Days of yesterday year

[Brin]

Brin, with the greatest respect your list is selective and clearly intended to make a point. I picked three random seasons from the 1960s, 1980s and early 2000s. Some of the teams you list did feature but more usually our opponents were teams like Derby, QPR, 'Boro, Cardiff, Huddersfield, Bristol City, Ipswich, Bolton, Millwall. We also played in the league Man City, Wolves, Brentford, Brighton, Villa, Palace, Norwich, Watford, Sheff utd, Forest and Fulham.

Wendun, likewise with respect, I was merely making a viewpoint of who's in the National League now and how far we have come and retained our league status, nothing more nothing less. You're thinking too deep on this one pal. It's not a TS praise just an observation.

[wendun]

Wendun, likewise with respect, I was merely making a viewpoint of who's in the National League now and how far we have come and retained our league status, nothing more nothing less. You're thinking too deep on this one pal. It's not a TS praise just an observation.

Brin, whatever your intent the clear implication is - as Towner's post makes clear - that but for the parsimony of TS we would be in Non-league or oblivion. And, as for Lol's mention of Lincoln I did try to make clear I had selected 3 random seasons and we did not play Lincoln in any of those which is why they are not mentioned. By the way, as to your mention of "...how far we have come..." well when I started watching we were established in what is now the Championship and were getting similar crowds.

[CAMiller]

Brin, whatever your intent the clear implication is - as Towner's post makes clear - that but for the parsimony of TS we would be in Non-league or oblivion. And, as for Lol's mention of Lincoln I did try to make clear I had selected 3 random seasons and we did not play Lincoln in any of those which is why they are not mentioned. By the way, as to your mention of "...how far we have come..." well when I started watching we were established in what is now the Championship and were getting similar crowds.

So in essence, we are back where we started whilst some clubs have bettered themselves and some clubs have gone tits up. I think that's what is commonly known as 'the law of averages'.

[wendun]

So in essence, we are back where we started whilst some clubs have bettered themselves and some clubs have gone tits up. I think that's what is commonly known as 'the law of averages'.

Exactly so, Cam. But you have to admit (or perhaps not) that the descent into non-league or worse of some of our old adversaries has been used several times on here to suggest that TS saved us from that fate and that if we'd spent a bob or two we'd obviously have been doomed.

[CAMiller]

Exactly so, Cam. But you have to admit (or perhaps not) that the descent into non-league or worse of some of our old adversaries has been used several times on here to suggest that TS saved us from that fate and that if we'd spent a bob or two we'd obviously have been doomed.

With some pretty strong justification I'd say. I think given what had happened in the 5 years leading up to TS stepping in and the stigma that was later to befall the name of 'Rotherham' that we were much more likely to have headed in the direction of Wrexham than that of Manchester City. If we had then I'm not sure there would have been a couple of Hollywood 'angels' stepping in to try and save our fate 15 years down the line. He may be 'the light bulb king' but I'm glad he is. That doesn't mean to say he's perfect though, who is?

[Brin]

With some pretty strong justification I'd say. I think given what had happened in the 5 years leading up to TS stepping in and the stigma that was later to befall the name of 'Rotherham' that we were much more likely to have headed in the direction of Wrexham than that of Manchester City. If we had then I'm not sure there would have been a couple of Hollywood 'angels' stepping in to try and save our fate 15 years down the line. He may be 'the light bulb king' but I'm glad he is. That doesn't mean to say he's perfect though, who is?

Wendun?

[John2]

Exactly so, Cam. But you have to admit (or perhaps not) that the descent into non-league or worse of some of our old adversaries has been used several times on here to suggest that TS saved us from that fate and that if we'd spent a bob or two we'd obviously have been doomed.

Did you forget that when he saved the club we'd been bankrupt twice in 2 years, lost our stadium, and started a season in the bottom division on -17 points?

Not to mention that the alternative to TS taking over was not existing at all.

Brin's original point was completely valid. Anyone with half a brain and that actually cares about the club can see we owe the man an extraordinary debt.

But maybe you have a point...
Maybe a better list would be the likes of Macclesfield, Darlington and Bury which ceased to exist.

[Lolmorgan]

I think Mark Robins should be given a bit of credit.

[wendun]

Did you forget that when he saved the club we'd been bankrupt twice in 2 years, lost our stadium, and started a season in the bottom division on -17 points?

Not to mention that the alternative to TS taking over was not existing at all.

John, I shall overlook the insults. I have argued at length my opposition on political and philosophical grounds to the "sugar daddy" model of club ownership. I have also laid out the economic aspects.
I find it sad that so-called socialists on here can see no alternative to being "saved" by a rich benefactor. It doesn't matter a fig to me if the owner is "good", it still means we operate at the whim of an individual and that principle is more important to me than sitting in a shiny new(ish) rented stadium. Many people - see for example John Nicholson's article in March 2022 - agree with me. In parts of Europe the English model is considered ridiculous. You can't have it both ways: if undemocratic ownership is wrong in the wider economy it's wrong in football.

[John2]

John, I shall overlook the insults. I have argued at length my opposition on political and philosophical grounds to the "sugar daddy" model of club ownership. I have also laid out the economic aspects.
I find it sad that so-called socialists on here can see no alternative to being "saved" by a rich benefactor. It doesn't matter a fig to me if the owner is "good", it still means we operate at the whim of an individual and that principle is more important to me than sitting in a shiny new(ish) rented stadium. Many people - see for example John Nicholson's article in March 2022 - agree with me. In parts of Europe the English model is considered ridiculous. You can't have it both ways: if undemocratic ownership is wrong in the wider economy it's wrong in football.

Have you heard the expression "don't hate the player, hate the game"?

TS is in no way responsible for the English model of football. It is what it is.

He has run the club about as well as he can under that model.

Football in the UK is a private, capitalist, industry.

As things stood in 2008, without TS the club would have ceased to exist.

Of course, the idealist in me can see the appeal of a community-owned football club, but it's a fantasy in the current system. Who would run it? Who would invest? How would we have built a stadium?

The closest we could have come would have been the Millers Trust taking over in 2008 as a last resort. If that happened do you think we'd be in a better position than we are now?

It's one thing to idealistically prefer a community ownership model, but you probably follow the wrong sport in the wrong country. Regardless, to take out your frustrations at the system on TS is just downright bizarre.