Who Do You Want?

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

I seem to recall McDermott's Reading team rather ground their way to promotion with 1-0s while the Southampton side who were their rivals were more of a 3-2 team.

Now, I'm not for a minute saying that fans wouldn't jump up and down for joy at promotion of the back of 46 consecutive 1-0s, but it brings up a wider point. On another thread, someone brought up the idea of cutting ticket costs, with a new poster noting that he frequently debates whether or not to go to the match and usually falls on the side of "nah". He's very far from alone in that, as the empty seats testify, and frankly I can't blame anyone who looks at the recent reviews and decides that £30 doesn't represent value for money.

Back up in God's country at the weekend, I was talking to a bloke aged around 50, disposable income, loves sport, used to be a BWFC diehard but also watches rugby league and cricket. For the last two or three years he's been going out with a woman who also used to go to Burnden every fortnight and loves sport; they'd just come back from the T20 finals thing. When I asked him if they'd ever been to the Reebok together, he looked blank, then surprised, then realised that they've never even discussed the idea.

For many people, football just isn't fun any more. Football made itself a "consumer" "choice", and people aren't choosing to go. Can you blame them, when a manager who has just presided over four shots on target in three games incredibly announces that he wants his team to stop being so expansive? And furthermore, when Freedman finally gets the bullet, shouldn't we be placing an emphasis on hiring someone who might just get the turnstiles clicking again?

[boltonboris]

It'd take a Mourinho. Even then, we still wouldn't manage a decent turnout. Simple fact of the matter is that the people of Bolton, just aren't interested in supporting their team.

90% of under 15's, now support the Manchester powerhouses. You see more Barcelona shirts in Bolton town centre than you do white shirts..

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

Not sure it'd take a Mourinho. If we were going at teams, we might have a chance of people going to the match.

I'm not talking brainless Coyle sub-the-tacklers stuff, just better PR, a spirit of adventure. You don't even have to win all the time. Bournemouth, for instance, get a clonking about once every six games - they were 3-0 down by 3.20 on Saturday - but they win a few, and that positivity is probably reflected in how they came back and shat Blackburn up late on.

Bar a few good months under Coyle, we've had nearly a decade of white-knuckled what-we-have-we-hold defensive football. I'm all for shutting the back door - as Pru said elsewhere, for the last five/10 minutes of a game it can (and frequently will) see you out, but trying to do it for an hour is much harder... not least on the fans. "That's entertainment?"

[boltonboris]

We'd get 1500 more at a push in this division.

don't forget there were 45,000 fans who promised to stay away until Megson left.. they never returned

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

As for the under-15s, Boz, that's another thing altogether - football's demographic timebomb of an ageing matchgoing audience not being replenished by a younger generation. That's a problem for almost all clubs (and TBF the club are trying their best in the North Stand, etc) - but perhaps the bigger concern at the mo is losing that older audience *as well*.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

We'd get 1500 more at a push in this division.

Get another defensive manager, we'll get 1500 fewer every season.

[boltonboris]

That's true.. But we'll be forever a club, that cannot fill it's ground./

Had we got to the play offs the other season, we'd have been 5000 short of capacity then too.

We're not a well supported club, due to the local competition. (I read that the North West including Lancs, Manchester and Merseryside) has the highest number of professional clubs per capita in Europe!!

[BWFC_Insane]

I seem to recall McDermott's Reading team rather ground their way to promotion with 1-0s while the Southampton side who were their rivals were more of a 3-2 team.

Now, I'm not for a minute saying that fans wouldn't jump up and down for joy at promotion of the back of 46 consecutive 1-0s, but it brings up a wider point. On another thread, someone brought up the idea of cutting ticket costs, with a new poster noting that he frequently debates whether or not to go to the match and usually falls on the side of "nah". He's very far from alone in that, as the empty seats testify, and frankly I can't blame anyone who looks at the recent reviews and decides that £30 doesn't represent value for money.

Back up in God's country at the weekend, I was talking to a bloke aged around 50, disposable income, loves sport, used to be a BWFC diehard but also watches rugby league and cricket. For the last two or three years he's been going out with a woman who also used to go to Burnden every fortnight and loves sport; they'd just come back from the T20 finals thing. When I asked him if they'd ever been to the Reebok together, he looked blank, then surprised, then realised that they've never even discussed the idea.

For many people, football just isn't fun any more. Football made itself a "consumer" "choice", and people aren't choosing to go. Can you blame them, when a manager who has just presided over four shots on target in three games incredibly announces that he wants his team to stop being so expansive? And furthermore, when Freedman finally gets the bullet, shouldn't we be placing an emphasis on hiring someone who might just get the turnstiles clicking again?

For me this thing about "attractive football" is a red herring.

Obviously winning the league playing lovely stuff will bring the fans in.

How many more would it bring in than winning the league grinding out results? A few I'm sure but for me it would be nowhere near significant.

How many more fans would we get playing what is considered attractive football but finishing 14th compared to finishing 14th grinding it out? Again I don't think it is significant.

Success is what brings the fans in IMO. After that sure nice football is a bonus but that is all it is.

I'm not sure many teams do that well in this league playing "nice football". It is a grind it out league. Obviously having goals in the side makes you more attractive to watch but I don't see many playing free-flowing football week in week out.

I'm not sure there are many teams who struggle but whose fans think its "ok cos we're playing nice football" either.

Good football is also highly subjective. Unless your Barcelona or a top side then for me passing it around for the game is often quite dull as you often lack the ability to unlock sides significantly. And you end up having to play out 1-0's anyway. Possession football is it something people want to watch week in week out? With a good side who can exploit it then yes, but in the championship? I'm less than convinced. Would people have considered Burnley to have played "good football" last season? Because in my eyes they were basically a team that ground results out and had an edge thanks to two very good strikers. They were hardly what I'd call "attractive".

As for the last sentence, Coyle was brought in exactly under that remit after Megson. And look what happened. I don't trust managers who constantly talk about football played "the right way". See Mowbray T for another example. You play for results first and foremost then worry about the rest of it.

[Dave Sutton's barnet]

So how come when we went to QPR, who were then top, in late January they were still advertising tickets for that forthcoming Saturday's match against second-placed Burnley? In the end, for that "title-deciding" game there were 2,000 empty seats in their 18k-capacity ground.

Shit football gets shit crowds. I'm not saying that a Freedman side winning 75% of games 1-0 wouldn't get a few more bums on seats, but the general malaise around the club - one you have mentioned on a thousand occasions - is only going to get worse with such a negative mindset being spouted. The next manager *has* to start to change that, from his public pronouncements to his matchday selections, if we are to have a chance of getting crowds back through the most important sales technique, word of mouth.

You'll go most weeks. Most folks wouldn't. Why? Is it perhaps because if they ask you how much fun you get for your money, you couldn't possibly put the club in a good light?

[Prufrock]

Playing 'nice football' occasionally would be nice. As would having a stated aim which wasn't deliberately not doing.

I too distrust managers who seem to make a point of playing 'good' football over results, but I'm one of those glass-half-full kinda types who thinks one of the reasons football is so successful as a sport is because I think the best way to get results is to indulge in a spot of attacking every now and then. It's also nice when a bit of passing breaks out, especially if it's in their half and at some sort of tempo.

[BWFC_Insane]

So how come when we went to QPR, who were then top, in late January they were still advertising tickets for that forthcoming Saturday's match against second-placed Burnley? In the end, for that "title-deciding" game there were 2,000 empty seats in their 18k-capacity ground.

Shit football gets shit crowds. I'm not saying that a Freedman side winning 75% of games 1-0 wouldn't get a few more bums on seats, but the general malaise around the club - one you have mentioned on a thousand occasions - is only going to get worse with such a negative mindset being spouted. The next manager *has* to start to change that, from his public pronouncements to his matchday selections, if we are to have a chance of getting crowds back through the most important sales technique, word of mouth.

You'll go most weeks. Most folks wouldn't. Why? Is it perhaps because if they ask you how much fun you get for your money, you couldn't possibly put the club in a good light?

It is clearly a complex issue.

What I'm saying is that "good football" is often conflated with a "winning team". I also think that the increased costs, the style of the matchday experience the overexposure of football on TV and better defences in the modern game are all factors.

What Bolton fans want is primarily success. We got better crowds in the premiership even when playing what was considered "poor football". The average attendance in Megson's last full season (as an example) was only ~400 less than in Coyle's first full season. The season we got to Wembley and were perceived at least to be playing "far better football". I don't think it makes a huge or significant difference. If it did these numbers would be far, far further apart.

[Hoboh]

I seem to recall McDermott's Reading team rather ground their way to promotion with 1-0s while the Southampton side who were their rivals were more of a 3-2 team.

Now, I'm not for a minute saying that fans wouldn't jump up and down for joy at promotion of the back of 46 consecutive 1-0s, but it brings up a wider point. On another thread, someone brought up the idea of cutting ticket costs, with a new poster noting that he frequently debates whether or not to go to the match and usually falls on the side of "nah". He's very far from alone in that, as the empty seats testify, and frankly I can't blame anyone who looks at the recent reviews and decides that £30 doesn't represent value for money.

Back up in God's country at the weekend, I was talking to a bloke aged around 50, disposable income, loves sport, used to be a BWFC diehard but also watches rugby league and cricket. For the last two or three years he's been going out with a woman who also used to go to Burnden every fortnight and loves sport; they'd just come back from the T20 finals thing. When I asked him if they'd ever been to the Reebok together, he looked blank, then surprised, then realised that they've never even discussed the idea.

For many people, football just isn't fun any more. Football made itself a "consumer" "choice", and people aren't choosing to go. Can you blame them, when a manager who has just presided over four shots on target in three games incredibly announces that he wants his team to stop being so expansive? And furthermore, when Freedman finally gets the bullet, shouldn't we be placing an emphasis on hiring someone who might just get the turnstiles clicking again?

For me this thing about "attractive football" is a red herring.

Obviously winning the league playing lovely stuff will bring the fans in.

How many more would it bring in than winning the league grinding out results? A few I'm sure but for me it would be nowhere near significant.

How many more fans would we get playing what is considered attractive football but finishing 14th compared to finishing 14th grinding it out? Again I don't think it is significant.

Success is what brings the fans in IMO. After that sure nice football is a bonus but that is all it is.

I'm not sure many teams do that well in this league playing "nice football". It is a grind it out league. Obviously having goals in the side makes you more attractive to watch but I don't see many playing free-flowing football week in week out.

I'm not sure there are many teams who struggle but whose fans think its "ok cos we're playing nice football" either.

Good football is also highly subjective. Unless your Barcelona or a top side then for me passing it around for the game is often quite dull as you often lack the ability to unlock sides significantly. And you end up having to play out 1-0's anyway. Possession football is it something people want to watch week in week out? With a good side who can exploit it then yes, but in the championship? I'm less than convinced. Would people have considered Burnley to have played "good football" last season? Because in my eyes they were basically a team that ground results out and had an edge thanks to two very good strikers. They were hardly what I'd call "attractive".

As for the last sentence, Coyle was brought in exactly under that remit after Megson. And look what happened. I don't trust managers who constantly talk about football played "the right way". See Mowbray T for another example. You play for results first and foremost then worry about the rest of it.

Cock!

It is not about playing the 'right way' every game, nor is it about just results either.
It's about the setup and ability of the team to take advantage of the situation when we come across teams, as we do who are so poor they get smashed out of sight, something we seem totally, with the odd exception, incapable of doing.
Scruffy 1-0's or 0-0's away from home do not matter, it is what we do at home that ultimately makes or breaks clubs, which just is not happening.

[bobo the clown]

When the Reebok was built Gordon Hargreaves was asked why the capacity was 'only' 27,000. He replied that, although there were occasional games where we would be turning people away it wouldn't be that many and that he'd be delighted, if embarrassed, to be eating his words a few years down the line. Well, he hasn't been.

Our support levels, even when doing well, are low. Certainly the blind ecstasy of coming up the leagues and us 'showing the World' ... as per the White Heat phase ... has disappeared. We didn't sell out for the play-off final. We didn't sell out for the FA Cup semi. We know all the reasons. Social, geographic, competitive and they're not going to change. However, even in the past year we've slipped and statements of intent like those of Freedman this week are not going to help.

I live 65 miles away. Whilst not a terrific distance it's hardly on the door-step. I go because I support the club. I will never support any other. But I hope to see decent players putting in a decent performance. I hope for effort, energy and skill. I want to see us win but know we can't always. But I do want some hope.

At present I sit and think "can I be arsed ?" It's a cool 5 or 6 hours from my Saturday when I do. To be told that my club manager intends to educate me, that I had better get used to 'solid' rather than expansive displays, to be sold the prospect of seeking one chance per game an that the club intends then to defend first and foremost is not persuading me that I should be arsed.

[Andy Waller]

When the Reebok was built Gordon Hargreaves was asked why the capacity was 'only' 27,000. He replied that, although there were occasional games where we would be turning people away it wouldn't be that many and that he'd be delighted, if embarrassed, to be eating his words a few years down the line. Well, he hasn't been.

Our support levels, even when doing well, are low. Certainly the blind ecstasy of coming up the leagues and us 'showing the World' ... as per the White Heat phase ... has disappeared. We didn't sell out for the play-off final. We didn't sell out for the FA Cup semi. We know all the reasons. Social, geographic, competitive and they're not going to change. However, even in the past year we've slipped and statements of intent like those of Freedman this week are not going to help.

I live 65 miles away. Whilst not a terrific distance it's hardly on the door-step. I go because I support the club. I will never support any other. But I hope to see decent players putting in a decent performance. I hope for effort, energy and skill. I want to see us win but know we can't always. But I do want some hope.

At present I sit and think "can I be arsed ?" It's a cool 5 or 6 hours from my Saturday when I do. To be told that my club manager intends to educate me, that I had better get used to 'solid' rather than expansive displays, to be sold the prospect of seeking one chance per game an that the club intends then to defend first and foremost is not persuading me that I should be arsed.

I'm in the same boat as you know Bobo. I only go really to spend a bit of time with my dad and see my family these days. It's my last season until something improves sadly. I know it's only 4 games in, but it just seems like deja-vu from last season.

Everyone seems to be coming around from the ground saying the same thing too..

[Abdoulaye's Twin]

Average attendance stats can be found here - http://www.european-football-statistics ... b/bolw.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Looking at those I'd say we're probably in the right area attendance wise given history and the recent years of shite. Football is over exposed, over sanitised and over hyped these days. Add in the 'fun stuff' you get in a 'match day experience' and it doesn't appeal to me any more, and I suspect many others.

I remember going to watch Orlando Magic (NBA) about 12 years ago. Most of the crowd paid little attention to the game until the last few minutes. The whole game they were trying to entertain the crowd with dancers, music, spot the fan on the screen and shooting prizes into the crowd. Make some noise for a prize seemed to be the gist of it. It was awful and football seems to be headed in a similar direction.

[BWFC_Insane]

Average attendance stats can be found here - http://www.european-football-statistics ... b/bolw.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Looking at those I'd say we're probably in the right area attendance wise given history and the recent years of shite. Football is over exposed, over sanitised and over hyped these days. Add in the 'fun stuff' you get in a 'match day experience' and it doesn't appeal to me any more, and I suspect many others.

I remember going to watch Orlando Magic (NBA) about 12 years ago. Most of the crowd paid little attention to the game until the last few minutes. The whole game they were trying to entertain the crowd with dancers, music, spot the fan on the screen and shooting prizes into the crowd. Make some noise for a prize seemed to be the gist of it. It was awful and football seems to be headed in a similar direction.

Yep. It also has the problem of improved technology meaning that it is getting to the point where you get an almost better experience watching on TV. What with the replays, analysis, camera angles etc....like any sport what TV cannot replicate is the atomosphere and feel of being there, but as those things are eroded by the game and its organisation TV is getting closer and closer.

[Armchair Wanderer]

A slightly different angle... £30 to watch a game of football is fine. But £30 to sit next to someone who should know better hurling abuse for an hour and a half, is a bit steep.

[BWFC_Insane]

A slightly different angle... £30 to watch a game of football is fine. But £30 to sit next to someone who should know better hurling abuse for an hour and a half, is a bit steep.

Someone has to sit next to Hoboh I guess.....

[boltonboris]

I just want a manager strong enough and hard enough, to get a stick off the drummers and smash them to pieces with it, then make his way up to the goal music machine and smash that up too..

I'd even forgive shit performances for that.

[Whookam]

and it was his sacking that led to the current decline.

Are you serious?

Yes.

Are you, though? Are you?

If forgot Freedman took us from the Prem to 18th in the Championship and stocked the team with championship quality players for big money...