New 5 year Plan

[Turkish]

Probably because it was sh!t. The Dell obviously limited us, otherwise why move?

 

We moved when it was sold out week after week and we had a 5 year waiting list for season tickets. In 1984 in our best ever season we had an average of 7,000 empty spaces a game over the course of a season. And in 1984 the Dell was far from sh*t, it was just like a lot of stadiums in that era. How were we limited by it when we had 7,000 empty spaces on average?

[aintforever]

We moved when it was sold out week after week and we had a 5 year waiting list for season tickets. In 1984 in our best ever season we had an average of 7,000 empty spaces a game over the course of a season. And in 1984 the Dell was far from sh*t, it was just like a lot of stadiums in that area. How were we limited by it when we had 7,000 empty spaces on average?

 

Because if it was bigger we would have had a higher average. More income.

[Turkish]

Because if it was bigger we would have had a higher average. More income.

 

By how much more?

 

By the way our biggest home attendance that season was still well short of capacity 21,141 v Tottenham. So why would our average have been higher?

Edited 14 May, 2012 by Turkish

[aintforever]

By how much more?

 

By the way our biggest home attendance that season was still well short of capacity 21,141 v Tottenham. So why would our average have been higher?

 

Because the big clubs would have brought more fans down. It aint rocket science.

 

Anyway it's not all about attendances, if we had rich owners then we could have brought in the players to win the league.

[The Kraken]

Because the big clubs would have brought more fans down. It aint rocket science.

 

Anyway it's not all about attendances, if we had rich owners then we could have brought in the players to win the league.

 

Wow. Just, wow.

[Turkish]

Because the big clubs would have brought more fans down. It aint rocket science.

 

Anyway it's not all about attendances, if we had rich owners then we could have brought in the players to win the league.

 

 

Like the England goalkeeper and European footballer of the year you mean?

 

Another one who thinks we should expand some can fit more away fans in.

[The Cat]

Didn't all clubs have pretty bad attendances in the 80's though? Used to be plenty of empty seats at Old Trafford for example.

 

Just looked through some Man Utd attendances from 1984. They go from +50k for bigger games down to mid 30k for ones against smaller teams etc. In fact they only got 31921 for the 0-0 against us.

 

http://www.aboutmanutd.com/man-u-matches/24-04-1985-southampton.html

 

And that season West Ham only rustled up 16674 supporters at Upton Park for the visit of Man Utd.

[Dig Dig]

We moved when it was sold out week after week and we had a 5 year waiting list for season tickets. In 1984 in our best ever season we had an average of 7,000 empty spaces a game over the course of a season. And in 1984 the Dell was far from sh*t, it was just like a lot of stadiums in that era. How were we limited by it when we had 7,000 empty spaces on average?

 

Quoting attendance figures from 27 years ago really doesn't add anything to the debate. It's almost as useless as the 2005 Bolton stat which we all know you hate.

 

The fact that we averaged a higher attendance in league 1 as recent as last year only proves a point you're trying to argue against considering you are talking about a time when we were 2nd and had the European player of the year etc etc. Why did we average more in league 1 and not back then?

[Turkish]

Quoting attendance figures from 27 years ago really doesn't add anything to the debate. It's almost as useless as the 2005 Bolton stat which we all know you hate.

 

The fact that we averaged a higher attendance in league 1 as recent as last year only proves a point you're trying to argue against considering you are talking about a time when we were 2nd and had the European player of the year etc etc. Why did we average more in league 1 and not back then?

 

You need to read the argument princess people keep banging on that in the 80s when we signed Keegan, Shilton and co

If it wasn't for the damn capacity at the Dell we'd have surely fulfilled our potential back then and been the Man U of the 80s and hoovered up all these fans that we are just about to 30 years too late. We were restricted by the Dell in the late 90s, no doubt about it but to suggest we needed a bigger stadium when we got no where nee filling the one we had in our best season ever is the sort of logic only our self titled intellegent posters would come out with isn't it?

[Turkish]

Didn't all clubs have pretty bad attendances in the 80's though? Used to be plenty of empty seats at Old Trafford for example.

 

Just looked through some Man Utd attendances from 1984. They go from +50k for bigger games down to mid 30k for ones against smaller teams etc. In fact they only got 31921 for the 0-0 against us.

 

http://www.aboutmanutd.com/man-u-matches/24-04-1985-southampton.html

 

And that season West Ham only rustled up 16674 supporters at Upton Park for the visit of Man Utd.

 

Exactly. Crowds were lower, we got no where near capacity at all. So how were we restricted by the Dell back then?

[dubai_phil]

It's blindingly obvious why total attendances at Football matches was lower in the 80's

 

Stadiums didn't serve Prawn Sandwiches back then.You couldn't get a Chicken Balti Pie, only a Bovril & a Wagonwheel. You had to stand out in the rain, and let's face it, The Salisbury & District League used to have 7 Divisions on a Saturday, and games kicked off at 3pm.

 

You used to be able to buy a scarf and a shirt or maybe a lapel pin if you were able to fight your way into a club shop somewhere.

 

Now? Hell you can even buy "Top Club" branded mobile phone cases.

 

Slight difference in the market awareness and matchday experience now that spectators have become customers instead of animals herded into pens by neo nazi's with cattle prods.

[Turkish]

It's blindingly obvious why total attendances at Football matches was lower in the 80's

 

Stadiums didn't serve Prawn Sandwiches back then.You couldn't get a Chicken Balti Pie, only a Bovril & a Wagonwheel. You had to stand out in the rain, and let's face it, The Salisbury & District League used to have 7 Divisions on a Saturday, and games kicked off at 3pm.

 

You used to be able to buy a scarf and a shirt or maybe a lapel pin if you were able to fight your way into a club shop somewhere.

 

Now? Hell you can even buy "Top Club" branded mobile phone cases.

 

Slight difference in the market awareness and matchday experience now that spectators have become customers instead of animals herded into pens by neo nazi's with cattle prods.

 

Who cares what the reasons where? We've been told we were restricted by the Dells capacity in early 80s. We weren't.

[70's Mike]

Our average attendance was 18000 in 1984, the capacity was 25,000 back then. How were we limited by the Dell?

 

are you sure capacity was 25000, chocolate boxes were knocked down 2 years before?

[Turkish]

are you sure capacity was 25000' date=' chocolate boxes were knocked down 2 years before?[/quote']

 

Yep. The capacity when the new family centre was built on the Milton Road end was 25,000 check full time at the Dell chapter 23 for reference.

 

Capacity 25k biggest crowd 21k = no restriction.

[Frank's cousin]

Yep. The capacity when the new family centre was built on the Milton Road end was 25,000 check full time at the Dell chapter 23 for reference.

 

Capacity 25k biggest crowd 21k = no restriction.

 

Still dont think you can use the 80s as a benchmark for potential - the demographic of who attended football then was different as said before. Mostly youth, younger blokes and football stadia were not exactly appealing to the wider public. What is our potential regular attendance if we have a good run in the Pl and play an exciting, entertaining brand of football that gets us noticed and see us flirting with the top 7/8? Depends on Ticket prices, affordability etc, IMHO.

 

Guess would be:

 

L1 - average withe recent feelgood factor - 22k

NPC - Average with feelgood factor and success - 26k

Prem - positions 20-13 - probably 29-30k

Prem top 13-9 - probably 30-31k

Prem top 8 regularly ? - 32-36k - possibly up to 40k for 'big games'

 

Basis for assumptions? Think we probably have over 60k who have been to one or more games - special occasions etc (not sure of teh exact number on the database, but this is misleading anyway as it only includes those who have purchased tickets themselves, not who have gone), we saw we could sell 45k+ and more for the tin pot.

 

Its all about how you tap into that market - how do you get those extra 15k to not go to one game a year, but to 8 or 9 or even an ST?

 

To dismiss the the potential based on 80s gates is flawed.

 

Funnily enough, you can increase/make a market by offering a product that is more appealing and good value for money - some may hate the idea, believing football should not be about attracting casual fans, but about committed regulars, but growth is only possible if these casual fans are hooked and converted, especially with younger kids. So the environment plays a big part as well as the quality on the pitch.

 

Once again, we have NO idea what NC has in mind, short, medium or long term, nor do we have a clue on whether there is any cash investment available form the Estate to fund infrastructure or performance/quality on the pitch. So its all speculation. But two points:

 

1. What the feck is wrong with speculation? Why the need for insult and wind up/**** take? Its just a fricken discussion, like many would have down the pub over a few beers, but some on here seem to act in a way that would get them a slap if they carried on like that over a beer...

 

2. We do know NC is ambitious - he is not used to being an alaso ran, and I dont believe he will be satisfied with mediocrity and survival battles mid to long term. So he MUST have a plan for growth IMHO. That plan may be staged (low to moderate risk) , or it may be an agressive strategy (with higher risk), I dont and no one on here knows. At the core of that plan will be funding to ensure both on the field success through appropriate and decent wage structure to hang on to talent supplemented by purchased quality. That will involve an array of potential commercial approaches, and it may involve the future expansion of capacity to realise the potentail attendences that come with success. I dont believe NC will make a decsion on capacity increase basd on previous attendance records - it may be a factor, but the biggest will be cost per seat and the investment needed - can it be commercially viable if it meant we were averaging say 75% capacity.

 

 

I just find it odd that some on here are so negative, patronizing and short sighted, over what should be a positive discussion over ambition and future growth potential. If you dont agree we have that potential or funding and it can not be comercially viable, fine, but the need for ridicule? FFS.

 

I suspect that NC may blind side us all yet - will be looking for innovation - he has shown he is not affraid to challenge the percieved 'norms' of football club stewardship and it would not surprize me if his strategy is something none of us have considered as viable or even thought about. To me that should be exciting... not an area of ridicule.

Edited 15 May, 2012 by Frank's cousin

[Turkish]

Still dont think you can use the 80s as a benchmark for potential - the demographic of who attended football then was different as said before. Mostly youth, younger blokes and football stadia were not exactly appealing to the wider public. What is our potential regular attendance if we have a good run in the Pl and play an exciting, entertaining brand of football that gets us noticed and see us flirting with the top 7/8? Depends on Ticket prices, affordability etc, IMHO.

 

Guess would be:

 

L1 - average withe recent feelgood factor - 22k

NPC - Average with feelgood factor and success - 26k

Prem - positions 20-13 - probably 29-30k

Prem top 13-9 - probably 30-31k

Prem top 8 regularly ? - 32-36k - possibly up to 40k for 'big games'

 

Basis for assumptions? Think we probably have over 60k who have been to one or more games - special occasions etc (not sure of teh exact number on the database, but this is misleading anyway as it only includes those who have purchased tickets themselves, not who have gone), we saw we could sell 45k+ and more for the tin pot.

 

Its all about how you tap into that market - how do you get those extra 15k to not go to one game a year, but to 8 or 9 or even an ST?

 

To dismiss the the potential based on 80s gates is flawed.

 

Funnily enough, you can increase/make a market by offering a product that is more appealing and good value for money - some may hate the idea, believing football should not be about attracting casual fans, but about committed regulars, but growth is only possible if these casual fans are hooked and converted, especially with younger kids. So the environment plays a big part as well as the quality on the pitch.

 

Once again, we have NO idea what NC has in mind, short, medium or long term, nor do we have a clue on whether there is any cash investment available form the Estate to fund infrastructure or performance/quality on the pitch. So its all speculation. But two points:

 

1. What the feck is wrong with speculation? Why the need for insult and wind up/**** take? Its just a fricken discussion, like many would have down the pub over a few beers, but some on here seem to act in a way that would get them a slap if they carried on like that over a beer...

 

2. We do know NC is ambitious - he is not used to being an alaso ran, and I dont believe he will be satisfied with mediocrity and survival battles mid to long term. So he MUST have a plan for growth IMHO. That plan may be staged (low to moderate risk) , or it may be an agressive strategy (with higher risk), I dont and no one on here knows. At the core of that plan will be funding to ensure both on the field success through appropriate and decent wage structure to hang on to talent supplemented by purchased quality. That will involve an array of potential commercial approaches, and it may involve the future expansion of capacity to realise the potentail attendences that come with success. I dont believe NC will make a decsion on capacity increase basd on previous attendance records - it may be a factor, but the biggest will be cost per seat and the investment needed - can it be commercially viable if it meant we were averaging say 75% capacity.

 

 

I just find it odd that some on here are so negative, patronizing and short sighted, over what should be a positive discussion over ambition and future growth potential. If you dont agree we have that potential or funding and it can not be comercially viable, fine, but the need for ridicule? FFS.

 

I suspect that NC may blind side us all yet - will be looking for innovation - he has shown he is not affraid to challenge the percieved 'norms' of football club stewardship and it wouldnot surprize me if his strategy is something none of us have considered as viable or even though about. To me that should be exciting...

 

Another breath taking dull and rambling and wide of the mark post.

Who is using them as a Benchmark of what crowds we would get not. People are claiming that in the early 80s we were held back by the Dell. We weren't. In our best season ever we averaged 18k and had a high of 21k in a 25k capacity stadium.

Edited 15 May, 2012 by Turkish

[aintforever]

Another breath taking dull and rambling and wide of the mark post.

Who is using them as a Benchmark of what crowds we would get not. People are claiming that in the early 80s we were held back by the Dell. We weren't. In our best season ever we averaged 18k and had a high of 21k in a 25k capacity stadium.

 

Think you will find even in the 80's a new stadium would have seen a rise in attendances. Also the corporate set-up at the Dell was virtually non-exsistent.

 

We didn't sell out every game at the Dell right up until the last couple of seasons, yet we still pulled in 32K at SMS when people like you were saying we would never fill it.

[Frank's cousin]

Another breath taking dull and rambling and wide of the mark post.

Who is using them as a Benchmark of what crowds we would get not. People are claiming that in the early 80s we were held back by the Dell. We weren't. In our best season ever we averaged 18k and had a high of 21k in a 25k capacity stadium.

 

And your point is? The old 'people are claiming' blahg blah blah and you say I 'ramble' - so what is our potential as one so gifted with foresight?

 

(apologies if your attention span is so limited, suggest you get an ed-due'-kay-shun, and you may be able to follow more than a single sentance without pictures

[Wes Tender]

Still dont think you can use the 80s as a benchmark for potential - the demographic of who attended football then was different as said before. Mostly youth, younger blokes and football stadia were not exactly appealing to the wider public. What is our potential regular attendance if we have a good run in the Pl and play an exciting, entertaining brand of football that gets us noticed and see us flirting with the top 7/8? Depends on Ticket prices, affordability etc, IMHO.

 

Guess would be:

 

L1 - average withe recent feelgood factor - 22k

NPC - Average with feelgood factor and success - 26k

Prem - positions 20-13 - probably 29-30k

Prem top 13-9 - probably 30-31k

Prem top 8 regularly ? - 32-36k - possibly up to 40k for 'big games'

 

Basis for assumptions? Think we probably have over 60k who have been to one or more games - special occasions etc (not sure of teh exact number on the database, but this is misleading anyway as it only includes those who have purchased tickets themselves, not who have gone), we saw we could sell 45k+ and more for the tin pot.

 

Its all about how you tap into that market - how do you get those extra 15k to not go to one game a year, but to 8 or 9 or even an ST?

 

To dismiss the the potential based on 80s gates is flawed.

 

Funnily enough, you can increase/make a market by offering a product that is more appealing and good value for money - some may hate the idea, believing football should not be about attracting casual fans, but about committed regulars, but growth is only possible if these casual fans are hooked and converted, especially with younger kids. So the environment plays a big part as well as the quality on the pitch.

 

Once again, we have NO idea what NC has in mind, short, medium or long term, nor do we have a clue on whether there is any cash investment available form the Estate to fund infrastructure or performance/quality on the pitch. So its all speculation. But two points:

 

1. What the feck is wrong with speculation? Why the need for insult and wind up/**** take? Its just a fricken discussion, like many would have down the pub over a few beers, but some on here seem to act in a way that would get them a slap if they carried on like that over a beer...

 

2. We do know NC is ambitious - he is not used to being an alaso ran, and I dont believe he will be satisfied with mediocrity and survival battles mid to long term. So he MUST have a plan for growth IMHO. That plan may be staged (low to moderate risk) , or it may be an agressive strategy (with higher risk), I dont and no one on here knows. At the core of that plan will be funding to ensure both on the field success through appropriate and decent wage structure to hang on to talent supplemented by purchased quality. That will involve an array of potential commercial approaches, and it may involve the future expansion of capacity to realise the potentail attendences that come with success. I dont believe NC will make a decsion on capacity increase basd on previous attendance records - it may be a factor, but the biggest will be cost per seat and the investment needed - can it be commercially viable if it meant we were averaging say 75% capacity.

 

 

I just find it odd that some on here are so negative, patronizing and short sighted, over what should be a positive discussion over ambition and future growth potential. If you dont agree we have that potential or funding and it can not be comercially viable, fine, but the need for ridicule? FFS.

 

I suspect that NC may blind side us all yet - will be looking for innovation - he has shown he is not affraid to challenge the percieved 'norms' of football club stewardship and it would not surprize me if his strategy is something none of us have considered as viable or even thought about. To me that should be exciting... not an area of ridicule.

 

As usual, the voice of reason Frank. You ask why can't we have a sensible discussion on here without the need for insult and wind-up p*ss take? Why the negativity, patronizing and short-sighted responses?

 

Well, it seems to me that those responsible are either not mature enough to indulge in sensible, intelligent debate, or they are just on a wind-up. As you say, if they were to indulge in these childish insults debating these things in the pub, somebody would have landed one on them. But because they are sat in front of a computer or on their smart phones, they can get away with it. I doubt that any who have been called names are that bothered about it; who knows what causes them to do it? Perhaps they were bullied in school or something like that.

[Turkish]

And your point is? The old 'people are claiming' blahg blah blah and you say I 'ramble' - so what is our potential as one so gifted with foresight?

 

(apologies if your attention span is so limited, suggest you get an ed-due'-kay-shun, and you may be a

ble to follow more than a single sentance without pictures

 

Read the last couple of pages of the thread and try to understand them sunshine. FFS. "Never had ambition and resources before"- how much more ambition do you need than to sign the European footballer of the year and best goal keeper in the world? "Held back by the Dell" We weren't in the 80s FACT. Yet again the intelligent posters are shown up by those with retarded logic.

[Frank's cousin]

Read the last couple of pages of the thread and try to understand them sunshine. FFS. "Never had ambition and resources before"- how much more ambition do you need than to sign the European footballer of the year and best goal keeper in the world? "Held back by the Dell" We weren't in the 80s FACT. Yet again the intelligent posters are shown up by those with retarded logic.

 

'Sunshine' - how old are you? 60? I suspect early 30s, in which case you should have some respect 'son'. As to you using the signing of KK as an indication of ambition, its shows an element of naiviety on your part. Resources in those days were not needed as they are today - he signed on 175k... a year, roughly the same as 18k a week now - things have changed somewhat don't you think? As to ambition, it was easier to attract KK to a club where he could remain the star after Hamburg, alreadu had some good ex internationals and LMs personality would have had a lot to do with it - and it was one player... and we won exactly what in those two years? Yes we played some cracking football, but we were not investing in a long term future... it was a short term vision, (one that was great for 2 seasons) but not part of an overhaul or 'major growth strategy'....

 

 

"Held back by the Dell" We weren't in the 80s FACT

 

Maybe not by capacity, because demand was not there - you are suggesting that that demand was limited by teh interset in saints ... others including myself have reasoned this demand was limited by teh environment and football culture at the time.... which has been proven as we have had greater average attendences since, despite being in third tier! FACT;)

Edited 15 May, 2012 by Frank's cousin

[Gemmel]

The point is valid - If we weren't selling out, then we can't say The Dell was limiting us in the 80's.

 

Football changed, money came flooding in and fans interest levels rose to the point that it did become limiting in the 90's and we literally had to move

[Frank's cousin]

The point is valid - If we weren't selling out, then we can't say The Dell was limiting us in the 80's.

 

Football changed, money came flooding in and fans interest levels rose to the point that it did become limiting in the 90's and we literally had to move

 

True.. the point being made now is can we raise fans interests levels further with better football, better services and a potentailly better facilities - can we 'grow' again? fair question being raised and discussed I would have thought...

[Turkish]

'Sunshine' - how old are you? 60? I suspect early 30s, in which case you should have some respect 'son'. As to you using the signing of KK as an indication of ambition, its shows an element of naiviety on your part. Resources in those days were not needed as they are today - he signed on 175k... a year, roughly the same as 18k a week now - things have changed somewhat don't you think? As to ambition, it was easier to attract KK to a club where he could remain the star after Hamburg, alreadu had some good ex internationals and LMs personality would have had a lot to do with it - and it was one player... and we won exactly what in those two years? Yes we played some cracking football, but we were not investing in a long term future... it was a short term vision, (one that was great for 2 seasons) but not part of an overhaul or 'major growth strategy'....

 

 

 

 

Maybe not by capacity, because demand was not there - you are suggesting that that demand was limited by teh interset in saints ... others including myself have reasoned this demand was limited by teh environment and football culture at the time.... which has been proven as we have had greater average attendences since, despite being in third tier! FACT;)

 

Of course you need more now resource Franks "the voice of reason" Cousin!! Things cost more!! The average wage in 1982 was about £9k a year, do you still earn that??!!! The world moves on, in 1982 teachers used blackboards and chalk now they use white boards and pens and everything!!!

 

So Keegan was on £175k a year was he? Well based on 1982 when the average fooball top flight football was on £750 a week that would make him on 4.5 times the average footballers wage for the era. Using the same ratio and the 2011 average premier league football is on £33000, that would put him on nearly £150k a week, consider the lack of TV revenue and sponsorship corporate stuff etc most of his wage would come from gate reciepts, that is a huge amount of money for the time is it not??

 

Like you go on to say, we also had some good ex internationals at the time, surely they who wont have cheap and a top manager who around that time turned down Man United!

 

As you rightly say demand wasn't there for a bigger stadium. So in the early 80s we werent held back, because demand wasn't there and we rarely sold out. It really isn't difficult to grasp the voice of reason.

 

So did we have ambition and resourses back then or didn't we??? Despite rarely coming close to filling the Dell, were we held back by it or weren't we?

[Turkish]

True.. the point being made now is can we raise fans interests levels further with better football' date=' better services and a potentailly better facilities - can we 'grow' again? fair question being raised and discussed I would have thought...[/quote']

 

No one is saying we cant. However some of our self titled intellegent posters seem to believe in the build it and they will come and all these legions of fans that we've never had before are going to start turning up.

 

Us retarded logic posters would rather do it in stages. Ie selling out more than we've got first, then expanding to meet and exceed demand, rather than sticking 8,000 seats on and keeping our fingers crossed we can fill them with away fans and neutrals.

[This Charming Man]

No one is saying we cant. However some of our self titled intellegent posters seem to believe in the build it and they will come and all these legions of fans that we've never had before are going to start turning up.

 

Us retarded logic posters would rather do it in stages. Ie selling out more than we've got first, then expanding to meet and exceed demand, rather than sticking 8,000 seats on and keeping our fingers crossed we can fill them with away fans and neutrals.

 

In all fairness, it worked for Kevin Costner, so why not us?

[Frank's cousin]

Of course you need more now resource Franks "the voice of reason" Cousin!! Things cost more!! The average wage in 1982 was about £9k a year, do you still earn that??!!! The world moves on, in 1982 teachers used blackboards and chalk now they use white boards and pens and everything!!!

 

So Keegan was on £175k a year was he? Well based on 1982 when the average fooball top flight football was on £750 a week that would make him on 4.5 times the average footballers wage for the era. Using the same ratio and the 2011 average premier league football is on £33000, that would put him on nearly £150k a week, consider the lack of TV revenue and sponsorship corporate stuff etc most of his wage would come from gate reciepts, that is a huge amount of money for the time is it not??

 

Like you go on to say, we also had some good ex internationals at the time, surely they who wont have cheap and a top manager who around that time turned down Man United!

 

As you rightly say demand wasn't there for a bigger stadium. So in the early 80s we werent held back, because demand wasn't there and we rarely sold out. It really isn't difficult to grasp the voice of reason.

 

So did we have ambition and resourses back then or didn't we??? Despite rarely coming close to filling the Dell, were we held back by it or weren't we?

 

You make no sense whatsoever... your 'ratio' is illogical, because the only figure that has any sense is the multiple 9k public average wage to 175k for KK - if we assume the current average public wage is 30k, then this would mean KK should be on roughly £590k a year now at that same ratio - approx 11k a week in today's terms yet you and I both know that a KK would now be in the region of 220k a week + a twenty fold increase in relative cost... against normal inflation that you alude to - so to use that as an example of ambition is again flawed.

 

We are talking about potential NOW. You have used the lack of demand in the 80s as a rational for suggesting the demand is not there even when as successful as in the 80s - the two are NOT comparable - the 80s was a time in which a high propostion of potential fans refused to go because of the culture and environment despite teh fact that it was affordable. We have seen that since the mid to late 90s football has been able to clean up its act - in part through legislation and inpart through SKY money that allowed clubs to invest in infrastructure - it created an environment that was more attractive to a wider range of fans - simple and we have seen that in that we averged more in the third tier last year than in L1 in the early 80s!

 

That was a time in which the pay packets betwen clubs were not so different as clubs ALSO recieved 50% of all away games to complement 50% of home receipts - less of a financial gap - the only thing holding a club back was reputation and the manager - gate had relatively little to do with it.

 

Since those rules changes greater emphasis on home gate receipts - so all clubs have needed to look at ways of maxing out the gate - So what do you believe is the CURRENT max we could achieve is welcoming and inclusive to all, clown costumes and all, riding high in the prem? only 20k? 30? 40 for some games?

 

Its also about what its SAYS about the ambition of a club and dont underestimate ego etc in atracting and keeing players.

 

What are some of you so affraid of in speculating about growth? Scared to many families, casual fans and clowns turn up regulary or something?

[Frank's cousin]

No one is saying we cant. However some of our self titled intellegent posters seem to believe in the build it and they will come and all these legions of fans that we've never had before are going to start turning up.

 

Us retarded logic posters would rather do it in stages. Ie selling out more than we've got first, then expanding to meet and exceed demand, rather than sticking 8,000 seats on and keeping our fingers crossed we can fill them with away fans and neutrals.

 

Why? If NC has the funding is an issue? Sure if its at the expense of the first team, but FFP rules will allow infrastructure development so thats not an issue - and anyway, only thinking about teh current squad and NOT about mid to long term is a recipe for disaster as seen down the road.

 

I am not saying we will suddenly see 15000 extra casual fans suddenly turn up in August, but good planning aligned with a growth strategy suggests that you consider these things in advance of need - whether its cost effective or not given the funding type is another seperate matter.

[Turkish]

You make no sense whatsoever... your 'ratio' is illogical' date=' because the only figure that has any sense is the multiple 9k public average wage to 175k for KK - if we assume the current average public wage is 30k, then this would mean KK should be on roughly £590k a year now at that same ratio - approx 11k a week in today's terms yet you and I both know that a KK would now be in the region of 220k a week + a twenty fold increase [b']in relative[/b] cost... against normal inflation that you alude to - so to use that as an example of ambition is again flawed.

 

We are talking about potential NOW. You have used the lack of demand in the 80s as a rational for suggesting the demand is not there even when as successful as in the 80s - the two are NOT comparable - the 80s was a time in which a high propostion of potential fans refused to go because of the culture and environment despite teh fact that it was affordable. We have seen that since the mid to late 90s football has been able to clean up its act - in part through legislation and inpart through SKY money that allowed clubs to invest in infrastructure - it created an environment that was more attractive to a wider range of fans - simple and we have seen that in that we averged more in the third tier last year than in L1 in the early 80s!

 

That was a time in which the pay packets betwen clubs were not so different as clubs ALSO recieved 50% of all away games to complement 50% of home receipts - less of a financial gap - the only thing holding a club back was reputation and the manager - gate had relatively little to do with it.

 

Since those rules changes greater emphasis on home gate receipts - so all clubs have needed to look at ways of maxing out the gate - So what do you believe is the CURRENT max we could achieve is welcoming and inclusive to all, clown costumes and all, riding high in the prem? only 20k? 30? 40 for some games?

 

Its also about what its SAYS about the ambition of a club and dont underestimate ego etc in atracting and keeing players.

 

What are some of you so affraid of in speculating about growth? Scared to many families, casual fans and clowns turn up regulary or something?

 

You are clearly not understanding it Franks "the voice of reason" Cousin. What does the average wage in the public have to do with how much Keegan was being paid?

 

People are banging on that we never pushed on in the early 80's because we were held back by the Dell. When in fact we were, we rarely sold out.

 

Apparantly we lacked ambition and resource, when we signed the Euopean football of the year on the equvilent in 1982 of £150k a week, based on what his wages in 1982 against the average wage of a footballer then and what it is now.

 

I'll make it even easier for you.

 

Average wage of a footballer 1982 - £750 a week - £39k PA

Average weekly wage of a football 2012 - £33k a week

 

Keegans wage in 1982 - £175k/£39k = 4.5

 

4.5 x £33k = £148k Per week in 2012

 

Keegan was would be on almost £148k a week using how much footballer wages have exploded by if was paying for us today.

 

It really isn't difficult to comprehend grandad.

Edited 15 May, 2012 by Turkish

[Dibden Purlieu Saint]

[Turkish]

Why? If NC has the funding is an issue? Sure if its at the expense of the first team, but FFP rules will allow infrastructure development so thats not an issue - and anyway, only thinking about teh current squad and NOT about mid to long term is a recipe for disaster as seen down the road.

 

I am not saying we will suddenly see 15000 extra casual fans suddenly turn up in August, but good planning aligned with a growth strategy suggests that you consider these things in advance of need - whether its cost effective or not given the funding type is another seperate matter.

 

I guess that fact the NC isn't expanding right now means he subscribes to the retarded poster logic, rather than the build it and they will come intelligent posters, yes?

[The Kraken]

Why? If NC has the funding is an issue? Sure if its at the expense of the first team, but FFP rules will allow infrastructure development so thats not an issue - and anyway, only thinking about teh current squad and NOT about mid to long term is a recipe for disaster as seen down the road.

 

I am not saying we will suddenly see 15000 extra casual fans suddenly turn up in August, but good planning aligned with a growth strategy suggests that you consider these things in advance of need - whether its cost effective or not given the funding type is another seperate matter.

 

As has been pointed out before.....

 

There has always been a 5 year plan in place from the time NC came in to the club. He expected us to be in the Premier League within 5 years. Not hoped, expected it. That we've doen it in 3 years has been impressive, but nonetheless all we have done is satisfy the expectations of the CEO to date.

 

Bearing in mind that this plan has always been in place, I'm minded to ask (once again): if the club were as sure as some of the posters on here as to what our crowds will be this season and beyond, why is there not a ready made 40-45K stadium for us to move into? We've had 3 years since they took over, yet there are not even any plans in the public domain, nor any talk from the CEO other than previous non-committal "we'll explore all options" statements (made more than a year or two ago).

 

Maybe, just maybe, Cortese considers "good planning and growth strategy" is best determined by analysing the actual attendance trends once in the top division, and then making a decision from that. At present most people would estimate we could attract larger crowds. However nobody, including the CEO, can accurately determin just what those attendances might be. Give it a season or two of analysing all current sales trends and we'll be a lot closer to that, and alot closer to determining whether we need a 32K stadium, 36K, 40K or even 45K and above.

 

We may have billionaire backers but, as we have been constantly told, we don't have an endless supply of cash to bankroll us. If the owners choose to incur stadium debt and convert it into equity then that will of course be a great thing, and a huge benefit. That said, I still find it a bit surprising that so many people want to spend the owners' money for them on a whim and a hunch, and get a bit uppity about the fact that a 26K average attendance last year is not evidence that we need a stadium 20K seats bigger.

[Wes Tender]

You make no sense whatsoever... your 'ratio' is illogical' date=' because the only figure that has any sense is the multiple 9k public average wage to 175k for KK - if we assume the current average public wage is 30k, then this would mean KK should be on roughly £590k a year now at that same ratio - approx 11k a week in today's terms yet you and I both know that a KK would now be in the region of 220k a week + a twenty fold increase [b']in relative[/b] cost... against normal inflation that you alude to - so to use that as an example of ambition is again flawed.

 

We are talking about potential NOW. You have used the lack of demand in the 80s as a rational for suggesting the demand is not there even when as successful as in the 80s - the two are NOT comparable - the 80s was a time in which a high propostion of potential fans refused to go because of the culture and environment despite teh fact that it was affordable. We have seen that since the mid to late 90s football has been able to clean up its act - in part through legislation and inpart through SKY money that allowed clubs to invest in infrastructure - it created an environment that was more attractive to a wider range of fans - simple and we have seen that in that we averged more in the third tier last year than in L1 in the early 80s!

 

That was a time in which the pay packets betwen clubs were not so different as clubs ALSO recieved 50% of all away games to complement 50% of home receipts - less of a financial gap - the only thing holding a club back was reputation and the manager - gate had relatively little to do with it.

 

Since those rules changes greater emphasis on home gate receipts - so all clubs have needed to look at ways of maxing out the gate - So what do you believe is the CURRENT max we could achieve is welcoming and inclusive to all, clown costumes and all, riding high in the prem? only 20k? 30? 40 for some games?

 

Its also about what its SAYS about the ambition of a club and dont underestimate ego etc in atracting and keeing players.

 

What are some of you so affraid of in speculating about growth? Scared to many families, casual fans and clowns turn up regulary or something?

 

Frank, as you insist on quoting him whilst he is on ignore, I might as well join in and disparage the nonsense he is spouting. If he is going to go all the way back to another era, (when football matches were mostly played at 3pm on a Saturday) as an example of how we might expect to fare in the near future, then we might as well compare how Strictly Come Dancing is likely to develop based on how well Come dancing did in the early eighties. And apparently teachers use white boards and pens now? Well, I never. Where is it all going to end,eh? What a long way they've come since the days of papyrus and quills! Ought we to have a look at what teachers earned in the early eighties to gauge what they should earn now? Refuse collectors? Dentists? No doubt all of these professions will have shown a uniform increase in their salaries exactly as is the case for all footballers and which can be worked out and projected on 30 years by applying the inflation increase as a norm. Or would the figures be distorted in the case of footballers by the obscene amounts of filthy lucre swilling around since Sky poked its nose into the game?

[aintforever]

You are clearly not understanding it Franks "the voice of reason" Cousin. What does the average wage in the public have to do with how much Keegan was being paid?

 

People are banging on that we never pushed on in the early 80's because we were held back by the Dell. When in fact we were, we rarely sold out.

 

Apparantly we lacked ambition and resource, when we signed the Euopean football of the year on the equvilent in 1982 of £150k a week, based on what his wages in 1982 against the average wage of a footballer then and what it is now.

 

I'll make it even easier for you.

 

Average wage of a footballer 1982 - £750 a week - £39k PA

Average weekly wage of a football 2012 - £33k a week

 

Keegans wage in 1982 - £175k/£39k = 4.5

 

4.5 x £33k = £148k Per week in 2012

 

Keegan was would be on almost £148k a week using how much footballer wages have exploded by if was paying for us today.

 

It really isn't difficult to comprehend grandad.

 

Why do you suppose the club tried to get a new stadium built then if they didn't think the Dell was holding them back? The Western Esplanade 35K idea collapsed because the club and council couldn't agree on funding (we had the ambition, but not the resources to carry it through).

 

You point about Keegan show how much the game has changed. Doesn't alter the fact that if we had billionaire owners back then we could have got more players like that and maybe finished higher than the 2nd place we achieved.

Edited 15 May, 2012 by aintforever

[Turkish]

Frank, as you insist on quoting him whilst he is on ignore, I might as well join in and disparage the nonsense he is spouting. If he is going to go all the way back to another era, (when football matches were mostly played at 3pm on a Saturday) as an example of how we might expect to fare in the near future, then we might as well compare how Strictly Come Dancing is likely to develop based on how well Come dancing did in the early eighties. And apparently teachers use white boards and pens now? Well, I never. Where is it all going to end,eh? What a long way they've come since the days of papyrus and quills! Ought we to have a look at what teachers earned in the early eighties to gauge what they should earn now? Refuse collectors? Dentists? No doubt all of these professions will have shown a uniform increase in their salaries exactly as is the case for all footballers and which can be worked out and projected on 30 years by applying the inflation increase as a norm. Or would the figures be distorted in the case of footballers by the obscene amounts of filthy lucre swilling around since Sky poked its nose into the game?

 

Dear oh dear What is it about you "intelligent posters"?!!

 

You just dont get it do you? People have been at pains to announce that we've never had ambtion and resource before. That we were held back in the 80's because we didn't have a rich owner and the Dell was too small. We are going to attract all these millions of new fans becauser it's different now than in the 1980s when we had a team full of internationals, finished second in the league, played in Europe every season.

 

No resources and ambiton. Yet we signed the European Footballer of the year on 4.5 times the average wage for that time. Which today would put him on near on £150k a week.

 

"but but but, that damed Dell, it held us back" Err not quite my ol' chum, we actually averaged 7k less than capacity in our best season ever. Our biggest crowd was 3.5k less than capacity that season.

 

I know you lot cant get over it and hate it but thems the fact our dear old intellegent posters. We weren't held back by anything at all.

 

And it's nothing to do with what might happen in the future. just merely pointing out how wrong you people are that can remember the Munich air crash that actually, we have had ambition and resource in the past.

[Turkish]

Why do you suppose the club tried to get a new stadium built then if they didn't think the Dell was holding them back? The Western Esplanade 35K idea collapsed because the club and council couldn't agree on funding (we had the ambition, but not the resources to carry it through).

 

You point about Keegan show how much the game has changed. Doesn't alter the fact that if we had billionaire owners back then we could have got more players like that and maybe finished higher than the 2nd place we achieved.

 

How many billionares were around buying football clubs in 1982?

[Frank's cousin]

You are clearly not understanding it Franks "the voice of reason" Cousin. What does the average wage in the public have to do with how much Keegan was being paid?

 

People are banging on that we never pushed on in the early 80's because we were held back by the Dell. When in fact we were, we rarely sold out.

 

Apparantly we lacked ambition and resource, when we signed the Euopean football of the year on the equvilent in 1982 of £150k a week, based on what his wages in 1982 against the average wage of a footballer then and what it is now.

 

I'll make it even easier for you.

 

Average wage of a footballer 1982 - £750 a week - £39k PA

Average weekly wage of a football 2012 - £33k a week

 

Keegans wage in 1982 - £175k/£39k = 4.5

 

4.5 x £33k = £148k Per week in 2012

 

Keegan was would be on almost £148k a week using how much footballer wages have exploded by if was paying for us today.

 

It really isn't difficult to comprehend grandad.

 

 

We may have to agree to differ - as you are not seeing the obviousl logic

 

1982

 

Average wage - 9k a year

Footballer average wage £40k a year

 

A multiple of around 4/5 times the man in the street wage - with me (as this is important)

 

KK was on 175k a year - a multiple of 19x the average wage of the man in the street in 1982

 

 

 

You cannot simply say its the same as 4 or 5 times the average PL footballer wage in today's terms as an indicator - I have just said that a KK wuold now cost 220k a week which is actually 6 times the 33k average.....nothing new there...

 

BUT lets look at what has happened - 33k a week average is 50 times the average annual wage. someone on 220k a week is 357 x average wage (compared to 4 times and 19 times in 1982)

 

If you want to use this as an indicator of ambition, its NO different from us offering a player 19 x the average wage now which would be 33k x 19 = 11-12k a week....

 

Its really simple and am surprized Turkish with you ogical brain is unable to grasp this simple concept.....

[Turkish]

We may have to agree to differ - as you are not seeing the obviousl logic

 

1982

 

Average wage - 9k a year

Footballer average wage £40k a year

 

A multiple of around 4/5 times the man in the street wage - with me (as this is important)

 

KK was on 175k a year - a multiple of 19x the average wage of the man in the street in 1982

 

 

 

You cannot simply say its the same as 4 or 5 times the average PL footballer wage in today's terms as an indicator - I have just said that a KK wuold now cost 220k a week which is actually 6 times the 33k average.....nothing new there...

 

BUT lets look at what has happened - 33k a week average is 50 times the average annual wage. someone on 220k a week is 357 x average wage (compared to 4 times and 19 times in 1982)

 

If you want to use this as an indicator of ambition, its NO different from us offering a player 19 x the average wage now which would be 33k x 19 = 11-12k a week....

 

Its really simple and am surprized Turkish with you ogical brain is unable to grasp this simple concept.....

 

Err so what?

 

Keegan was on 4.5 times what the average footballer was on in 1982. If he was on 4.5 times what the average footballer is on now he'd be on £150k a week. It's simple The Voice of Reason. Very simple.

[Frank's cousin]

Dear oh dear What is it about you "intelligent posters"?!!

 

You just dont get it do you? People have been at pains to announce that we've never had ambtion and resource before. That we were held back in the 80's because we didn't have a rich owner and the Dell was too small. We are going to attract all these millions of new fans becauser it's different now than in the 1980s when we had a team full of internationals, finished second in the league, played in Europe every season.

 

No resources and ambiton. Yet we signed the European Footballer of the year on 4.5 times the average wage for that time. Which today would put him on near on £150k a week.

 

"but but but, that damed Dell, it held us back" Err not quite my ol' chum, we actually averaged 7k less than capacity in our best season ever. Our biggest crowd was 3.5k less than capacity that season.

 

I know you lot cant get over it and hate it but thems the fact our dear old intellegent posters. We weren't held back by anything at all.

 

And it's nothing to do with what might happen in the future. just merely pointing out how wrong you people are that can remember the Munich air crash that actually, we have had ambition and resource in the past.

 

This where you are wrong - We could afford to pay 1 player a wage equivilant to that of 4 players in 1982, because IN 1982 that 175 k a year was like us spending 625k a year on that player in today's terms.... which even without the Sky monies distorting income, many Championship clubs could afford it on gate + commercial revenues - now we could NOT afford a 220k+ a week player even with the Sky money - so using 1982 as amrker of ambition is simple flawed.....

Edited 15 May, 2012 by Frank's cousin

[aintforever]

How many billionares were around buying football clubs in 1982?

 

What's that got to do with anything? I'm illustrating the point that the club didn't have the resources to build a new 35K ground at Western Esplanade in the 70s/80s even though they wanted to.

 

We could now. We have the ambition AND resources.

[Frank's cousin]

Err so what?

 

Keegan was on 4.5 times what the average footballer was on in 1982. If he was on 4.5 times what the average footballer is on now he'd be on £150k a week. It's simple The Voice of Reason. Very simple.

 

Are you really that thick? or WUMing for Britain

[Saint86]

Another breath taking dull and rambling and wide of the mark post.

Who is using them as a Benchmark of what crowds we would get not. People are claiming that in the early 80s we were held back by the Dell. We weren't. In our best season ever we averaged 18k and had a high of 21k in a 25k capacity stadium.

 

I don not understand you.

 

You are either an egit, or you have got confused with your argument and lost the plot so to speak.

 

What relevance is the capacity during the 80's - the climate has changed several times over. We now have a 32k stadium, we have had far less success in the last 10 years than in the 10 years prior to the 80's yet our attendance is 14k higher? So quoting a limited attendance from the 80's make no sense... why are you doing it? Your post have just been rude and condescending and at little to the discussion other than stating that you have an 80's dell sized brain and can't let go of the past / can't aknowledge change.

 

There is clearly a geniunine scope to expand the stadium. However it will likely wait until midway through next season to be announced, perhaps later. To what degree it is expanded is the only unknown in my view (unless we are relegated). The simple truth is that right now, we have just been promoted. We will now get a £40m income increase.... and this is ample to support our current and indeed the likely increased wage structure we will be running. Especially when considering the fact that the ambition is to rely on 50% youth players.

 

As a business plan, the only way to increase income is to generate additional sources (the £40m is fixed relative to every other club in the league - they all get it and will get what it changes to.)

 

The logical next step is to increase attendances as this will boost revenues in the long term. There will also be marketing abroad, something that will have been aided by Lee's signing (although I am not saying that this is the only reason we signed him).

 

The best time to expand the stadium is when we have an excess income due to larger TV revenues and what are effectively only large championship wage costs. Add to this the fact that several players will be on the way out.

 

Now, if you can not see that they stadium expansion will happen, indeed that it must happen, then I quiestion your intelligence, although that is allready under review due to your continued quotage of irrelevant 1980's figures. In addition, cut out your abuse it is not needed, and you let yourself down, you also let the club down in the eyes of any other fans that visit this forum.

 

Also, the OP was in relation to a 5 year plan. Well, as discussed, I feel that ofc the minimum objective is survival. But that is a minimum. I would imagine that they will be aiming for a position between 10-15th place. This will follow for the second season as well. They will then reassess and expansion is likely to come to the fore after either of these seasons if we are on target. They will then look to push on and go for 7-10th in the later seasons and push for europe or a good cup run. I trulyl believe that this is possible within 5 years. Look at recently promoted teams such as Ipswich who got straight into Europe and Newcastle this season. You also have the impressive performances of Norwich and Swansea, clubs that we are better than IMO.

 

After these 5 years the club will look to stabilize at this level and push on to being a regular qualifier for europe and perhaps further. I do believe that with the right decisions and the backing and ambition of Cortese that anything is possible. I also think that the man expects and I can't fault one major decision that he has made.

[Turkish]

What's that got to do with anything? I'm illustrating the point that the club didn't have the resources to build a new 35K ground at Western Esplanade in the 70s/80s even though they wanted to.

 

We could now. We have the ambition AND resources.

 

paying the European footballer of the year 4.5 times the average footballers wage isn't having ambition and resorces then?

[Turkish]

I don not understand you.

 

You are either an egit, or you have got confused with your argument and lost the plot so to speak.

 

What relevance is the capacity during the 80's - the climate has changed several times over. We now have a 32k stadium, we have had far less success in the last 10 years than in the 10 years prior to the 80's yet our attendance is 14k higher? So quoting a limited attendance from the 80's make no sense... why are you doing it? Your post have just been rude and condescending and at little to the discussion other than stating that you have an 80's dell sized brain and can't let go of the past / can't aknowledge change.

 

There is clearly a geniunine scope to expand the stadium. However it will likely wait until midway through next season to be announced, perhaps later. To what degree it is expanded is the only unknown in my view (unless we are relegated). The simple truth is that right now, we have just been promoted. We will now get a £40m income increase.... and this is ample to support our current and indeed the likely increased wage structure we will be running. Especially when considering the fact that the ambition is to rely on 50% youth players.

 

As a business plan, the only way to increase income is to generate additional sources (the £40m is fixed relative to every other club in the league - they all get it and will get what it changes to.)

 

The logical next step is to increase attendances as this will boost revenues in the long term. There will also be marketing abroad, something that will have been aided by Lee's signing (although I am not saying that this is the only reason we signed him).

 

The best time to expand the stadium is when we have an excess income due to larger TV revenues and what are effectively only large championship wage costs. Add to this the fact that several players will be on the way out.

 

Now, if you can not see that they stadium expansion will happen, indeed that it must happen, then I quiestion your intelligence, although that is allready under review due to your continued quotage of irrelevant 1980's figures. In addition, cut out your abuse it is not needed, and you let yourself down, you also let the club down in the eyes of any other fans that visit this forum.

 

Also, the OP was in relation to a 5 year plan. Well, as discussed, I feel that ofc the minimum objective is survival. But that is a minimum. I would imagine that they will be aiming for a position between 10-15th place. This will follow for the second season as well. They will then reassess and expansion is likely to come to the fore after either of these seasons if we are on target. They will then look to push on and go for 7-10th in the later seasons and push for europe or a good cup run. I trulyl believe that this is possible within 5 years. Look at recently promoted teams such as Ipswich who got straight into Europe and Newcastle this season. You also have the impressive performances of Norwich and Swansea, clubs that we are better than IMO.

 

After these 5 years the club will look to stabilize at this level and push on to being a regular qualifier for europe and perhaps further. I do believe that with the right decisions and the backing and ambition of Cortese that anything is possible. I also think that the man expects and I can't fault one major decision that he has made.

 

any chance of typing that again in bullet points? It's bad enough have to read "The voice of reason" rambling.

[Frank's cousin]

paying the European footballer of the year 4.5 times the average footballers wage isn't having ambition and resorces then?

 

Yes it shows ambition to some degree, happy to cenced that - but from a financila committment perspective it was less of a committment than us signing Rickielambert and paying him 12k a week.

 

That shift has been possible because in part we attract more fans paying higher prices for a seat in a decent facility + supplemented by the Liebherrs - this is why you simply cant make such a comparison

[Turkish]

Are you really that thick? or WUMing for Britain

 

I dont understand what the average wage of an office worker or builder in 1982 has to do with what a footballer would be on now.

 

Like for like comparisons. Keegan was on 4.5 times the average footballers wage. On the same ratio he'd be on £150k a year. It doesn't suit your intelligent posters argument and just because you dont like it because it doesn't suit you "we didn't need rescourses in 1982" arguement but it's clear as day.

[Turkish]

Yes it shows ambition to some degree, happy to cenced that - but from a financila committment perspective it was less of a committment than us signing Rickielambert and paying him 12k a week.

 

That shift has been possible because in part we attract more fans paying higher prices for a seat in a decent facility + supplemented by the Liebherrs - this is why you simply cant make such a comparison

 

Obviously they are going to pay a higher price. It's 30 years later FFS. Does a loaf of bread or litre of petrol cost the same now as it did in 1982?

[Frank's cousin]

any chance of typing that again in bullet points? It's bad enough have to read "The voice of reason" rambling.

 

- you really are a comic genius what shall I call you then? - TBH I could waste time thinking of something suitable, but you really are not worth the effort

[Turkish]

- you really are a comic genius what shall I call you then? - TBH I could waste time thinking of something suitable' date=' but you really are not worth the effort [/quote']

 

Yet you're going on and on and on and doing all sorts of sums to prove that we lacked ambition and resource is 1982, when we clearly didn't.

[Frank's cousin]

I dont understand what the average wage of an office worker or builder in 1982 has to do with what a footballer would be on now.

 

Like for like comparisons. Keegan was on 4.5 times the average footballers wage. On the same ratio he'd be on £150k a year. It doesn't suit your intelligent posters argument and just because you dont like it because it doesn't suit you "we didn't need rescourses in 1982" arguement but it's clear as day.

 

 

Good loordy - Can you not see that the only way your argument stands up is if the AVERGAE footballers wage had grown at the normal inflationary rate realtive to everything else?

 

Lets make it simple

 

1982

Average yearly salary £9,000 per year

Avergae footballers salary £40,000 per year

KK salary £175,000 a year

 

2012 (if everything had grown in relative terms - meaning it would be Saints showing the SAME level of ambition now as then)

Average yearly salary £33,000 per year

Average Footballers salary £200,000 per year (£3800 per week)

KK type salary approx £650,000 per year (£11,000 per week)

 

2012 REALITY which shows its impossible to judge Saints ambitions now on 1982 standards

Average yearly salary £33k

Avergae footballers salary £1.5 million

KK type salary £10 million a year +

 

Uhm. what you are comparing is us spending £175 k a year on KK in 182 and saying ist the same as us spending 10 mil a year now - when the reality is that spedning £175 k a year in 1982 is the same as spedning £650k a year now.... 'reasonable' enough in any voice with a brain