Attendances

[Mattyblue]

It’s a shame for those fans living far away, but no they shouldn’t get to watch every midweek game, just like I shouldn’t get to watch all the away ones.

A stupid idea that could damage attendances - something much more  important.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Mattyblue

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, Mattyblue said:

The impact of the red button will only be properly seen in future seasons. If the crowds of EFL clubs substantially fall then yes the league have made a big error.

The EFL does not have the attraction of the PL, having 10+ home games a season live on TV could make a lot of folk question their future ST purchases*

The deal before this one was fine, 1 or 2 live matches a weekend. I had no expectation to see every midweek away game on my TV, there was no demand for it amongst fans. Will I watch the Swansea away game? Too right I will but I wouldnt shed a tear if it was scrapped - bigger picture.

 

*Yes I know not you chaddy, you’ll be there regardless.

I want to see as many Rovers games as I can. Plus like Ive just said it gives fans who cant attend to not locally or due to family/work commitments chances to see midweek games  

But surely the tv deal need to go up tho to cover lost revenue by clubs tho? 

[Mattyblue]

So do I, but not at the expense of bums on seats. Why not show every game live then? Where does it stop?

I would love to see every game I can’t get to on TV, but I’m happy I don’t get to.  As I care about the well being of the club and the game much more than my selfish wants.

Edited October 14, 2018 by Mattyblue

[JHRover]

The IFollow fiasco is going to be just as damaging as the red button. Yesterday once again, despite originally claiming that there would be a blackout on live broadcasts on Saturday afternoons, all League One and Two games were available via IFollow for £10 in the UK.

So for half the admission cost, plus no travelling, food, aggravation, UK fans can watch their team from their armchair rather than go to the game.

Just how much loyalty do they think they can exploit? It might not have an immediate impact but over a few years as more people try it I'm sure it will drastically impact upon crowds.

Thing is I don't think the League or Clubs particularly care. All they measure success on is cash. We've only got to look at what they've done to the Football League Trophy and taking the Premier League coin to see what their motivations are.

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, Mattyblue said:

So do I, but not at the expense of bums on seats. Why not show every game live then? Where does it stop?

I would love to see every game I can’t get to on TV, but I’m happy I don’t get to.  As I care about the well being of the club and the game much more than my selfish wants.

I worked with a few Liverpool, Everton, Man Utd fans and some attend games regularly and should dont and much rather watch it at home on a dodgy box or Channel. 

Isnt it a UK or UEFA rule that 3pm kick offs cant be show live. 

Where does it stop? It wont. I wouldnt be surprise In 10 or 15 years time that most PL and Championship clubs will have their own tv channel showing every game live for 20 to 30 pounds per month. Same price as a ST ticket. Thats the way its going. 

1 hour ago, Mattyblue said:

It’s a shame for those fans living far away, but no they shouldn’t get to watch every midweek game, just like I shouldn’t get to watch all the away ones.

A stupid idea that could damage attendances - something much more  important.

But surely you want to keep fans and under 16's fans interest in the club who cant attend for various reasons. 

Edited October 14, 2018 by chaddyrovers

[Mattyblue]

So you can’t see a midweek game and you lose interest in the club? 

No course you don’t, that’s life. The very best way to get folk interested in watching football in the ground.

 

[Stuart]

9 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

There’s no point harking back to the 90s, we were the best team in England with all the hangers on that came with that, that club and it’s extended fan base has gone. Jack was right then, he wouldn’t have had the foresight to see the changes in the game and our fairly rapid decline from the elite, we didn’t have the time to fully cement ourselves as THE club outside Liverpool and Manchester in this area for fans wanting to watch top football before we fell away. But modern BRFC, I personally don’t believe will ever need a ground this big.

Much better comparisons would be with the post Jack club, we’ve only come close to filling it with the ‘Taking Back Ewood’ campaign.

End of the day it’s 31,000 and that’s that. But we will never fill it at the prices we charge now, even in the PL. But with TV revenues we certainly could have a go with reduced pricing.

It does make you wonder what the future of football looks like. Empty seats aren’t only a problem for Rovers. It’s endemic throughout the divisions. 

The next obvious step for TV companies is having the red button around the clock - including 3pm. Unfortunately many clubs are dealing with this like pubs did when their footfall dropped off. They increased prices and charged the loyal customers more - driving them away or forcing them to spend less. At the same time they put up a barrier for new punters who had to find an alternative way to get their fix. The pubs closed or limp along still, propped up by the breweries. Clubs will be propped up by TV money (ironically) and by developing players to sell. No change there I guess.

Football will survive like alcohol does but many local clubs will vanish and the football need be satisfied by bigger clubs and by TV coverage of the teams who can sell enough players each season to cover their costs - the ones without cash rich owners at least.

Non-league style football could become the norm all the way up to mid Championship and the ‘haves and have-nots’ system in the PL could be replicated in the second tier. Maybe we only have 60 EFL clubs not 72 - and then maybe less.

It’s a bleak post apocalyptic football landscape but without fans in the ground, it doesn’t matter if you have 30,000 seats or 10,000, if you are only getting 6,000 - 8,000 fans turning up. Maybe smaller stadia are the answer but it’s would be a pretty poor state of affairs if the TV matches were Walsall-style grounds week in week out just to generate any atmosphere.

But no, clubs and TV companies need to find a way to bring people along to live games for the experience while beaming back to those who win’t/can’t. The only way I can see that they do this is for money made from TV has to be shared with clubs to compensate them in offering subsidised tickets. At least that way clubs still get funds.

Football used to be a socialist sport but it’s very much a capitalist one now. If TV continues to take the money and the fans out of the game/grounds then clubs need to take back powers from the TV companies and that means reforming under a new FA-affiliated organisation. But this won’t happen either under the current system where rich turkeys are the ones voting for Christmas.

Sadly the only real answer is simply for fans to put up with the leeches at their clubs, paying the man and fighting to keep hold of their (usually, town) club. Unfortunately we know at Rovers there is no appetite for that from more than a couple of hundred, and no more that 10,000 or so prepared (or able) to pay the man.

What a mess.

[chaddyrovers]

3 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

So you can’t see a midweek game and you lose interest in the club? 

No course you don’t, that’s life. The very best way to get folk interested in watching football in the ground.

 

Kids could lose interested if they dont see games after games..

I want to see midweek away games as I cant get to them atm. 

I love watching live Rovers games in the ground but not everyone is like me tho. So the red button for midweek games does help alot..

[chaddyrovers]

1 hour ago, MCMC1875 said:

Venkys Out

 

Still no answers to very simple questions. I wonder why you cant answer them. Double standards. 

 

[Mattyblue]

They’ll see weekend games and games in school holidays, or all of them, depending on the parent, like they always have. 

We are going round in circles chaddy so I’ll leave it here. I’m not interested in you getting to see games you couldn’t see before, just the well-being of the club. If you think going on for half our home games being shown on TV is a good thing with no negative effects, fine,  the proof will by how much crowds in the EFL fall in the next few years, because that will prove the folly of this initiative.

Edited October 15, 2018 by Mattyblue

[Stuart]

5 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

 

Still no answers to very simple questions. I wonder why you cant answer them. Double standards. 

 

Go down to a Trust meeting, Chris, people there will be more than happy to discuss your simple questions.

[chaddyrovers]

13 minutes ago, Stuart said:

Go down to a Trust meeting, Chris, people there will be more than happy to discuss your simple questions.

These are very simple questions and nothing to do with the Trust and meeting. 

[47er]

Chaddy, you post endless speculation but hound other posters to prove what they are posting is accurate.

You are always asked questions which you never answer and when prodded further you reply "I've already answered that"

And now you claim double standards! You are, thankfully, a true one-off!

Edited October 15, 2018 by 47er

[Neal]

19 hours ago, Leonard Venkhater said:

I agree, Stuart. Now to add the vinegar sponge...

Did anyone else see the Waggott quote about 10th place at Christmas being a good show?

This sums up my ongoing issue about managed decline.

Our self inflicted (bordering on deliberate in my book) relegation experience has now allowed them to depict mediocrity as success. The trouble is that it plays on our natural sympathies with Tony and the players, who fought their way out of the third tier....

 

 

Absolutely. Something I've been saying for years. I don't buy this hiding behind mediocrity because we don't spend more than other clubs... Burnley and Cardiff spent next to nothing and got promoted. I genuinely believe spending large amounts of money in this league counts for absolutely nothing. Look at Dack, Rothwell, Williams, Bell, Evans, Cairney, King, Duffy, Gestede... All of them cost well under a million and would get in most other championship sides. It's a lack of ambition that's killed us since we went down, specifically under Bowyer, who squandered a very good opportunity with the best 11 we've had down in this league. It's about good, strategic and well researched investment and if that squad is has the ability to be promoted, regardless of the transfer fee paid, then promotion should be the aim. 

 

That said, I'm happy to give TM the opportunity to get this group of player established in this league but then the expectation will be the same as it always was. There is a part of me that is thinking that this might be the best opportunity TM might get, regardless if it is our first season back... The league is wide open and Dack may be gone next season leaving us with a big void of goals to find. 

Edited October 15, 2018 by Neal

[AllRoverAsia]

IF the EFL Clubs can derive an income stream from games being live on Sky, iFollow or elsewhere they will not care about ground attendance figures, whilst some Clubs, Rovers being one imo, will continue to try to extort as much as possible from those who do attend.

I can see the ground attendance and TV/online viewer numbers being published.

In all seriousness who, apart from an ardent fan, will switch on the TV or computer to watch a game like Rovers v Wigan or many others. Not many imo.

IF the Championship is rebranded PL2 it becomes a different story opening up the international market to a superb con-trick.

Meanwhile it is good to see that the iFollow and red button codes appear to have been cracked. Long may it continue.

[tomphil]

1 hour ago, AllRoverAsia said:

IF the EFL Clubs can derive an income stream from games being live on Sky, iFollow or elsewhere they will not care about ground attendance figures, whilst some Clubs, Rovers being one imo, will continue to try to extort as much as possible from those who do attend.

I can see the ground attendance and TV/online viewer numbers being published.

In all seriousness who, apart from an ardent fan, will switch on the TV or computer to watch a game like Rovers v Wigan or many others. Not many imo.

IF the Championship is rebranded PL2 it becomes a different story opening up the international market to a superb con-trick.

Meanwhile it is good to see that the iFollow and red button codes appear to have been cracked. Long may it continue.

And the gloss wears off after a few years newness, a few big names haul themselves back to Prem stability, obscene contracts for bang average players and saturation tv coverage are the norm. The tv and advertising giants start to lose interest and bang we have that scenario unfolding again like the digital thing or whatever it was years ago were the money suddenly dries up !!!

Suits running the game won't care though they'll have had their few quid out of it.

[blueboy3333]

21 hours ago, Leonard Venkhater said:

Did anyone else see the Waggott quote about 10th place at Christmas being a good show?

This sums up my ongoing issue about managed decline.

Our self inflicted (bordering on deliberate in my book) relegation experience has now allowed them to depict mediocrity as success. The trouble is that it plays on our natural sympathies with Tony and the players, who fought their way out of the third tier....

 

Managed decline? We've just been promoted, refused bids for our best player and gambled £7m on a 19 year old who hasn't done owt. That's the antithesis of 'managed decline'. 

10th place would be a 'good show' first season back in the Championship. There are a few sticks to beat Waggott with but stating the obvious isn't one of them. 

 

[AllRoverAsia]

26 minutes ago, tomphil said:

And the gloss wears off after a few years newness, a few big names haul themselves back to Prem stability, obscene contracts for bang average players and saturation tv coverage are the norm. The tv and advertising giants start to lose interest and bang we have that scenario unfolding again like the digital thing or whatever it was years ago were the money suddenly dries up !!!

Suits running the game won't care though they'll have had their few quid out of it.

 There is still enourmous scope for broadcasters to increase market penetration in overseas markets such as Asia, Africa and probably South America so has a while to run. It is advertising revenue to the broadcasters that will decide footballs future though.

One day it will be a fully digitalised game to cut out those wage demands, unless we get Android Eastham and Bosman types. Luckily I do not expect to  be around to see it.

[arbitro]

For those old enough to remember the most level playing field was when gate receipts were shared. The incentive for clubs like Rovers was getting into the First Division and playing the big clubs away and getting (after expenses) 50% of the gate money. The big clubs didn't like this so, with the backing of the Football League the rule was changed so visiting clubs got nothing. I have a real fear that sooner or later history will repeat itself and the 'big six' will take a bigger share of the pot primarily because of their box office appeal. I read that the lowest ever Sky audience was recorded for the recent Cardiff v Burnley match which kind of bears this out. Contrast that to Man Utd or Liverpool and their global appeal. Christian Purslow was the Liverpool Chief Executive who went public and actually used Rovers as an example of why Liverpool should get more money. There will be strong resistance from the PL and member clubs but I think the threat of the elite clubs leaving for a European or Global league will put the fear of God into them.

[AllRoverAsia]

1 hour ago, arbitro said:

For those old enough to remember the most level playing field was when gate receipts were shared. The incentive for clubs like Rovers was getting into the First Division and playing the big clubs away and getting (after expenses) 50% of the gate money. The big clubs didn't like this so, with the backing of the Football League the rule was changed so visiting clubs got nothing. I have a real fear that sooner or later history will repeat itself and the 'big six' will take a bigger share of the pot primarily because of their box office appeal. I read that the lowest ever Sky audience was recorded for the recent Cardiff v Burnley match which kind of bears this out. Contrast that to Man Utd or Liverpool and their global appeal. Christian Purslow was the Liverpool Chief Executive who went public and actually used Rovers as an example of why Liverpool should get more money. There will be strong resistance from the PL and member clubs but I think the threat of the elite clubs leaving for a European or Global league will put the fear of God into them.

I thought that changes had already been made in the PL so that the "big" boys were going to get the lions share of the quite recent TV deals. Greed rises to the top, maybe not on Arsenal letterhead this time but similar.

Despite my predections of an increasing pot and for the rich to get richer there is a large part of me that would like to see the whole shitfest implode.

[arbitro]

1 hour ago, AllRoverAsia said:

I thought that changes had already been made in the PL so that the "big" boys were going to get the lions share of the quite recent TV deals. Greed rises to the top, maybe not on Arsenal letterhead this time but similar.

Despite my predections of an increasing pot and for the rich to get richer there is a large part of me that would like to see the whole shitfest implode.

I wasn't aware of any changes either made or impending.

I concur with your second sentence and would like to see the whole Sky gravy train derailed. When I see average Joe's earnings £100k plus on a weekly basis it makes me puke.

[Mattyblue]

Changes were agreed in the summer.

The income from future increases in international TV revenue will be weighted towards those at the top of the table -

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.skysports.com/amp/football/news/11661/11397468/premier-league-clubs-agree-new-way-of-sharing-international-broadcast-revenue

[JHRover]

The FA are the real culprits in all this. They conceded far too much ground in the early 90s when the Premier League was set up. They could have retained control of the beast.

Now clubs have so much wealth and power it is going to be nigh on impossible to stop them.

The threat of a breakaway league could also be immediately stopped if FIFA/UEFA/FA simply point blank refused to sanction such a thing.

[arbitro]

Just now, JHRover said:

The FA are the real culprits in all this. They conceded far too much ground in the early 90s when the Premier League was set up. They could have retained control of the beast.

Now clubs have so much wealth and power it is going to be nigh on impossible to stop them.

The threat of a breakaway league could also be immediately stopped if FIFA/UEFA/FA simply point blank refused to sanction such a thing.

When the PL was created it was known as the FA Premier League. The FA's name was dropped not long after because they had served their usefulness. In every other major footballing country in the world the respective National FA hold the power except England.

[Stuart]

10 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

These are very simple questions and nothing to do with the Trust and meeting. 

You can’t be that invested in your questions then.