[Archived] Lancashire United-Pros and Cons

[cn174]

I'm sure you are right, but once again, it's a short term view.

People slated MK Dons, yet in 10 years, they have 10,000 fans. Not a bad start, in a place that wasn't a hotbed of football.

Yea but they were gifted a place in the football league, in League bloody 1, not even in the bottom. Lancashire United would start in Division 10!

[Stuart]

Hmm, you know we have more than 10,000k really. We wouldn't be having this 'serious' debate if we'd not been screwed over by some clueless nobheads and we'd still be averaging mid 20s. But anyway if MK Dons were made to start in the equivalent league (I dunno what it is there - Kingston league or somat) would they have 10k on by no. Not a chance.

It would take a good 10 years at least from inception to even make it into the football league, by which point everyone would've lost interest long ago. The most successful new club around here is FC United, they have potentially got a massive fanbase, they've got big money behind them, but their progression hasn't been as quick as everyone predicted once they got into the Unibond/Evostik. There's no evidence whatsoever to think that a Lancashire United team would do any better than that.

By the time Lancashire United reached the football league 'everyone' would have got bored waiting for a 'successful' local team.

I'm not so sure we do these days. I was talking to someone recently who mentioned that a lot of fans they know, who have stopped attending, were actually neutrals who only came because the tickets were so cheap. These people are the first to leave following relegation.

The other side of this is that it assumes that LancsCo would have to start at the bottom of the pyramid. Even Rovers were going out of business, couldn't a group apply to take the Rovers share - MK Dons style?

Look, I know that this is a debate I won't/can't win but it shouldn't dismissed just because it's different. It's a pretty big leap but I can definitely see merits in trying to look beyond the diminishing Blackburn fanbase - and dare I say, think big.

Yea but they were gifted a place in the football league, in League bloody 1, not even in the bottom. Lancashire United would start in Division 10!

I have to say, btw, I REALLY hate the term "Lancashire United". I prefer Lancashire County.

[Ewood Spark]

I'm not so sure we do these days. I was talking to someone recently who mentioned that a lot of fans they know, who have stopped attending, were actually neutrals who only came because the tickets were so cheap. These people are the first to leave following relegation.

The other side of this is that it assumes that LancsCo would have to start at the bottom of the pyramid. Even Rovers were going out of business, couldn't a group apply to take the Rovers share - MK Dons style?

Look, I know that this is a debate I won't/can't win but it shouldn't dismissed just because it's different. It's a pretty big leap but I can definitely see merits in trying to look beyond the diminishing Blackburn fanbase - and dare I say, think big.

I have to say, btw, I REALLY hate the term "Lancashire United". I prefer Lancashire County.

Anyway ... where has the Organ Grinder got to? ... he seems to have left you dancing without any music!

[Stuart]

Anyway ... where has the Organ Grinder got to? ... he seems to have left you dancing without any music!

[Ewood Spark]

Anyway ... where has the Organ Grinder got to? ... he seems to have left you dancing without any music!

Not good enough ... having met him on several occasions .... that ain't him.

[AlanK]

I remember Oxford and Reading were going to merge years ( 25 ? ) ago. They were going to be called Thames Valley Royals. It never happened and since then both teams have developed new stadiums with Reading having stints in the top league.

As for Rovers, I wish our ground was smaller and therefore fuller. It contributes to the atmosphere.

I also do not understand why people are so against ground sharing. Each team could have their own dressing room, home fans could have their own end. Instead its a venue thats used for its purpose about 30 times a year. Its bonkers.

[jim mk2]

What a waste of time and space this thread is. Impractical, not viable, won't happen.

Next.

[AlanK]

And I thank Jim for giving us the perfect example of out dated and stubborn ideals.

[darrenrover]

Nothing wrong with the 'economic principal' save who would back it in the first instance?

Who would then support it on an ongoing basis?

Like it or not, in this neck of the woods we are somewhat tribal and support of your local team is more often than not passed down through generations. We are not a Milton Keynes/ Wimbledon scenario.

Perhaps just me but if Rovers went tits up tomorrow, the only team I would contemplate following would be BRFC 2013 Ltd.

Other than that I'd become an egg chase follower.

[AlanK]

I agree Darren but would it matter to you if another club played on the same bit of grass every other week. I`d like to think " not really ". Its a no brainer.

[Ewood Spark]

I agree Darren but would it matter to you if another club played on the same bit of grass every other week. I`d like to think " not really ". Its a no brainer.

I suggest that the time to contemplate spending every other Saturday at Whaddon Road has now arrived.

[cop]

Sad state of affairs if the modern football fan only wants to watch top flight football and thinks a merger with rival clubs is the only way to compete. What happened to just supporting your local club?

It seems some football fans have become snobby, the suggestion watching a lower quality of football week-in-week-out seems unacceptable. For those fans, I suggest a Sky Sports subscription.

[AlanK]

I suggest that the time to contemplate spending every other Saturday at Whaddon Road has now arrived.

Funny you should say that. After the floods of 2007 down here, Gloucester and Cheltenham have shared Whaddon Road. No problems.

[jim mk2]

Plastic, hybrid club that will be ignored all the supporters of the town teams and watched by a few thousand, if that many, and whose only effect will be to destroy iconic clubs whose names are etched in football history.

Fail.

[darrenrover]

I agree Darren but would it matter to you if another club played on the same bit of grass every other week. I`d like to think " not really ". Its a no brainer.

No I'd agree with that. Sensible economics in this day and age.

Rovers A one week and Rovers B the following week at Ewood would meet with my approval. ;-)

[Rover_Shaun]

Lancashire United

Used to be a crap bus company and an equally crap idea for a football team.

[darrenrover]

Lancashire United

Used to be a crap bus company and an equally crap idea for a football team.

Next Victor........?

[Rover_Shaun]

If all else fails resort to insults.

[supergrabbi01]

Let's just re-form Blackburn Olympic... We'll still be wearing blue, and we'll have an FA Cup in the trophy cabinet too.

[Exiled in Toronto]

If this idea is so good, perhaps the proponents of it could give us the following so we can properly evaluate it:

- A suggestion for where this team would play and who would have paid for the stadium

- A viable transition plan from several completely independent companies all with customer bases who boycott all the other companies, to one entity where, say, 85% of all the customers have been retained

- A realistic assessment as to which league this newly formed club would commence playing in

- Who would pay for the above activities

- Who would own it

- Some examples of where all the above has taken place successfully.

[AlanK]

Some very valid questions with no easy answers.

However, as far as staying as seperate teams but sharing the same ground I give you the teams in Milan.

If Everton and Liverpool have any sense they will follow suit. I know we are all terratorial, but Ewood can stand empty for 2 or 3 weeks at a time. It just does not make sense. Sharing a ground could even add a little spice. Imagine playing a big game at home against the team you share with in a promotion/relegation battle / cup tie.

The away team have their " home " end, the rest of the stadium goes to the home team. Just think about it. Besides, these days, if I plonked the current rovers team in an unfamiliar strip elsewhere you wouuldn`t recognise them anyway. Gone are the days of the local lads playing for the local team.

[Exiled in Toronto]

Some very valid questions with no easy answers.

However, as far as staying as seperate teams but sharing the same ground I give you the teams in Milan.

If Everton and Liverpool have any sense they will follow suit. I know we are all terratorial, but Ewood can stand empty for 2 or 3 weeks at a time. It just does not make sense. Sharing a ground could even add a little spice. Imagine playing a big game at home against the team you share with in a promotion/relegation battle / cup tie.

The away team have their " home " end, the rest of the stadium goes to the home team. Just think about it. Besides, these days, if I plonked the current rovers team in an unfamiliar strip elsewhere you wouuldn`t recognise them anyway. Gone are the days of the local lads playing for the local team.

I don't think you'll find much disagreement with the concept of ground-sharing, and I too wish new Ewood had been a more compact 24-25,000 with Kidder Street still there. We've only filled the current ground probs not even 10 times in 18 years in the top league

[Salgado Is A Hero]

What I'm struggling with is....the whole point of this is to one day support a team that's successful and can challenge all the top teams no?

Well there's a word for somebody who's overly concerned with his team gaining glory.

I'd imagine this point has been raised a few times though.

Lancashire United? Now I'm not from Lancashire, but I'd rather support Tottenham than some b*stard pikey offspring of one team I like, and 3/4 that I don't, in a different kit, with a different name, in a different stadium, no history, no nothing.

Plastic, hybrid club that will be ignored all the supporters of the town teams and watched by a few thousand, if that many, and whose only effect will be to destroy iconic clubs whose names are etched in football history.

Fail.

Yea pretty much that, history is just as important as the future.

[Mr. E]

If such a thing were to happen, I would wish the new club well, maybe even root for it in matches, but the passion would not be there. As someone once rightfully said, you can change your wife, your job, your political views, even your religion - but never your football club. If you've really felt passion for a club once, you know it is not possible to flip a switch and feel the same for another club, even if somewhat connected.

Unfortunately the possibility of no more Rovers is becoming more likely with each new day with Venkys in charge.

[Zulu]

I am all in favour of Venky's buying the dingles, notlob and PNE....

Please keep us out of your crackpot scheme.