The Chinaman Has Not Disappeared (14 Viewers)

[TheSnoz]

1Nil, the argument from me is that the 'sicknotes' as I call them are one part of the problem. And I'd agree with you that a good number of posters on here don't represent the views of the average City fan, thank god for that. We'd have far worse troubles if we did.
But can't you see that if missing fans don't turn up they're making it pretty near impossible for the team to improve. Keep repeating it - what magic wand do the absent fans want any City board to wave? - no fans= no money. No improved team.
NOWHERE have I said I'm a better supporter. You're entitled to your views, that's what this forum is all about. I don't get personal. I've got good manners. But I've also got opinions. I don't buy city strips, never liked them as something to wear.

 

---

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Hotrod, Brighton, I can't see my team as a 'product.' I've got an emotional tie with them - it bothers me when we don't do well. I'm not as far gone as that character Michael Palin played in 'Ripping Yarns' who smashed his house up when his team lost mind! You see, what I'm getting at is that some fans don't have this emotional bond. It's the 'entertain me' way of thinking. To me football isn't like going to the cinema or to see a band, it means far more than that.
& I don't buy this argument that Coventry is too cosmopolitan to have big crowds. Have you been to Derby or Nottingham recently? Leicester? Even Norwich, Fulham, come on, that is a tired outdated argument.

To you it's a passion-as it is to all hardcore fans. To a good number of others it's something to maybe do on a Saturday-and if it costs a fair bit and isn't of even average quality, chances are they won't go. I don't see anything wrong with people wanting value for money.

 

[Grendel]

To you it's a passion-as it is to all hardcore fans. To a good number of others it's something to maybe do on a Saturday-and if it costs a fair bit and isn't of even average quality, chances are they won't go. I don't see anything wrong with people wanting value for money.

In pure financial terms it is value for money. In the early 80's we had gates of below 10,000 in the top flight. My only point is if someone was to want a football club the chances are they would look elsewhere as we are not an example of a club that is likely to generate huge revenue.

The passion runs deeper through the waters of the Trent and their east midland neighbours. I used to watch football in derby and Nottingham in the 80's when attended university and the level of enthusiasm and passion was a world away from where we were then and are now.

This is not a criticism but a statement and suggests we should not expect the same success levels. We are more Preston than forest I feel.

 

[dongonzalos]

Average attandence in 1999-2000 was 21000-23000. The capacity at the time I believe was 23500.
That was when we finished 14th and had players like Robbie Keane

A successful product that does what it says on the tin, brings in cutomers, any business in the world knows that it has to attract their customers. It cant just sit their and provide a dodgy product for 12 years and expect this not to affect its custome base.

The arguement that big crowds will lead to a succesful club, Leeds, Man City and Sheff Weds stayed very loyal as they tumbled down the leagues.

Do you think our current owners will think we are get 25k crowds great lets invest any money raised form these crowds into the playing staff?

If they wanted 25k crowds they could get it and possibly very easily at the moment ,with investing in 7 free transfers. I do not think attendences are their priority.

They are depending on the 12 k hardcore and will focus on getting wages down. Be it in this division or below.

If you give Coventry fans a product worth buying I think 25k will buy it. As shown in 1999. 14th in the league is not amazing but it drew in an aver 21-23k. This is the last time I can recall Coventry having a product to excite the fans

 

[SkyBlueBlood]

so we know the name of the guy who is interested (apparently) ....... what exactly would stop SISU going direct to him in that case and cutting out any middleman. It would suit both parties wouldnt it .... it isnt as if the chinese company has any difficulty operating in the english speaking world.....

in hoffman we zzzzzzzzzzzz

SISU probably have gone direct, but what credible businessman would want to deal with them.

 

[SkyBlueBlood]

Average attandence in 1999-2000 was 21000-23000. The capacity at the time I believe was 23500.
That was when we finished 14th and had players like Robbie Keane

A successful product that does what it says on the tin, brings in cutomers, any business in the world knows that it has to attract their customers. It cant just sit their and provide a dodgy product for 12 years and expect this not to affect its custome base.

The arguement that big crowds will lead to a succesful club, Leeds, Man City and Sheff Weds stayed very loyal as they tumbled down the leagues.

Do you think our current owners will think we are get 25k crowds great lets invest any money raised form these crowds into the playing staff?

If they wanted 25k crowds they could get it and possibly very easily at the moment ,with investing in 7 free transfers. I do not think attendences are their priority.

They are depending on the 12 k hardcore and will focus on getting wages down. Be it in this division or below.

If you give Coventry fans a product worth buying I think 25k will buy it. As shown in 1999. 14th in the league is not amazing but it drew in an aver 21-23k. This is the last time I can recall Coventry having a product to excite the fans

That business plan is no different to Tesco saying sales are down lets stop all advertising.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

In pure financial terms it is value for money. In the early 80's we had gates of below 10,000 in the top flight. My only point is if someone was to want a football club the chances are they would look elsewhere as we are not an example of a club that is likely to generate huge revenue.

The passion runs deeper through the waters of the Trent and their east midland neighbours. I used to watch football in derby and Nottingham in the 80's when attended university and the level of enthusiasm and passion was a world away from where we were then and are now.

This is not a criticism but a statement and suggests we should not expect the same success levels. We are more Preston than forest I feel.

I'd disagree-an investor who brought success to Coventry would have booming crowds and be known as someone who took the club out of the doldrums. Enormous potential just waiting for a slither of success to open it.

 

[Grendel]

I'd disagree-an investor who brought success to Coventry would have booming crowds and be known as someone who took the club out of the doldrums. Enormous potential just waiting for a slither of success to open it.

And your evidence is?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Leeds at home in 2010, Chelsea FA Cup tie, taking 11,000 to Old Trafford, the second half of the 2005/6 season, and other times when we did better than wallow in the bottom half. A successful team would bring in much better crowds I'm sure.

 

[Astute]

A successful Div3 team would bring in better crowds than a failing Champ team. We have been a failing Championship team for years now. I could see us averaging at least 20k at home if we do well.

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

Gunnarsson wasn't exactly a fan favourite by the time he left, but people lost their minds when Thomas looked like he was being sold to Liverpool. Between Thomas, Bigi, Norwood and Gardner, yes, that spot next to Clingan was aptly replaced.

No it wasn't imo, if you think so then that is your opinion but I think you are wrong. For 2/3 of the season it was replaced by players who shouldn't have been playing in the first team imo.

You have to take the rough with the smooth. This is about personnel and talent ceilings, not what they did or didn't do over the course of a season. Even if you wanted to do that, it's easy to argue that Juke was only lost in the new year when it looked like we were as good as relegated, that he needed to be sold as his value was at a premium and was bound to decline, and that the club actually improved results with his sale and subsequent replacements.

I would agree to an extent here, it was going to be hard to replace King and who knows what could have happened if Mcdonald had stayed fit. As soon as it became apparent though that Eastwood wasn't going to play any part in the season we should have bought in a replacement though.

All three of whom were regular targets for criticism! Centre midfield had Clingan and any one of Gardner/Bigi/Thomas/Norwood/Deegan. That really should have been sufficient to replace the majority - perhaps even better - the production of the departed Gunnarsson.

Yes I agree they weren't the best players but the season before last when they left these players had a combined 83 appearances across the season, they were good players to have in the squad to have when the injuries hit us, as I have already said Gael and Thomas were not ready to step up to the first team imo so Norwood and Deegan were the only adequate replacements for these players and they only played a combined 43 games in the season, 47 if we take into account Gardners 4 appearances. Again not good enough

We weren't far off, I reckon if we had Norwood and Nimely from the start of the season add one more midfielder and striker and we would have stayed up.

 

[Colonel Mustard]

No it wasn't imo, if you think so then that is your opinion but I think you are wrong. For 2/3 of the season it was replaced by players who shouldn't have been playing in the first team imo.

Fair enough. It's a subjective call.

I would agree to an extent here, it was going to be hard to replace King and who knows what could have happened if Mcdonald had stayed fit. As soon as it became apparent though that Eastwood wasn't going to play any part in the season we should have bought in a replacement though.

CCFC, like most clubs, has finite resources. If one of our star players isn't performing then we can't simply go out and spend a large transfer fee and commit to three years of wages. It is one of the reasons I've been so tough on AT over the past year - CCFC really needs a coach that gets the most out of the players on a regular basis.

Yes I agree they weren't the best players but the season before last when they left these players had a combined 83 appearances across the season, they were good players to have in the squad to have when the injuries hit us

Again, CCFC can't carry expensive passengers, especially those who were subject to so much criticism from fans. Thomas and Bigi may have been raw, but they'll be better players for the experience (like Ben Turner). And whatever flaws they had should have been carried by the experience around them (Clingan, McSheffrey, Bell, Baker etc).

We weren't far off, I reckon if we had Norwood and Nimely from the start of the season add one more midfielder and striker and we would have stayed up.

Agreed, we weren't far off at all, but I'll always say that a change in manager could have been the difference (and a more realistic option).

 

[SkyBlue_Bear83]

Fair enough. It's a subjective call.



CCFC, like most clubs, has finite resources. If one of our star players isn't performing then we can't simply go out and spend a large transfer fee and commit to three years of wages. It is one of the reasons I've been so tough on AT over the past year - CCFC really needs a coach that gets the most out of the players on a regular basis.



Again, CCFC can't carry expensive passengers, especially those who were subject to so much criticism from fans. Thomas and Bigi may have been raw, but they'll be better players for the experience (like Ben Turner). And whatever flaws they had should have been carried by the experience around them (Clingan, McSheffrey, Bell, Baker etc).



Agreed, we weren't far off at all, but I'll always say that a change in manager could have been the difference (and a more realistic option).

Can't really say fairer than that, a lot of the senior players let us down last season at different times throughout the season. Juke for the first half of the season and Keogh are probably the only players who don't fall under that bracket.

Although I will say any change of manager would have been equally as big a a gamble as sticking with Thorn as anyone proven wouldn't want to come here an work under the conditions an neither could we afford to appoint a proven manager.

 

[cloughie]

In pure financial terms it is value for money. In the early 80's we had gates of below 10,000 in the top flight.

Yes and you may find that man utd weren't gettinng 70.000 gates like they do now, It was a different era which you cannot compare to now

 

[Grendel]

In pure financial terms it is value for money. In the early 80's we had gates of below 10,000 in the top flight.

Yes and you may find that man utd weren't gettinng 70.000 gates like they do now, It was a different era which you cannot compare to now

You are on safe ground the capacity was 50,000 I think. Here is the league table;

Club Average vs '82
1 Manchester United 41.695 - 6,5%
2 Liverpool 34.758 - 0,9%
3 Tottenham Hotpsur 30.581 -12,9%
4 Manchester City 26.789 -21,4%
5 Arsenal 24.153 - 5,6%
6 Aston Villa 23.748 -11,3%
7 West Ham United 22.822 -14,2%
8 Everton 20.277 -17,8%
9 Ipswich Town 19.503 -11,0%
10 Watford 19.488 NEW
11 Southampton 18.799 -13,9%
12 Nottingham Forest 17.851 -10,5%
13 Sunderland 17.370 -11,4%
14 Norwich City 16.862 NEW
15 Stoke City 16.622 13,6%
16 Birmingham City 15.638 - 8,6%
17 West Bromwich Albion 15.200 - 9,4%
18 Brighton & Hove Albion 14.662 -19,6%
19 Luton Town 13.452 NEW
20 Swansea City 11.704 -35,8%
21 Coventry City 10.552 -19,5%
22 Notts County 10.265 -11,6%

Thank god for Notts County and so much for Southampton and Norwich never having bigger crowds before the new grounds, in 1986 we managed to break the 11,000 mark.

 

[TheSnoz]

In a city the size of Coventry the crowds are shockingly low. A pity that more don't take the view that if we all stick together, support the team, we can make this team a good one again. I've said it on here before - and apologies for harking back to a figure from the past - 'You can beat a team, but you can't beat a team and a city.' (Jimmy Hill - 1960s.) It was a bit Churchillian granted but you get his drift. And he was right. If you don't turn up (and you live close by, can afford to, but choose not to) you are letting your team down and not playing your part in reviving their fortunes.
And it bothers me that a few on this thread are talking our club down, going down the path of some media with 'unfashionable Coventry,' talk. What planet are you people on? Where's your loyalty, your faith, your support? Like Preston, for crying out loud. Now that kind of talk IS part of the problem.
Brighton Sky Blue is nearer the mark. The crowds would show a big upsurge with even a tiny bit of success. Spot on. But why not pledge your allegiance now? Be one of the 12th men (& women). & don't give me any of that SISU (much as I dislike them) rubbish. Did Derrick Robbins, Peter Robbins, Jack Scamp, John Poynton & all the other City boards tell you their business? Did they heck.
Think a lot of people have what could be called 'Premier League disease.' Probably the younger age group, who, if it isn't Man U & Chelsea, don't want to know. Been said elsewhere, but the Premier League has damaged English football badly.
Until a lot more of you 'Sicknotes' get signed off we have no chance. And remember, I'm not talking about people who live distance away, or unemployed etc. Just the ones who CHOOSE to stay away til things improve (and then jump on the bandwagon & it will come). They're the real sicknotes.

 

[Colonel Mustard]

Although I will say any change of manager would have been equally as big a a gamble as sticking with Thorn as anyone proven wouldn't want to come here an work under the conditions an neither could we afford to appoint a proven manager.

I know a narrative has developed that the club can't afford to sack AT and only have him because he is cheap, but there is plenty of evidence to suggest the club could afford a new manager - look at all the contract extensions, new boardroom hires, and even transfer fees (McDonald) in the last season. Replacing AT would have been a nominal cash issue. I believe he was kept on because SISU didn't want more fan backlash and because of the turbulence in the boardroom.

As for "proven managers", I think it is a dodgy term. There are too many variables to accurately judge the vast majority of managers. For example - the relationship with players, with the board and chairman, the amount of money at their disposal, even home life. Is Roy Hodgson proven or unproven after his sacking from Liverpool? Villas-Boas? Some managers will flourish at one club and do badly at another. So I'm happy to keep chopping and changing until the club finds someone who can do good things within the current circumstances.

 

[SkyblueBazza]

Trouble is Colonel - there was a man named Eric Black who seemed to be doing well & the team played some good stuff with him at the helm...but he was sacked in favour of Peter Reid (I recall someone saying it was "...like sacking Van Gogh & getting Rolf Harris in to finish the ceiling")
We need someone with the vision to recognise when we HAVE a good'n in charge. At the moment being run by none football people (now & previously) - there is little chance of it happening. It's all run for the money not the fans, sadly.

 

[Colonel Mustard]

Quite right, Bazza.

Personally, I've always favoured the concept of two-tier management: a director of football and a first team coach. The DOF being like a general, understanding the limitations of resources and planning a long-term strategy around it. Leave the coaching to the coach. One would think there would be less chance of a Nilsson/Black cock-up, as well as much clearer accountability (fire the coach if they're not getting the most out of the players; fire the DOF if the team is not meeting benchmarks).

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

In a city the size of Coventry the crowds are shockingly low. A pity that more don't take the view that if we all stick together, support the team, we can make this team a good one again. I've said it on here before - and apologies for harking back to a figure from the past - 'You can beat a team, but you can't beat a team and a city.' (Jimmy Hill - 1960s.) It was a bit Churchillian granted but you get his drift. And he was right. If you don't turn up (and you live close by, can afford to, but choose not to) you are letting your team down and not playing your part in reviving their fortunes.
And it bothers me that a few on this thread are talking our club down, going down the path of some media with 'unfashionable Coventry,' talk. What planet are you people on? Where's your loyalty, your faith, your support? Like Preston, for crying out loud. Now that kind of talk IS part of the problem.
Brighton Sky Blue is nearer the mark. The crowds would show a big upsurge with even a tiny bit of success. Spot on. But why not pledge your allegiance now? Be one of the 12th men (& women). & don't give me any of that SISU (much as I dislike them) rubbish. Did Derrick Robbins, Peter Robbins, Jack Scamp, John Poynton & all the other City boards tell you their business? Did they heck.
Think a lot of people have what could be called 'Premier League disease.' Probably the younger age group, who, if it isn't Man U & Chelsea, don't want to know. Been said elsewhere, but the Premier League has damaged English football badly.
Until a lot more of you 'Sicknotes' get signed off we have no chance. And remember, I'm not talking about people who live distance away, or unemployed etc. Just the ones who CHOOSE to stay away til things improve (and then jump on the bandwagon & it will come). They're the real sicknotes.

Now that you have greatly narrowed your definition of a sicknote I'm a lot more inclined to agree with you Snoz. Brighton were a total mess in the mid 90s-no ground, playing in Gillingham, bottom tier football, followed by being stuck at an athletics stadium for a few more years afterwards-scraping by on crowds routinely under 10,000. Now, they've got thousands on waiting lists for season tickets (imagine that at the Ricoh), expanding the Amex after just a year in it and thriving. It just shows what can happen if a club gets some momentum behind it.

 

[TheSnoz]

BrightonSkyblue, those fans who travel and every game is an away game for them are brilliant. Football can be expensive, especially for the beer and pie brigade. Though beats me why anyone would want to be blind drunk at a match (and they are) - but that's another issue. I'm not going to criticise someone with little money. I'm probably cynical because you read so many on here not going and seeming to be proud of it, like wearing a badge. 'I'm a City fan but I don't go.'
Brighton are a club on the up with Tony Bloom money, Gus, Taricco, Otway & co. Their backroom staff you wouldn't believe. Attention to detail. Bloom is the key and someone like that would be great at City. & if we could get that Calderon in at right back that would be brilliant, even though he's knocking on a bit. But it shows, just like you said, fortunes can change quickly in football. One minute it's Dagenham, the next Wolves or the like. Its a nice stadium and they have a station by it too.
Sad to say, but Italy deserved it tonight, didn't they?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

More to the point Snoz, BHA have been through deeper lows as a club than the City and are seriously benefitting from that loyalty. We could learn a lot from what went on there between the Goldstone sale and the building of the Amex-and that's not just local bias creeping in

 

[1940 oldfive]

but the point is nothing to do with who can afford to go and who can't. Over half a century the club has spent 35 years in the top tier and 14 of the other 15 in the second. For a club of modest means this is still punching above our weight.

We do not have the resources of villa, forest, leicester etc. As we no longer have a fan base.

The majority of revenue at this level is through home attendances. So how can a club with poor revenue retain better players and also sign better wants. It cannot without further piling into debt. People go on about going into admin and a clean start. This is delusion. We would go down again and investors would have a high risk project to take on. How would an investor view this project as a worthy venture?

try asking j.h he had the answer a few years back

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

The Snoz says....If you don't turn up (and you live close by, can afford to, but choose not to) you are letting your team down and not playing your part in reviving their fortunes.


I say.....When SISU took control, we were getting crowds in the mid 20k's....They have done NOTHING for this club since the takeover.
We could fill the Ricoh ten times over every week, but they would still do NOTHING!

 

[TheSnoz]

Sky Blue Kid, supporters should support. Good fans = good team.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

If fans show undying loyalty week in week out regardless of performance, it can create a complacency at the top that producing rubbish won't matter because fans will pay regardless. Being hit in the pocket by falling gates encourages them (in theory) to be more proactive and keep on pitch quality at a decent level.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

100% disagree TheSnoz. You are telling me that I'm not a good supporter.....We had good supporters(Mid 20k's) when they took charge....they did fook all about playing staff.......and have done fook all since. Why should I, along with thousands of others pay good money to a hedge fund who have had NO INTENTION of strengthening the team, which in turn, should make a successful side again.........Good owners = good team(Bringing in decent playing staff) You don't sell rotten meat and call it prime sorloin steak do you? Over the last 5 years supporters HAVE backed the team.....What have SISU done?

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

@The Snoz........
Under SISU rule, a load of rubbish.
You don't sell a mini under the guise of it being a Rolls Royce.....You can fool some of the people, some of the time...but...You can't fool ALL of the people ALL of the time.

 

[wingy]

If fans show undying loyalty week in week out regardless of performance, it can create a complacency at the top that producing rubbish won't matter because fans will pay regardless. Being hit in the pocket by falling gates encourages them (in theory) to be more proactive and keep on pitch quality at a decent level.

I would qualify this comment in that the normal rules applying to owning a Football Club are out of kilter in Sisu's vision.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Applies to all areas of business Wingy-if a brand gets itself a monopoly (or as good as) over a certain product or service, standards can easily slip as there're no major competitors to capitalise. In football, brand loyalty is often such that people will keep turning up whether the football's good or not.

 

[dadgad]

The Brighton comparison is a good one.
A inclusive vision based on community, local business and the council singing from the same hymn sheet.
The very opposite of what Ccfc have under SISU.
Until the club is honestly and transparently led from the top down the community cannot be blamed for not buying into it.
They're not mugs, you know?

 

[Grendel]

@The Snoz........
Under SISU rule, a load of rubbish.
You don't sell a mini under the guise of it being a Rolls Royce.....You can fool some of the people, some of the time...but...You can't fool ALL of the people ALL of the time.

You can probably fit our fans in a Mini - that's the problem.

 

[TheSnoz]

If you don't go (see exclusion list, unemployed, live far away etc - posted earlier) and you choose not to support your team then not only are you not a good supporter - you're not a supporter at all. This isn't aimed at you Sky Blue Kid, you're making it personal. I don't know you, you're probably a nice bloke. But if anyone doesn't go and support then they're not a supporter. And I mean the mass of stay away fans. Simple logic.
Brighton? Let's not get carried away. On the up, yep true. But doubt very much their board tell their fans their business. Just one season at their lovely new ground so far, gates around 20,000 - sound familiar. Football is volatile. There is a myth growing (with City especially) that football clubs have to tell their fans their business. This has never been the case anywhere, at any club. At any time. It has never happened. Just the flourishing of the internet and fans talking that has created this idea. I dislike SISU as much as anyone, but I don't expect them to tell me stuff. Older fans will tell you, we never heard Jimmy Hill, Noel Cantwell, Gordon Milne, Dave Sexton, Bobby Gould, all the other managers and definitely not board members. Little bits in the local papers was about it.

 

[Sky Blue Kid]

@ TheSnoz.....

I was a season ticket holder at HR and Ricoh until the beginning ,of last season. 40 odd years in total. I've lived 130 miles from Coventry for nearly 30 years, so it's not a case of not wanting a ST anymore, it's a case of not wanting to pay SISU good money for doing fook all for my club. I'm not trying to make it personal, apologies if taken that way.
SISU need to speculate to accumulate, not suck the club dry, how they have been doing!

 

[torchomatic]

Snoz, I agree. I'm not sure where the fallacy that previous regimes - of any club - have been so open with the fans that they let them know every single thing they are doing comes from. None of our previous lot have.