|
Post by gasify on Nov 27, 2023 18:09:05 GMT
Surely there is going to be some advertising at the front, like the old totaliser. Could help raise some additional funds to save costs. The angle of the roof is massive, so people will still get wet in the first few rows. Has there been any sponsorship/ naming rights announced? The prevailing winds are from the south west, south or west. Fans in the new stands will be kept dry. We can probably come up with a name that is a bit catchier...
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 27, 2023 12:24:24 GMT
Looking at the way xG is defined, I'm not sure it it is saying that: "xG is calculated using a serious deep dive into the past. To measure the likelihood of shots being converted into actual goals, xG uses historical information from thousands of shots with similar characteristics to estimate how likely a goal is on a scale between 0 and 1. 0 would mean that on average, if 10 shots with similar characteristics had been taken in the past, none of them had gone in, whereas 1 would reflect that all of those 10 shots had gone in." The xG hides the chances created? We could be creating 100 chances and just missing loads or we could be creating a small number of chances and taking more. I'm not sure if this stat is relevant in the "what is wrong debate". It could still be the quality of strikers, it could be the quality of chances created. Let's improve both? 😁 Expected Goals on Target (xGOT) is interesting. This model builds upon the original xG model by crediting on-target shots based on a combination of their underlying chance quality (xG) and the quality of their execution. xG measures the quality of the chances that a side makes and xGOT builds on this to tells us what a team managed to do with these chances. Essentially, xG is a pre-shot model while xGOT is a post-shot model. We have one player Aaron Collins (19th) in the top 50 xGOT player table, compared to a club in the playoffs like Peterborough who have six players in the top 50. That sounds like the new age funky stat to go with. Basically, we can't hit a barn door with a banjo...
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 27, 2023 6:51:59 GMT
Looking at the xG stats right now and our expected goals per game is 1.35 a game. And we score 1.35 goals a game. So we’re not missing loads of chances we’re just not creating lots of very good scoring opportunities and that’s why we’re not scoring many goals. I don’t base my opinions on Rovers on stats I base them on what I see because I’ve seen every game this season . But in this instance the stats do back up what I see, we’re a side who like to knock it about at the back and midfield but by the time we get in to the final third we really struggle because we’re too slow with the ball and lack the movement tempo and creativity to be a top 6 side. I really fail to see how signing JCH or a similar type of striker will solve that other than he might provide us with a better goals to games ratio than Martin. Looking at the way xG is defined, I'm not sure it it is saying that: "xG is calculated using a serious deep dive into the past. To measure the likelihood of shots being converted into actual goals, xG uses historical information from thousands of shots with similar characteristics to estimate how likely a goal is on a scale between 0 and 1. 0 would mean that on average, if 10 shots with similar characteristics had been taken in the past, none of them had gone in, whereas 1 would reflect that all of those 10 shots had gone in." The xG hides the chances created? We could be creating 100 chances and just missing loads or we could be creating a small number of chances and taking more. I'm not sure if this stat is relevant in the "what is wrong debate". It could still be the quality of strikers, it could be the quality of chances created. Let's improve both? 😁
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 26, 2023 13:40:47 GMT
For a so called quality squad Rovers struggle against teams in the top half of the division! Do you watch the game? If so where did we struggle during the game? You've hit the nail on the head. We didn't really struggle at all. In fact, I thought we played well, bringing on Thomas and Brown and going for it does seem to me as that "Plan B" that people say we don't have. It worked, we got the equaliser. Then a rush of blood gave the advantage back to Derby. Even after that and in the 9 mins of injury time, I thought we could equalise. I like Grant as the CB. It means we can get the ball forward quicker and p*ss about at the back less. Why are we always looking for a scapegoat? If there was ever a game to simply dust ourselves down and go again on Tuesday, it was this game. Looking forward to Tuesday still, 3 points are well and truly possible on Tuesday night.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 23, 2023 19:44:08 GMT
Can you imagine the Northampton reaction if we won it?
They will be shouting that it's a fix that Bristol Rovers have won the Bristol Street Trophy!
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 23, 2023 19:41:04 GMT
I've heard this kind of thing before and I didn't understand it then and I don't understand it now. That isn't how contracts work? JB had a 5 year contract. We wouldn't be saying we will pay you for the next five years or until you get another job. We would be saying here is 20% of that five years wages, off you pop. We should be taking the approach that what he said after the Stevenage game was gross misconduct and that he is owed no compensation. Unless severance terms were set out in advance in the contract (or we had sufficient legal grounds to terminate his contract on the grounds of gross misconduct) then he would be entitled to receive his monthly wage until his contract expires - if he accepts another job he’d have to resign and we’d be off the hook. That’s why many managers (Sven Goran Ericsson leaving England being a prime example) have just sat on their big contracts and not rushed into getting a new job. Btw I don’t think for one minute the club would be waiting for him to get another job before appointing a new manager. That is just nonsense. Just googled the Sven situation as I don't remember him sitting on a contract. I found this: www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/football/2006/jan/24/newsstory.sportIt looks like he was paid £5m when he had 2 years left on a £4.5m a year contract. This is the situation that I imagine. You can take a lump sum now and off you pop. I would have expected JB to be offered something like that (obviously scaled to Rovers budget and the contract value). A manager sitting on a contract to the end, doesn't help the manager or the club. I refuse to believe that this is what happens when a football manager is sacked. Maybe it happen in the 90's but not in the last 10 years...?
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 23, 2023 19:30:27 GMT
I've heard this kind of thing before and I didn't understand it then and I don't understand it now. That isn't how contracts work? JB had a 5 year contract. We wouldn't be saying we will pay you for the next five years or until you get another job. We would be saying here is 20% of that five years wages, off you pop. We should be taking the approach that what he said after the Stevenage game was gross misconduct and that he is owed no compensation. We've no idea why JB was dismissed or what compensation he was entitled to? Perhaps the board decided after the Burton loss to dismiss him when they got their chance and he gave it to them on a plate in his post match Stevenage rant? Or perhaps he failed to meet the performance requirements, points/league position wise? What do you think about the suggestion that he will continue to be paid until he gets another job? That was what I was responding to.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 23, 2023 17:23:31 GMT
Why wait for someone to "become available" and not go ahead and headhunt the best person? If we were seriously willing to spend around £2.2m on the JCH deal then there is nothing stopping us from making an approach to a club for the right candidate. IMO it's obvious that the board are waiting for Barton to get a job elsewhere and off the payroll first. I've heard this kind of thing before and I didn't understand it then and I don't understand it now. That isn't how contracts work? JB had a 5 year contract. We wouldn't be saying we will pay you for the next five years or until you get another job. We would be saying here is 20% of that five years wages, off you pop. We should be taking the approach that what he said after the Stevenage game was gross misconduct and that he is owed no compensation.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 23, 2023 5:34:24 GMT
The south stand juts out infront of the away end , so spectators in the corner of the away terrace have to look through the south stand to see the goal mouth area, that is why there is no end on that side of the south stand. If seats were put in the corner of the stand which is currently empty and the supporters stood up from their seats which they do , the view of supporters on the away end would be blocked , so the club have to leave that corner clear of seats/fans. I'm not too sure if it's to do with restricted views from away terrace but it appears on plans there is no end on the left side of stand . Maybe the outer side could be used for a scoreboard screening ?. This raises the question why there is a large gap on the inside top left of stand ?. I have it on good authority that it is a health and safety measure. When the stand is full, there will be a build up of methane. This in itself wouldn't be an issue. However due to the beer and burger origins, it has been decided to have an area to exhaust that methane.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 22, 2023 19:45:28 GMT
Maybe when they extend the East stand the will refurbish the existing section and swap the seats to match the blue with the South Stand and add white for lettering. "The Gas" would be my preference as that is unique rather than BRFC (also Blackburn) "Up The Gas" would be quite cool.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 22, 2023 11:23:59 GMT
I've always thought that this could be a possibility. Maybe it still is. Maybe this is a way of relaxing the restrictions on the land to make way for a stadium? Maybe the new owners have a plan to sell the club with land and planning permission for a stadium? Who knows? 🫰 There is absolutely no possibility of a stadium ever being built on The Quarters site. Boooo
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 22, 2023 6:55:14 GMT
Brentford are a smart club we should aspire to be like IMHO. trainingground.guru/tags/teams/brentford/Their stadium cost just over £70m and over the previous five years to the stadium being built the club had sold players for a combined value of £150m and up to 2021, the average age at which players were signed at Brentford in total since the 14/15 season was lower than 23-years-old. Brentford spent 7 seasons in the Championship at Griffin Park on crowds averaging about 10,300 and then won promotion to the Premier League despite having the fourth-lowest playing budget in the Championship, above only Preston, Rotherham and Burton. They punched above their weight mostly with a combination of smart recruitment and innovative coaching. The likes of Brentford and Luton have shown what is possible and also our former long time divisional rivals Brighton, Bournemouth, Swansea City, Cardiff etc. Swansea had a clear philosophy and you can see that by their managerial appointments when moving through the divisions: Roberto Martínez, Paulo Sousa, Brendan Rodgers, Michael Laudrup, Garry Monk, Graham Potter, Steve Cooper and Russell Martin. “I think the journey the club has been on has been absolutely remarkable. There should be a lot of clubs out there dreaming. Everything is possible if you work hard, have a clear strategy, top attitude and togetherness. I think then everything is achievable in the world” said Brentford Head Coach Thomas Frank. Lee Dykes, the club’s current Technical Director, who has been there since 2019 after joining from Bury, said: “Matthew [Benham, owner] will tell you himself that we never want to be in a position where we have to outspend our competitors – we out think them. That’s why it’s such an innovative club and everything recruitment wise is geared towards that philosophy.” Former Director of Football Rasmus Ankersen said during his time at the club: “Recruitment is the bread and butter of Brentford because we have one of the lowest revenues in the league. We need to make the business sustainable by buying cheap and selling expensive, which is what we’ve done over the last few years. “It comes down to not only being able to identify undervalued talent in the market but also we invest a lot in the development of players. We invest in different types of specialists, whether it be sleep coaches, kicking coaches, to try and raise the level of the players who come in." talksport.com/football/fa-cup/659667/brentford-data-revolution-england-smartest-club-championship-leicester-fa-cup/trainingground.guru/articles/ankersen-how-backroom-investment-pays-off-for-brentfordwww.standard.co.uk/sport/football/brentford-appoint-sleep-specialists-and-ballstriking-coaches-to-claim-edge-in-premier-league-promotion-race-a3945156.htmlbreakingthelines.com/squad-analysis/mathew-benham-brentford-a-story-on-innovation-through-statistical-analysis/trainingground.guru/articles/phil-giles-staying-ahead-of-the-curve-at-brentfordTSG 1899 Hoffenheim are a Bundesliga club that made a 19-year journey from Germany’s fifth division to the Champions League with the help of similiar innovative methods too. www.computerweekly.com/news/450423973/TSG-1899-Hoffenheim-gets-faster-in-the-head-with-SAP-analyticswww.forbes.com/sites/sap/2017/08/15/tsg-hoffenheim-is-tops-in-tech-and-talent/amp/I f*cking love that.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 22, 2023 6:50:39 GMT
Just so I'm understanding this properly, and please someone correct me if not: - South Glos council want to build 70-odd homes at the Quarters - we (the club/owners) own the Quarters and the land - we would NOT be selling up or moving, but simply 'giving back' (at a price) some of the land we acquired for the housing development Semi related but shame we couldn't build a stadium there. Massive amounts of land, right next to Aztec M5/M4 crossover junction and still within the 'Bristol' boundaries (for those understandably not keen on us doing a Brighton and moving outta town). I've always thought that this could be a possibility. Maybe it still is. Maybe this is a way of relaxing the restrictions on the land to make way for a stadium? Maybe the new owners have a plan to sell the club with land and planning permission for a stadium? Who knows? 🫰
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 22, 2023 6:41:21 GMT
Interesting comment. If the same person paid for the asset and then took the asset back, would that be asset stripping? Also plans also seem to have been in place well before they were made public for both new ownership and potential selling of assets. Which is why you'd have to be very cynical to claim it's asset-stripping... "...the activity in which an entity buys an unsuccessful company cheaply and sells its assets separately at a profit..." Maybe I have missed something here. Are you talking about the training ground or are you talking about something else? I thought you were talking about the training ground, which didn't exist when Wael and his family took over. It was pretty obvious when they bought the land that there was more to it than just the training ground. I'm pretty sure it was mentioned here many times about the land being 'banked'. I seem to remember they showed their cards pretty early by trying to get a building classified as habitable within 6 months of buying the land (someone probably has a better memory than me). The fact that they created a new company and bought it through that company also suggested that they had ideas for that land that didn't rely on Rovers. In all honesty, I can't say that I bear any grudge if they end up making 10-20 million from this deal. Even if not a single penny of that is reinvested. They have already put around 30 million into the club. Any new stadium deal, relied on us selling The Memorial ground. Even at UWE where we would have a 200 year lease. I don't remember anyone complaining too hard at that deal. If their goal is Asset stripping then you could say that they are not very good at it. What asset are you concerned about?
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 21, 2023 20:10:00 GMT
The owners were clear about wanting a younger manager with experience of promotion and managing at a higher level. Also mentioned was that backroom staff would be employed by the club - the club wouldn't then incurr the cost of replacing other staff when sacking a manager. The thing is... Once in place a manager can ignore club staff and go to his own contacts anyway. Ian Holloway could be classed as Younger Manager, just depends who he is being compared to... Warnock?
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 21, 2023 20:06:11 GMT
Backpack rule implemented in 1992. Well I'm sure I can remember him going to pick the ball up and the crowd behind the goal shouting at him,think it was jock passing it back. That reminds me of:
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 21, 2023 13:57:23 GMT
We've spent more on the ground this year than we have done for 50+ years? Anyway why are you concerned Rovers have never had any money to develop the ground it's not like it's a new development. Even in the FM deal had gone ahead it would have meant handing the Mem over to CI in exchange for the new stadium. Why shouldn't any Rovers fan be concerned that we are selling parts of training ground land? Anywhere else owners would be accused of asset stripping. There is a huge difference selling the Mem site to fund a brand new modern stadium and selling parts of your assets to tart up a dated stadium by putting ends on stands that are not fit for purpose. Interesting comment. If the same person paid for the asset and then took the asset back, would that be asset stripping?
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 20, 2023 5:55:48 GMT
Look, don't start bringing real world issues into economics. Economic theory is just that, a theory (ceteris paribus). The main point is that we don't make our decisions about going to see Rovers based on price. We base it on our feelings. That is the very reason why we still follow our side when they get relegated. Can anyone remember a time when we got relegated (so a lower quality product) and the prices got reduced? I don't, but still kept going to watch the lower quality product and paying the same price. You bought up the economic theory! If theory didn’t relate to reality then the government wouldn’t bother hiring economists to help formulate policy nor businesses hire the thousands upon thousands of individuals who’d spent time studying economics degrees - resulting in it being one of the most rewarding degrees out there. And I should know as I was once one of them 🙂 even if I have forgotten a lot of it! Reality is we can’t endlessly raise prices. Price elasticity for football tickets in practice is not a linear relationship. Yeah it’s probably less than one (thus technically inelastic) but there will come a point where increases in price will result in a reduction of revenue. If not the club would price tickets higher (as the equilibrium point on the supply and demand curve would be at a higher point) However I will grant you that there is an element of equity in our pricing and the club has seemingly avoided passing on increases in costs over the years. Either way I think the club prices tickets pretty fairly. Away tickets are almost always higher and often significantly so. Even if the facilities are better. Actually, someone else brought up economic theory @topper. My comments to you were around the fact that economic theories assume quite a lot away and so by mentioning the fact that this theory assumes that an infinite price increase will not impact demand, its just a theory. If food prices increase infinitely, we would probably start eating each other. I absolutely agree that there are thousands employed as economists up and down the country and all over the world. The key (Rovers) take aways from this are: Rovers can increase ticket prices and it won't have a massive impact on attendances. By putting more seating in, the average ticket price will increase. There will be standing, but we shouldn't assume it will be in the same ratio as we currently have. As for facilities, that just goes to show that football fans will accept literally standing in p*ss to support their team. I will definately pay more for my season ticket, I expect to be a season ticket holder to the day I die. That feeling at 17:00 after taking 3 points is priceless.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 19, 2023 20:47:25 GMT
Inflation didn't exist in those days. Ok 👍 It was a joke as inflation back in 2021 isn't anywhere near the post Liz Truss level of inflation. Just googling for ticket prices and this is what I found: Season 19/20 was stopped due to the Pandemic and Thatchers season ticket was £285. Season 20/21 was the relegation season and the Thatchers ticket was £285. Season 21/22 was the promotion season in league 2 and the season ticket was £315 Season 22/23 was back in league 1 and season ticket was £339 I've always taken advantage of the early bird price. So it looks like my season ticket increased from £285 to £315 when we were in a lower league.
|
|
|
Post by gasify on Nov 19, 2023 20:21:00 GMT
Did anyone struggle to get a seat with the South Stand tent? As a Thatchers person, I have no idea as to whether seats were easy or difficult to get prior to that stand being removed. Seats always usually sell out first, if we played a well supported side you don't even got the option of buying a seat in the South Stand, the SW stand seemed to be sold out for most games last season. I can understand when we play the bigger sides in the league, they bring more fans and we give them more stand space. I am surprised that last season it was difficult to get tickets. There always looks like there is spaces available from the Thatchers end.
|
|