the boy from saints Posted 1 May, 2009 Share Posted 1 May, 2009 Just watched a longish (compared to The Championship's usual 25 seconds) 'article' on the demise of Saints, Charlton, and Norwich - but focussing on Saints. What was nice was the recognition of Saints being the first BIG casualty of the credit crunch - they played footage of Keegan, Le Tiss and the FA Cup win. Killer was quoted as 'Saints Defender' and Lawro blaming the gamble of clubs spending to get back in the Prem causing the financial problems resulting in relegation. At least we're not forgotten (this was nationwide BBC1 news) - and in the media we're still seen as a big club. Please let there be some good news soon... I'm a bit ****ed so I bet there's already a thread on this as it's taken me bloody ages to type this!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 1 May, 2009 Share Posted 1 May, 2009 Lawro blaming the gamble of clubs spending to get back in the Prem causing the financial problems resulting in relegation. Yes I totally agree with Lawro on that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobM Posted 1 May, 2009 Share Posted 1 May, 2009 It was a good, honest and very sympathetic article, which almost surprised me. I kind of expected it to be more negative towards the huge money spent in football in general, but it was more focused on how sad it is that such a big club could drop so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swannymere Posted 1 May, 2009 Share Posted 1 May, 2009 When have we ever been a 'big club'? This is part of the problem and why we'll never be taken seriously by anybody. We are a medium sized club in terms of fanbase and history, pretending otherwise is what contributed to our downfall in the firstplace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 1 May, 2009 Share Posted 1 May, 2009 It was a good, honest and very sympathetic article, which almost surprised me. I kind of expected it to be more negative towards the huge money spent in football in general, but it was more focused on how sad it is that such a big club could drop so far. I dont live in Soton these days so most people I know are not Saints supporters and are generally sympathetic to our plight. Including a Pompey one who thinks they will be in the same position soon as a number of their players are likely to be sold so relegation is a strong possibility for next season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint63 Posted 1 May, 2009 Share Posted 1 May, 2009 The best bit of P R we could expect at present. It was an honest appraisal, with a tinge of sadness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dicko Posted 1 May, 2009 Share Posted 1 May, 2009 When have we ever been a 'big club'? This is part of the problem and why we'll never be taken seriously by anybody. We are a medium sized club in terms of fanbase and history, pretending otherwise is what contributed to our downfall in the firstplace. That's a fair point, but I think SMS has helped our image If we were still at The Dell, we would never be seen as a big club nationwide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Landrew Posted 1 May, 2009 Share Posted 1 May, 2009 That's a fair point, but I think SMS has helped our image If we were still at The Dell, we would never be seen as a big club nationwide The peculiar thing is that apart from the building of the stadium, SFC has remained a small club in ambition. It was this that intially set off the original relegation, and the general slide began. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamster Posted 1 May, 2009 Share Posted 1 May, 2009 When have we ever been a 'big club'? This is part of the problem and why we'll never be taken seriously by anybody. We are a medium sized club in terms of fanbase and history, pretending otherwise is what contributed to our downfall in the firstplace. This is not personal, but jeez, how old are you? Try to imagine a club signing the current European 'player of the year' (and arguably the best player of his time), imagine a club winning the FA Cup, imagine a club qualifying for a european (KNOCK OUT ie proper)) tournament 4 years running ( I stand to be corrected), imaging a club who had 7 (blah blah) current and ex Englab]nd captains in their squad, imagine a club who the current record appearance for England player plays for, imagine a club who EVERYONE fear palying at their home ground, imagine a BIG CLUB. Imagine hte hurt that those fans feel. That my friend IS/WAS us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Forever Posted 1 May, 2009 Share Posted 1 May, 2009 We have had some good times and I sincerely hope that it won't be that long before they return. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obelisk Posted 1 May, 2009 Share Posted 1 May, 2009 This is not personal, but jeez, how old are you? Try to imagine a club signing the current European 'player of the year' (and arguably the best player of his time), imagine a club winning the FA Cup, imagine a club qualifying for a european (KNOCK OUT ie proper)) tournament 4 years running ( I stand to be corrected), imaging a club who had 7 (blah blah) current and ex Englab]nd captains in their squad, imagine a club who the current record appearance for England player plays for, imagine a club who EVERYONE fear palying at their home ground, imagine a BIG CLUB. Imagine hte hurt that those fans feel. That my friend IS/WAS us Spot on. it's very possible that a lot of younger fans just will not recognise what the reality was just a few seasons ago. I'll not go into details bus as an example I'll just remind folk that Saints were relegated from Div 1 in 1974 with Man ****in' Utd. Ok they got straight back up but in those days there was no big four. The team we play on Sunday were top of the heap in the late 70s. It was the ebb and flow back then but not any more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintjersey Posted 1 May, 2009 Share Posted 1 May, 2009 Just watched it on Iplayer....... my god that was pretty depressing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
St Landrew Posted 1 May, 2009 Share Posted 1 May, 2009 This is not personal, but jeez, how old are you? Try to imagine a club signing the current European 'player of the year' (and arguably the best player of his time), imagine a club winning the FA Cup, imagine a club qualifying for a european (KNOCK OUT ie proper)) tournament 4 years running ( I stand to be corrected), imaging a club who had 7 (blah blah) current and ex England captains in their squad, imagine a club who the current record appearance for England player plays for, imagine a club who EVERYONE fear palying at their home ground, imagine a BIG CLUB. Imagine hte hurt that those fans feel. That my friend IS/WAS us That was largely Lawrie's doing [Yes, Ted got us into Europe too], and all the big club ambitious stuff is his. He wanted a new stadium way back when, but little ambition SFC directors said no. SFC's demise is NOT through overspending on the football side of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swannymere Posted 1 May, 2009 Share Posted 1 May, 2009 This is not personal, but jeez, how old are you? Try to imagine a club signing the current European 'player of the year' (and arguably the best player of his time), imagine a club winning the FA Cup, imagine a club qualifying for a european (KNOCK OUT ie proper)) tournament 4 years running ( I stand to be corrected), imaging a club who had 7 (blah blah) current and ex Englab]nd captains in their squad, imagine a club who the current record appearance for England player plays for, imagine a club who EVERYONE fear palying at their home ground, imagine a BIG CLUB. Imagine hte hurt that those fans feel. That my friend IS/WAS us Hey i remember those times, but let's not forget it was a very short period of time in contrast to what has happened in the whole timeframe of the clubs existance. Nottingham Forest won the European Cup twice, does that make them a big club? You can't rely on what happened in a short time frame in the distant past as an indicator of club size, if it was the case Pompey would be one of the biggest clubs in the country Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bakovnetski Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 Saints failed to gamble on getting back into the Prem in the first season (Fuller £90k) which was what the problem was IMO. Handing £7 Mil to the drunken scumbag Burley a year too late was also part of the problem and paying too high wages for journeymen cr*p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
um pahars Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 Hey i remember those times, but let's not forget it was a very short period of time in contrast to what has happened in the whole timeframe of the clubs existance. Nottingham Forest won the European Cup twice, does that make them a big club? You can't rely on what happened in a short time frame in the distant past as an indicator of club size, if it was the case Pompey would be one of the biggest clubs in the country I did an analysis of Leauge position over the last 10, 20, 30 & 40 years a while back as someone had descrbed us as cannon fodder. Here's the results: Starting from the 2004 season (i.e. the one before we got relegated) and going backwards our average league position has been: 10 years to 1995 = 13th 20 years to 1985 = 13th 30 years to 1975 = 14th 40 years to 1965 = 15th I don't think anyone has ever claimed us to be up there with the big boys regularly fighting for trophies, but over the last 40 years to be 15th out of 92 in the footballing pyramid is a pretty good record. Going back 40 years to 1965 would probably cover the vast majority of those who come on this board, but even going back to late 1950's, we're probably still in the top 20. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gjphilsaint Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00k29ry/BBC_News_at_Ten_01_05_2009/ 20 minutes in... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cabrone Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 I did an analysis of Leauge position over the last 10, 20, 30 & 40 years a while back as someone had descrbed us as cannon fodder. Here's the results: Starting from the 2004 season (i.e. the one before we got relegated) and going backwards our average league position has been: 10 years to 1995 = 13th 20 years to 1985 = 13th 30 years to 1975 = 14th 40 years to 1965 = 15th I don't think anyone has ever claimed us to be up there with the big boys regularly fighting for trophies, but over the last 40 years to be 15th out of 92 in the footballing pyramid is a pretty good record. Going back 40 years to 1965 would probably cover the vast majority of those who come on this board, but even going back to late 1950's, we're probably still in the top 20. Yes, I've always thought that this club was bigger than it's own management and even fans ever gave it credit for. A football club needs confidence and ambition, without it you are only going to slide down. We could have pushed on to be european contenders after 2003 but that lack of ambition came back to hurt us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
georgeismyname Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 Nice piece by the BBC. Pity Lawro forgot to have a shave ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waggy Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 This is not personal, but jeez, how old are you? Try to imagine a club signing the current European 'player of the year' (and arguably the best player of his time), imagine a club winning the FA Cup, imagine a club qualifying for a european (KNOCK OUT ie proper)) tournament 4 years running ( I stand to be corrected), imaging a club who had 7 (blah blah) current and ex Englab]nd captains in their squad, imagine a club who the current record appearance for England player plays for, imagine a club who EVERYONE fear palying at their home ground, imagine a BIG CLUB. Imagine hte hurt that those fans feel. That my friend IS/WAS us Brilliant post, that is also the BIG club that I remember and have been lamenting for the past four years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crouchi Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 We punched above our weight, particularly 78-85, but we have never been a big club and never will be, just like we've never had a massive fanbase. Stadium, statues.. we are not in the top 10, maybe not the top 20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waggy Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00k29ry/BBC_News_at_Ten_01_05_2009/ ffwd to 20:45 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 Wow, that's so depressing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
docker-p Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 (edited) Start by reading Um Pahars post above. There was a very interesting link posted on the old SaintsForum to a site dedicated to professional marketeers. There they had commissioned research into who followed what club throughout the British Isles. Not necessarily who went along and paid, but when asked said they backed team X. I cant find the site again alas, or remember the exact details but it went something like Man U on top of the list (surprise surprise) with an estimated 4m odd fans, Liverpool second with 2m, Rangers or Celtic third and fourth with just short of 2m etc etc. Saints were 17th, (or 18th) sandwiched between Hearts above and Norwich below. The list was just the top twenty in Britain. Notable for their absence was nearly half the premiership including Portsmouth. Does that make us a big club in terms of Man U, Arsenal etc etc? No; but it does show we are a biggish club whose potential should be realised by being a premiership club at least. NB. I think there were 5 scottish clubs in the top twenty Rangers, Celtic, Aberdeen, Hibs and Hearts. Which would make us 12, or 13 in England which ties in fairly nicely with UPs research. Edited 2 May, 2009 by docker-p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ecuk268 Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 We punched above our weight, particularly 78-85, but we have never been a big club and never will be, just like we've never had a massive fanbase. Stadium, statues.. we are not in the top 10, maybe not the top 20 It was a different world back then. You had clubs like Derby and Ipswich winning the league, and Forest winning the European Cup. The gap between the big city clubs and the more modest ones like us was much narrower. I can't see those days ever returning unless football finances are given a major overhaul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 Lawro blaming the gamble of clubs spending to get back in the Prem causing the financial problems resulting in relegation. Yes I totally agree with Lawro on that 7 million spent and then 12million + sold the season after? Can't put it all on that really. I don't doubt for one minute that since relegation from the Premiership we have been vastly cash positive on transfers. That is not the cause, it's about salaries and performances from those receiving them. We failed to downsize all the activities quickly enough,that's where we went wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sussex Saint Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 It was a different world back then. You had clubs like Derby and Ipswich winning the league, and Forest winning the European Cup. The gap between the big city clubs and the more modest ones like us was much narrower. I can't see those days ever returning unless football finances are given a major overhaul. I agree. They're were the dominant team like Liverpool, Leeds, Man Utd but there was never the massive chasm between the handful of top clubs and the likes of us that exists today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eelpie Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 I agree. They're were the dominant team like Liverpool, Leeds, Man Utd but there was never the massive chasm between the handful of top clubs and the likes of us that exists today. But there is a massive chasm between the England team and the rest of the world. Despite the current manager's positive influence, the England team has been struggling to field an international quality squad for a long time. The FA and FL have a lot to answer for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 I agree. They're were the dominant team like Liverpool, Leeds, Man Utd but there was never the massive chasm between the handful of top clubs and the likes of us that exists today. Indeed, but why do Liverpool,Arsenal,Chelsea and Man U have the dominance now? Because they are vastly in debt,debts that other clubs with more modest revenues could never even think of having. When a side costing 300 million plays a side costing 25 million there will only ever be one result, apart from the occasional fluke now and then. For football to become of any real interest to the masses again the debt train has to be stopped. Salary cap and cap on transfers per season has to be introduced. Otherwise the same 4 clubs will qualify for Europe season in season out until a breakaway league is eventually formed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iowsaintsfan Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 I only caught the end of it, and it got alarm bells ringing of what had happened to us Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 I did an analysis of Leauge position over the last 10, 20, 30 & 40 years a while back as someone had descrbed us as cannon fodder. Here's the results: Starting from the 2004 season (i.e. the one before we got relegated) and going backwards our average league position has been: 10 years to 1995 = 13th 20 years to 1985 = 13th 30 years to 1975 = 14th 40 years to 1965 = 15th I don't think anyone has ever claimed us to be up there with the big boys regularly fighting for trophies, but over the last 40 years to be 15th out of 92 in the footballing pyramid is a pretty good record. Going back 40 years to 1965 would probably cover the vast majority of those who come on this board, but even going back to late 1950's, we're probably still in the top 20. So with a mean of 15th Statistically there was a high chance that one day we would finish in the relegation position. Somebody with a good knowledge of Statistics could probably work it out Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 Indeed, but why do Liverpool,Arsenal,Chelsea and Man U have the dominance now? Because they are vastly in debt,debts that other clubs with more modest revenues could never even think of having. When a side costing 300 million plays a side costing 25 million there will only ever be one result, apart from the occasional fluke now and then. For football to become of any real interest to the masses again the debt train has to be stopped. Salary cap and cap on transfers per season has to be introduced. Otherwise the same 4 clubs will qualify for Europe season in season out until a breakaway league is eventually formed. It seems to be similar in other countries like Spain Italy and Germany does nt it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 It seems to be similar in other countries like Spain Italy and Germany does nt it? Probably but the debt levels are probably nowhere near as great. If you take Germany for instance the top 3 this year aren't the same as last year. If you take Wolfsburg for instance. Top this year, 5th last year and 15th the two years before that, so progress has obviously been made,I'm not an expert on their structure but I wouldn't say their outlay on players is anywhere near that of Bayern Munich who are only 3rd this year.Italy? well AC Milan came a cropper last year and their championship seems to have 5 or 6 clubs who regularly battle it out.Don't know anything about debt levels though. Those side certainly don't cost anywhere near MU's or Chelsea's. Arsenal looked in serious difficulty this time round but hup a little 12 million dob for Arshavin seems to have put them back on course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hamster Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 Indeed, but why do Liverpool,Arsenal,Chelsea and Man U have the dominance now? Because they are vastly in debt,debts that other clubs with more modest revenues could never even think of having. When a side costing 300 million plays a side costing 25 million there will only ever be one result, apart from the occasional fluke now and then. For football to become of any real interest to the masses again the debt train has to be stopped. Salary cap and cap on transfers per season has to be introduced. Otherwise the same 4 clubs will qualify for Europe season in season out until a breakaway league is eventually formed. Nail on head WC, nail on head mate. If ever a cliche was written for football in the modern times, it was that it is not a level playing field. And I wouldn't have it any other way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 Nail on head WC, nail on head mate. If ever a cliche was written for football in the modern times, it was that it is not a level playing field. And I wouldn't have it any other way. Man U Chelsea etc can service the debt but I doubt if Pompey can long term And the Gulf is getting wider I notice Man U and Liverpool are interested in Lennon of Spurs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daren W Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 The peculiar thing is that apart from the building of the stadium, SFC has remained a small club in ambition. It was this that intially set off the original relegation, and the general slide began. Now that is good point. Our transfer record is, correct me if I'm wrong, Rory Delap... Bought with Dell money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toadhall Saint Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 Indeed, but why do Liverpool,Arsenal,Chelsea and Man U have the dominance now? Because they are vastly in debt,debts that other clubs with more modest revenues could never even think of having. When a side costing 300 million plays a side costing 25 million there will only ever be one result, apart from the occasional fluke now and then. For football to become of any real interest to the masses again the debt train has to be stopped. Salary cap and cap on transfers per season has to be introduced. Otherwise the same 4 clubs will qualify for Europe season in season out until a breakaway league is eventually formed. Which is the intention anyway. By the time a wage cap has been introduced it will only apply to the Prem and below as there will be some sort of European "Super" league which contains the top 18, 14 of which are the G14 who really control the European Champions League. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Window Cleaner Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 Now that is good point. Our transfer record is, correct me if I'm wrong, Rory Delap... Bought with Dell money The infrastructure of the club just cost too much money, big sales and low buys = no money. Doesn't make sense at all does it?.Record sale what 10 million or so from Walcott,8 from Deano,7 from Bridge,7ish from Bale, 6 from Beattie,5 from Jones,3 from Baird,7 plus recent add ons from Crouch plus all the bits and bobs that we've sold on a continual basis yet we have no money. We've got to have harvested nigh on 60 million in transfer fees these last 6 years or so .Something in the cost structure is top heavy and I can't see it being the Stadium really,true we wasted a lot of money on bit part player but honestly it just doesn't add up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daren W Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 The infrastructure of the club just cost too much money, big sales and low buys = no money. Doesn't make sense at all does it?.Record sale what 10 million or so from Walcott,8 from Deano,7 from Bridge,7ish from Bale, 6 from Beattie,5 from Jones,3 from Baird,7 plus recent add ons from Crouch plus all the bits and bobs that we've sold on a continual basis yet we have no money. We've got to have harvested nigh on 60 million in transfer fees these last 6 years or so .Something in the cost structure is top heavy and I can't see it being the Stadium really,true we wasted a lot of money on bit part player but honestly it just doesn't add up. It's not just me then who thinks somewhere along the line something's amiss. We're told transfers in equalled transfers out in the Premiership, so with all those big money transfers out there must have been an awful lot of players bought for a million or so and just given away... Transfers in = transfers out. Sky & Premiership money = Wages So what does the stadium income cover? Payoffs? Admin costs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toadhall Saint Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 It's not just me then who thinks somewhere along the line something's amiss. We're told transfers in equalled transfers out in the Premiership, so with all those big money transfers out there must have been an awful lot of players bought for a million or so and just given away... Transfers in = transfers out. Sky & Premiership money = Wages So what does the stadium income cover? Payoffs? Admin costs? I'm with you on that - I think there has been some creative accounting on the way, well that how it looks on the face of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 2 May, 2009 Share Posted 2 May, 2009 The infrastructure of the club just cost too much money, big sales and low buys = no money. Doesn't make sense at all does it?.Record sale what 10 million or so from Walcott,8 from Deano,7 from Bridge,7ish from Bale, 6 from Beattie,5 from Jones,3 from Baird,7 plus recent add ons from Crouch plus all the bits and bobs that we've sold on a continual basis yet we have no money. We've got to have harvested nigh on 60 million in transfer fees these last 6 years or so .Something in the cost structure is top heavy and I can't see it being the Stadium really,true we wasted a lot of money on bit part player but honestly it just doesn't add up. Take say the £3m for Jones that went on Euell's and John's Wages Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now