relocates to Northampton, Telford or Helmel Hempsted - because NOBODY would go and watch it.
Click to expand...

I think Option 1 or 3 are the only realistic ones. I wouldn't mind Option 2 in the event that Option 1 didn't occur.
 
D

dadgad

Well-Known Member
Yes, but we're applying the obvious logical arguments. There is nothing logical about Sisu. They appear to buck every trend, every sane move. They are reducing overheads irrespective of revenue. They're mad men - you cannot legislate for this.
 
A

Ashdown1

New Member
Some of these arguments though are wholly dependent on SISU letting the club benefit from its own footfall once they were re united with a stadium in its hometown. This particular hedge fund has shown through numerous actions and lies that they cannot be trusted. What if they got their undeserving hands on the Ricoh and it's lucrative contracts and funnelled all income streams into their own coffers and retained the football club on an unambitious League two budget henceforth. For me the football club is almost dead now anyway, for it to be controlled by these unscrupulous, distrusted and uncaring money grabbers long term is unthinkable. At no point in in the past 3 years have they shown me that they have any other ambitions for the club than using it to get back their investors money.
There has to be another way !!
 
stupot07

stupot07

Well-Known Member
We will not be a new Wimbledon. Tell me where there is a football clubless conurbation as big or bigger than Coventry and Warwickshire?

All this 'we're just like Wimbledon' none sense is just scaremongering.
 
NorthernWisdom

NorthernWisdom

Well-Known Member
thaiskyblue said:
enlighten me ? sisu and logical just don't go together, greed, lies , secrecy yes, logic never, not going to happen any time soon.
Click to expand...

At the risk of repeating myself.

The club, by rights, should be dead now. Any business that's not a football club would be wound up.

The club has no value as is.

The owners then have a choice of either spending a (relatively small, compared to what has gone before) amount to attempt to generate some value.

If it fails, the club still has no value.

If it succeeds, the club has some value.

This is merelty a stay of execution...
 
ccfcway

ccfcway

Well-Known Member
dalycov said:
There are no similarities betwen our situation and Wimbledon, their move was initiated by businessmen in MK who realised that there was a huge market, by far the largest city in the country without a football league team
Click to expand...

I think you will find COVENTRY is the largest city in the country without a football league team
 
señor Santiago

señor Santiago

Well-Known Member
coventry city ( all area under coventry city council jurisdiction) population census 2011 = 316000
wakefield ( all areas under wakefield district council jurisdiction) population census 2011 = 321000
 
T

theferret

Well-Known Member
señor Santiago said:
coventry city ( all area under coventry city council jurisdiction) population census 2011 = 316000
wakefield ( all areas under wakefield district council jurisdiction) population census 2011 = 321000
Click to expand...

Wakefield (the city) has a population of about 70K. The metropolitan borough has a population 320K+ but includes the towns of Normanton, Pontefract, Featherstone, Castleford and Knottingley - all of which comes together under the somewhat confusing name of City of Wakefield - which is really just an administrative area - but it does have city status as well, so technically I suppose you are correct. To clarify, the city of Wakefield is much smaller - while its urban area bigger.

This is all very boring, but strangely relevant. You are trying to inflate the size of Wakefield by including its wider urban area, and yet in another thread you say that a stadium just the other side of the city boundary (boundaries are just artificial lines that change over time) but within the Coventry Urban Area is not in Coventry and therefore you would not view the team that play there as a Coventry team. Just an observation.
 
señor Santiago

señor Santiago

Well-Known Member
Football is tribal and territorial for most. Coventry is coventry and not warwickshire.I appreciate it does not matter to some , it is more about the team than where they are based or represent. But i feel if ccfc set up home out side the city boundary, it will lose thousands of fans. We will have the case of man utd and man city. Man city playing within city of manchester, the other outside.

Area names and whats with in and outs is open to discussion. But we have to use official definitions. Wakefield city officially includes all areas listed above and has a population of 321000 listed in the census2011
 
letsallsingtogether

letsallsingtogether

Well-Known Member
But as a franchise what stops them selling up north of the border there are teams there that want to enter the football league.
The League have admitted only last week that they do not know if coventry will ever return home............As for the name they can change that anytime


watch this space.
 
T

theferret

Well-Known Member
señor Santiago said:
Football is tribal and territorial for most. Coventry is coventry and not warwickshire.I appreciate it does not matter to some , it is more about the team than where they are based or represent. But i feel if ccfc set up home out side the city boundary, it will lose thousands of fans. We will have the case of man utd and man city. Man city playing within city of manchester, the other outside.

Area names and whats with in and outs is open to discussion. But we have to use official definitions. Wakefield city officially includes all areas listed above and has a population of 321000 listed in the census2011
Click to expand...

Your argument makes no sense, but you're entitled to your opinion. Wakefield (as you define it) is just a collection of towns separated by miles of countryside. So, in your world, a team playing in Knottingley (separated from Wakefield by the town of Pontefract and 14 miles of greenbelt) would still be IN Wakefield, and yet you couldn't support a Coventry team still in the Coventry built-up area and only yards over the administrative boundary? Weird logic, but hey, we'll be back at the Ricoh soon so it's all academic (and luckily for you yards inside the city boundary).
 
D

dadgad

Well-Known Member
So, Coventry is currently Wawickshire and Northamptonshire?

Imaginary squiggles in a map don't mean nothing....it's all about tribal perception.

These perceptions evolve. Some would say they can change rapidly....some add that they already have changed....irrevocably. :(
 
señor Santiago

señor Santiago

Well-Known Member
i did not say i would support wakefield if i lived in pontefract . But i am saying that i would not support ccfc if it is based in bedworth binley woods wolston or burton green.

The question was the largest city without a football team in FL. Wakefield is a city according to the government, with a population of 321000. I dont know how many acres or miles of green fields it has
 
Last edited:
T

theferret

Well-Known Member
señor Santiago said:
i did not say i would support wakefield if i lived in pontefract . But i am saying that i would not support ccfc if it is based in bedworth binley woods wolston or burton green.

The question was the largest city without a football team in FL. Wakefield is a city according to the government, with a population of 321000. I dont know how many acres or miles of green fields it has
Click to expand...

The fact you would give up on your football club because it might potentially be a few hundred yards the wrong side of an imaginary line drawn by a civil servant at some point in the past is one of the most insane things I have ever read on this forum, and the competition for that accolade is very stiff I have to say.
 
señor Santiago

señor Santiago

Well-Known Member
yes i would . The reason i started supporting this club was because it was within the imaginery line set by the civil servant. The line decides who i follow.
 
T

theferret

Well-Known Member
señor Santiago said:
yes i would . The reason i started supporting this club was because it was within the imaginery line set by the civil servant. The line decides who i follow.
Click to expand...

Right, so had you been born in Exhall on the N&B side of that same line you'd have chosen to support someone else?

Not sure why I'm bothering to try and argue against such an irrational viewpoint. We'll be returning to the Ricoh at some point anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top