Neutral Fan
Member
This kind of comment makes me wonder why I didn't take my kids with cheap tickets when CCFC were playing at Sixfields.
Oh wait...I have principles on this sort of thing....
Rico h Arena Move Will Break Partnerships (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter torchomatic
- Start date
This kind of comment makes me wonder why I didn't take my kids with cheap tickets when CCFC were playing at Sixfields.
Oh wait...I have principles on this sort of thing....
Otis
Well-Known Member
NFL 1920
Err, who? Who? Who? Who?
NFL 1930
8 of those teams no longer exist, or have moved AND completely changed names.
1950.
Chicago Cardinals. Now the Arizona Cardinals
LA Rams. Now the St Louis Rams
New York Yanks. No longer exist
Baltimore Colts. Now Indianoplis Colts
Not saying it is right, just saying over there it is the norm and acceptable. They even have franchise players within their teams too for God's sake. Completely different model.
I'm sure if in Brazil or Argentina teams moved cities and changed allegiance there would be civil war.
US sport is very much about franchising and following the money. Over here it is (or has been) more about locality, community, heriatge, belonging and local rivalry.
| 1920 APFA standings | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| | W | L | T | PCT | DIV | PF | PA | STK |
Akron Pros
| 8 | 0 | 3 | 1.000 | 6–0–3 | 151 | 7 | T2 |
| Decatur Staleys | 10 | 1 | 2 | .909 | 5–1–2 | 164 | 21 | T1 |
| Buffalo All-Americans | 9 | 1 | 1 | .900 | 4–1–1 | 258 | 32 | T1 |
| Chicago Cardinals | 6 | 2 | 2 | .750 | 3–2–2 | 101 | 29 | T1 |
| Rock Island Independents | 6 | 2 | 2 | .750 | 4–2–1 | 201 | 49 | W1 |
| Dayton Triangles | 5 | 2 | 2 | .714 | 4–2–2 | 150 | 54 | L1 |
| Rochester Jeffersons | 6 | 3 | 2 | .667 | 0–1 | 156 | 57 | T1 |
| Canton Bulldogs | 7 | 4 | 2 | .636 | 4–3–1 | 208 | 57 | W1 |
| Detroit Heralds | 2 | 3 | 3 | .400 | 1–3 | 53 | 82 | T2 |
| Cleveland Tigers | 2 | 4 | 2 | .333 | 1–4–2 | 28 | 46 | L1 |
| Chicago Tigers | 2 | 5 | 1 | .286 | 1–5–1 | 49 | 63 | W1 |
| Hammond Pros | 2 | 5 | 0 | .286 | 0–3 | 41 | 154 | L3 |
| Columbus Panhandles | 2 | 6 | 2 | .250 | 0–4 | 41 | 121 | W1 |
| Muncie Flyers | 0 | 1 | 0 | .000 | 0–1 | 0 | 45 | L1 |
Err, who? Who? Who? Who?
NFL 1930
| Team | P | W | L | T | PCT |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Green Bay Packers | 14 | 10 | 3 | 1 | .769 |
| New York Giants | 17 | 13 | 4 | 0 | .765 |
| Chicago Bears | 14 | 9 | 4 | 1 | .692 |
| Brooklyn Dodgers | 12 | 7 | 4 | 1 | .636 |
| Providence Steam Roller | 11 | 6 | 4 | 1 | .600 |
| Staten Island Stapletons | 12 | 5 | 5 | 2 | .500 |
| Chicago Cardinals | 13 | 5 | 6 | 2 | .455 |
| Portsmouth Spartans | 14 | 5 | 6 | 3 | .455 |
| Frankford Yellow Jackets | 18 | 4 | 13 | 1 | .222 |
| Minneapolis Red Jackets | 9 | 1 | 7 | 1 | .125 |
| Newark Tornadoes | 12 | 1 | 10 | 1 | .091 |
8 of those teams no longer exist, or have moved AND completely changed names.
1950.
Chicago Cardinals. Now the Arizona Cardinals
LA Rams. Now the St Louis Rams
New York Yanks. No longer exist
Baltimore Colts. Now Indianoplis Colts
Not saying it is right, just saying over there it is the norm and acceptable. They even have franchise players within their teams too for God's sake. Completely different model.
I'm sure if in Brazil or Argentina teams moved cities and changed allegiance there would be civil war.
US sport is very much about franchising and following the money. Over here it is (or has been) more about locality, community, heriatge, belonging and local rivalry.
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
It's not the same situation, although I could never rule out ever being a hypocrit, I think everyone is at times in their lives.
You could argue I'm a hypocrit now, as I give money to SISU yet I want them out, it's a quandary, but life is full of them.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Things have changed. Football owners used to be local people, with an afinity or link to their clubs, quite often being fans themselves.
It's all changed now and I dare say an awful lot of owners do not care much for the fans of their clubs at all.
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
Some people were less understanding, in a situation that isn't exactly the same. That will be case in every situation, some people refuse to buy Nestle products, some people only buy fair trade.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
I must admit I know a few myself. But I think it will wear off for the most part. I think everyone I've heard say it is a neutral and not necessarily a Rugby fan. The true Rugby fans I do know have sworn allegiances to their current club. Being from Rugby that tends to be lions (although not many), Saints or Tigers. Mainly the latter. I can't see them picking up too many fans from the Rugby area, geography may be a big factor in this but on the whole true Rugby fans are loyal to the team they already follow. No different to us lot with CCFC, I doubt you'd find anyone on here change to Man U if they moved to the area.
Would never happen - WASPS would pull out their loan players before then
Similar to Cov RFC and Broadstreet
Nick
Administrator
I wouldn't be so sure.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Me neither.
Moff
Well-Known Member
Tony, what side of Rugby are you on? I know more Saints here than those who support the Leicester Pussycats or whatever their name is
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
torchomatic
Well-Known Member
Oh, I get that. I get the "light switch" views/morals/attitudes of people like r_b, Spider, MMM, Dongo, Italia and to some extent, you and may others. SISU move City to Northampton (switch on outrage). The Council move a team 82 miles (switch off outrage). This place is chockablock with double-standards. It always has been.
The refreshing thing though is posters like LAST, BHSB, Duffer et al who have stuck their head above the parapet and said "hold on, the Council is wrong here". The still hate SISU with a passion but they have the intelligence to realise that what the council are doing is out of order. People seem to really struggle with that simple concept; criticising the Council or ACL doesn't mean you love SISU. No one does. No one want them here.
The Council are not and never have been above criticism. And they are so wrong on the Wasps issue.
The refreshing thing though is posters like LAST, BHSB, Duffer et al who have stuck their head above the parapet and said "hold on, the Council is wrong here". The still hate SISU with a passion but they have the intelligence to realise that what the council are doing is out of order. People seem to really struggle with that simple concept; criticising the Council or ACL doesn't mean you love SISU. No one does. No one want them here.
The Council are not and never have been above criticism. And they are so wrong on the Wasps issue.
Rusty Trombone
Well-Known Member
I agree with some of your points, and if I thought the circumstances were exactly the same, then I think more people would be outraged. Not as many though, because generally you get more outrage if something affects someone, rather than based on principles.
Over and Over again we see people commenting about double standards and hypocrisy, It's not valid because for the most part people weren't up in arms about us being moved to Northampton because a sports team was being ripped from it's community. We were all up in arms because OUR! sports team was being ripped from it's community. It's hard to get outraged about something (that I agree with you is wrong) when it doesn't affect you (i dont mean wasps coming here doesn't affect us, I mean wasps being moved from wycombe doesn't affect us) and there are a million more outrageous things happening in the world much more worthy of our anger.
The response will probably be that I expected outrage from other fans for our move, I personally didn't expect this at all though I did desire it but for the most part we got almost none from the vast majority of clubs, A Song from Arsenal, some nice support from the real Dons but not really much else.
Otis
Well-Known Member
I would say most people understand why the council did the deal, but that doesn't mean they give their unqualified support.
The council shouldn't have done the deal. The very least they should have done was to have consulted the football team, the rugby team and all the associated fans groups.
If they were to consider a franchise it should have been the very last resort and I don't believe that is the case here. They didn't have to sell to Wasps, they chose to. If they had no other choice then things might have been a little different and people may have felt a little different.
I'm sure then people would still say that the franchising was wrong but that every other avenue had been explored and there was very little choice in the matter.
Otis
Well-Known Member
This is the reason why I don't feel any outrage and just find the whole situation saddening.
Nick
Administrator
The same could be said that people understand why SISU moved us though, don't have to agree with it but can understand why.
but there were no valid reasons for moving us.
skybluetony176
Well-Known Member
Tony, what side of Rugby are you on? I know more Saints here than those who support the Leicester Pussycats or whatever their name is
The pussy cat dolls side obviously
duffer
Well-Known Member
At the time SISU said it was about the survival of the club, in the same way that Wasps owners are saying now.
If you accept that Wasps owners can decide where their club should play, then you've accepted that model for everyone - you can't then complain when it happens to our club.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Think it would be a tiny minority.
We had a stadium here in Coventry, our home town. There was simply no reason to move away.
Sisu can say this and ACL can say that, but a short term agreement could have been arranged for us to remain at the Ricoh and we all know that it could.
It is different circumstances to Wasps, but then that's not the issue of franchising.
I've already said I think moving wasps is wrong though that it doesn't outrage me because there are so many much more outrageous things in the world that deserve my outrage more.
Sisu were lying though when they said the move was for the survival of the club, there were, no, zero, none valid reasons for moving us to northampton.
Otis
Well-Known Member
But that's bollocks. They were trying to distress ACL. Sisu acted in Sisu's interest, not the club's. They don't give two hoots about our survival.
Otis
Well-Known Member
Absolutely spot on. Nail on head.
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
NFL 1920
1920 APFA standings
W
L
T
PCT
DIV
PF
PA
STK
Akron Pros
8
3
1.000
6–0–3
151
7
T2
Decatur Staleys
10
1
2
.909
5–1–2
164
21
T1
Buffalo All-Americans
9
1
1
.900
4–1–1
258
32
T1
Chicago Cardinals
6
2
2
.750
3–2–2
101
29
T1
Rock Island Independents
6
2
2
.750
4–2–1
201
49
W1
Dayton Triangles
5
2
2
.714
4–2–2
150
54
L1
Rochester Jeffersons
6
3
2
.667
0–1
156
57
T1
Canton Bulldogs
7
4
2
.636
4–3–1
208
57
W1
Detroit Heralds
2
3
3
.400
1–3
53
82
T2
Cleveland Tigers
2
4
2
.333
1–4–2
28
46
L1
Chicago Tigers
2
5
1
.286
1–5–1
49
63
W1
Hammond Pros
2
5
.286
0–3
41
154
L3
Columbus Panhandles
2
6
2
.250
0–4
41
121
W1
Muncie Flyers
1
.000
0–1
45
L1
Err, who? Who? Who? Who?
NFL 1930
Team
P
W
L
T
PCT
Green Bay Packers
14
10
3
1
.769
New York Giants
17
13
4
.765
Chicago Bears
14
9
4
1
.692
Brooklyn Dodgers
12
7
4
1
.636
Providence Steam Roller
11
6
4
1
.600
Staten Island Stapletons
12
5
5
2
.500
Chicago Cardinals
13
5
6
2
.455
Portsmouth Spartans
14
5
6
3
.455
Frankford Yellow Jackets
18
4
13
1
.222
Minneapolis Red Jackets
9
1
7
1
.125
Newark Tornadoes
12
1
10
1
.091
8 of those teams no longer exist, or have moved AND completely changed names.
1950.
Chicago Cardinals. Now the Arizona Cardinals
LA Rams. Now the St Louis Rams
New York Yanks. No longer exist
Baltimore Colts. Now Indianoplis Colts
Not saying it is right, just saying over there it is the norm and acceptable. They even have franchise players within their teams too for God's sake. Completely different model.
I'm sure if in Brazil or Argentina teams moved cities and changed allegiance there would be civil war.
US sport is very much about franchising and following the money. Over here it is (or has been) more about locality, community, heriatge, belonging and local rivalry.
Portsmouth Spartans no longer exist as Harry spent all transfer fees recieved on his dog. Allegedly.
WM
Moff
Well-Known Member
If SISU decide to move us from Coventry once more, because they cant now get the Ricoh, it would have a huge effect on us and I take it those not currently outraged will find it in themselves to turn on their outrage again.
yes we will and we will be right too and if you can't understand the reasons why and why that isn't hypocrisy then there isn't really much point discussing it.
Otis
Well-Known Member
But Coventry have somewhere to play IN Coventry. Wasps weren't even playing in their home city and have changed grounds 3 times. I'm not defending that and I still think franchising is wrong, but it is different.
I am not outraged about the Wasps move, but would be totally outraged if Sisu move us again.
Moff
Well-Known Member
Of course I understand the reasons. It was a hypothetical question, and just highlights some of the concerns of people at the moment. I didnt expect you to see that
Skyblueweeman
Well-Known Member
Are you not even a little bit outraged by the council whingeing about us moving 34 miles away, then welcoming Wasps with open arms?
WM
Moff
Well-Known Member
We could go round in circles, but as a result of the Wasps sale, I fear this could give SISU all the excuse they need to look at options out of the City for our future home. They may not though and we could be just fine...like we continue to be under their stewardship...hold on.....
olderskyblue
Well-Known Member
Just so I understand the terminology people are using, is SISU, in trying to distress ACL by moving CCFC to Northampton temporarily, Franchising?
You see, I just thought they were just using my club as a bargaining chip as a means to get the Ricoh on the cheap, so as to be able to get a return on investment for their investors................
You see, I just thought they were just using my club as a bargaining chip as a means to get the Ricoh on the cheap, so as to be able to get a return on investment for their investors................
