by loyal1 » 08 Jun 2007 21:42
by URZZZZZZZZ » 08 Jun 2007 21:45
by The 17 Bus » 08 Jun 2007 22:19
by Row Z Royal » 08 Jun 2007 22:26
by Hemenbruff Royal » 08 Jun 2007 22:38
by Hemenbruff Royal » 08 Jun 2007 22:51
by bassavage » 08 Jun 2007 22:51
by The 17 Bus » 08 Jun 2007 22:53
by Millsy » 08 Jun 2007 22:55
by Ian Royal » 09 Jun 2007 01:03
2 world wars, 1 world cup We'd have most likely screwed up big time. Definitely not ready for it.
And I put it to you that the hunger created by *just* missing out was possibly the best thing that ever happened to us - created in club and fans alike an undying passion to make up for a haunting heartbreak.
Missing out in the way we did was, in retrospect, a Godsend.
As was missing out on Europe the way we did.
by Katie Marsden » 09 Jun 2007 01:32
by Behindu » 09 Jun 2007 07:53
by Mr Angry » 09 Jun 2007 08:29
Behindu Promotion in 95 would have been a disaster.
Financially it would have crippled us. 10,000 crowds at EP would have meant either prices rocketing or huge debts. A total lack of hospitality and non footballing revenue would have made the problem worse. We would probably have struggled to keep players let alone sign them.
We would have had a disasterous season and dropped straight back out with the whole experience leaving the club shell shocked.
If we had managed to stay up we would have been faced with the massive problem of making EP all seater (just about impossible) and therefore would have had to groundshare somewhere.
Obvioulsy the 95 events live on in the collective memory. Justbecasue players come and go doesn;t mean that history is forgotten. Murts would have played alongside many players who were here in 95 and people like Ron Grant, Kevin Dillon and Nicky Hammond have many links with that time.
In hindsight it was a blessing that we lost, at the time it seemed like the end of the world. We are a stronger club for it and I'd rather have done things the way we have than had the Barnsley experience.
by papereyes » 09 Jun 2007 10:23
loyal1 if we went up in 95 do you think we would be were we are today or would we have ened up doing a banrsley or a bradford and splashing the cash and then struggling for years on end?
by Bucks Dave » 09 Jun 2007 11:12
by papereyes » 09 Jun 2007 11:16
Bucks Dave If I remember rightly, Elm Park did not meet the Premiership conditions and we would have looked to groundshare.
This would not have been a brick by brick growth. We would have been faced with a crap unacceptable stadium, very poor training facilities, a squad without much depth (a number of our Bolton heroes were walking wounded by the end) and a wage bill set to spiral due to the ITV digital flood of money, followed by the crisis of the taps being turned off, all of it hitting us in one go.
Instead, over time, we built a good stadium ready for expansion in a planned manner, gradually improved our training facilities until they are up there with the average Premiership outfit, have a squad with real depth, a management, coaching and medical infrastructure which can cope and a wages and transfer policy that will not cripple us if anything goes wrong.
Mr Mad said that with hindsight going up in 1995 would have been a disaster. I remember Watford going up in a similar fashion around that time and it took them years to recover.
by Coppelled Streets » 09 Jun 2007 12:01
by RG30 » 09 Jun 2007 12:03
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 330 guests