The best programme

[Schumi]

What is the best programme in the league?

[Schumi]

Leaving aside bias (maybe it'd be better if people voted for away programmes, i.e. not their own club?), I'd have to say that Cork's is the best I've seen. I don't buy programmes all that regularly so I haven't seen all of them by any means.

[James]

ok v early days yet.. lol only 2 votes but poll is bound to come out at a win for cork city given that most ppl here are from cork
hardly gona be a credible poll (even if gerry's cork city matchday mag is the best read EVER)

[Bluebeard]

Obviously, then, just vote on the away programmes if you feel you cannot make a considered and impartial choice! I would imagine that most of you who vote will be able to be level headed and fair and from Cork all at the same time ;)

Only slagging boys, I wish our programme could be as good.

[James]

na methinks the cork muppets will vote for the city matchday mag cause its the best ... impartiality! never, shure we're from cork like

[pineapple stu]

Originally posted by James
the poll is bound to come out at a win for cork city given that most ppl here are from cork

Have to agree obviously - although how to explain Bohs' 30% so far???:confused:

Might be more informative if people give comments on the programmes they've read?

Bohs - Only saw this for us and Rosenborg - absolutely nothing in it. One long article (about Kenny hoping to retain the league v. us and the trip to Belarus v. Rosenborg). Even lost the full colour front cover! 5 /10

Cork - Wasn't bad, although when we played, it was a joint programme for the League Cup as well - don't know if it was made any bigger for the two games. Always one of my favourite programmes over the years. Very much livened up by those two articles by me this year, I thought! :D Don't like the A4, but that's just a personal preference I suppose... 7½ /10

Derry - Always a neat enough programme, although that random page taking really REALLY old jokes and inserting Finn Harps is a bit wierd! 7 /10

Drogheda - Didn't see this, but apparently isn't as good as last year. Wasn't bad last year, although as I remember, did suffer from a bit of a lack of content.

Longford - Hmmm...Shamrock Rovers are we? And Drogheda had this problem too! Seem to be many silly mistakes, and not a whole lot of content either. 4 /10

Pat's - Was impressed with the 48 pages - although 22 were ads! Then there was the manager's message, the chairman's message, the SEI message, etc., not to mention the two or three articles with the "let's take the pi$$ out of UCD 'cos we don't like them" (not saying they don't have a point, just to make it three times in the official match programme for the game against us is very petty.) Most of the articles were just reviews of the last fortnight's action as well. 6 /10

Shamrock Rovers - Didn't see. Usually good if not spectacular. Bobby Best does a very good job though.

Shels - Never a bad programme (think Cork got a very off day - shouldn't blunt the poll too much). E2.50 normal price, by the way. A few articles, although a bit more of the slagging og the opposition - 6½ /10

UCD - I know the reason I set out the programmes like this was to avoid favouritism, but I honestly reckon ours is the best programme in the league (in terms of content anyway - couldn't care less for all the glossy paper which everyone else seems to think is essential), which is why I voted for it. Okay, we don't go for mad glossy paper and fancy coloured designs, but sure there's no real need to if it's only going to cost a huge amount more - certainly, no-one's complained to us about it anyway. 6 ads (including the cover) in a 28 page programme - most of the rest is reading, and we try and keep the content interesting to home and away fans (general articles, round up of foreign leagues, reviews of previous encounters, etc.). We've added an extra four pages since we last played Cork as well. Dublin Daily gave us the best programme out of the ones they ever got around to reviewing (Drogheda, Bohs, Shels, Bray and Kildare), and I think I have to agree! 8½ /10

Waterford (almost forgot yez!:o ) - haven't seen it.

[ramsie]

Dont forget Cobh Ramblers programme "THE RAMBLER"

[A face]

Didn't look before leaping .... saw the poll and went straight for City, but if i could vote again i'd vote for Derry. Haven't read many but from what i have seen it is good.

[pete]

Turners Cross is the further "away" day for me.

CCFC "match day magazine" by far the best seen this year.

Bohs & Rovers euro efforts were very poor.

[pineapple stu]

Just read Drogheda's programme last night - hate to draw conclusions based on one issue, but it was appalling! Our player profiles (all eleven of them, which were spread out over two pages as the font size was so big!) were two years out of date, and Pat Jennings' profile started with Barry Ryan's old profile! And seeing as we'd been in touch with them only two weeks before about their profiles, there was no excuse for getting back in touch with us about ours! There was no content apart from a random three-page smattering of various football trivia - again, with a proper font, this would have taken up only one page. One page only had "Support the Drogs" on it!!! The manager's column used the term "had of gone in" - that's how much literacy was involved. And then there were the claims of how the printers produced the "quality match-day programme" and how Drogheda were playing "some of the best football ever seen in the eircom League"!!! I kid you not!!!

There were so many ads it was ridiculous - I appreciate they bring money to the club, but if they're going to charge two quid, they should have a minimum degree of content.

[The Donie Forde]

Originally posted by pineapple stu
And seeing as we'd been in touch with them only two weeks before about their profiles, there was no excuse for getting back in touch with us about ours

Any chance you could p/m me the contact you made, pineapple stu? Or maybe, e-mail me the profiles you (?) got from them? I've been on to Drogs at their 'official' e-mail address, and at their printers, but have received no reply...

Earlier in the season they requested and received penpix/info from us...

Most clubs have yet to learn this is a two-way street. I have considered not supplying info to clubs who do not reciprocate, but it is the fans who lose out in the end, not the clubs, if info isn't available.

Donie

[pineapple stu]

We had to take the info from their website in the end - there's a link in the Drogheda section of this website. They're over a year old though, so players have come and gone and bits of info are now completely inaccurate, such as their claim to have had the best defence last season!:D

There's an e-mail on the website, but when we asked about the pen pics, we were just told that we could use them and that they were out of date. There was no attempt made to provide up-to-date pen pictures, or even to say which players had since left or joined.

I'll PM you what we ended up with in the programme - how good it is, I honestly don't know though. It's certainly better than what's on the website.

[UCD_4_Life]

UCD's is the only one I get with any regularity so I'd have to go for ours.

Drogheda's can be decent at times, as can Bohs'.

[d13bohs]

Bohs programme isn't great but I don't often buy away programmes, the reason I voted for it was for the article on Ernie Crawford last night, any of you who visit the Bohs or eL mb's will see why;) :D

[TheRealRovers]

Your missing 12 first division clubs from that list

[pineapple stu]

What's the standard of programme like in the First Division like then? (Might as well get prepared...:( ) I presume they have to suffer somewhat from a lack of contributors and to a lesser extent from a lack of money?

[Finglas BSCY]

Originally posted by d13bohs
Bohs programme isn't great but I don't often buy away programmes, the reason I voted for it was for the article on Ernie Crawford last night, any of you who visit the Bohs or eL mb's will see why;) :D

"Ernie Crawford, he's our friend.....He hates Rovers";) :D

[The Donie Forde]

Originally posted by pineapple stu
We had to take the info from their website in the end - there's a link in the Drogheda section of this website. They're over a year old though, so players have come and gone and bits of info are now completely inaccurate, such as their claim to have had the best defence last season!:D

There's an e-mail on the website, but when we asked about the pen pics, we were just told that we could use them and that they were out of date. There was no attempt made to provide up-to-date pen pictures, or even to say which players had since left or joined.

I'll PM you what we ended up with in the programme - how good it is, I honestly don't know though. It's certainly better than what's on the website.

Thanks, pineapple stu, and for the pm. Been on their site - I wouldn't use those penpix - just thought you might have had something more up to date from their editor when I saw your original post. :(

Thanks again.

Donie

[A face]

A few of you here are involved in putting programs together.

Between you, could give a little review of the other programs from what you know but include the first division.

I can only imagine that Galways is OK, Waterfords (when in the first) is good. Sligo Rovers (the ones that i have anyway) seem OK. Ramblers is poor enough in fairness. Where it doesn't have colour or paper quality ... it doesn't make up elsewhere.

Some are brutal altogether though.

[Cityace]

Oh, look at shelbourns per cent..............

[pineapple stu]

Originally posted by A face
A few of you here are involved in putting programmes together.

Between you, could give a little review of the other programmes from what you know but include the first division.


I've done mine up above. Don't know anything about the First Division (yet...:( ), although I remember Athlone's was just black and white photocopied (I stand corrected on that now if any Athlone fan corrects me!) when we played them in the relegation/promotion play-off.

Basically, I think the Premier breaks down as follows -

Good - UCD, Cork, Derry

OK - Shels, Rovers, Pat's

Very poor - Longford, Bohs

Appalling - Drogheda (they only had half the results filled in in their cross section table, and their season line-outs didn't say who they played in the second round of the Cup and had results with no line-outs and line-outs with no results!!!)

[Schumi]

Originally posted by TheRealRovers
Your missing 12 first division clubs from that list Polls can only have 10 options max. The majority of people won't have seen any 1st division programmes either.

[SÓC]

From all the Programs in the League that I've seen I'd put Citys on Top, the quality and the content is excellent.

UCD which, if you consider the resources the lads have, is a great achievement, now if only they'd stop gloating about their Dublin Daly score ;)

The Pats one is quite good but one of the regular articles is quite annoying.

Bohs has gone backwards

Longford is a decent enough, but the ones I have are oldish

Shels is normally ok but the one recently was a joke

Drogs and Waterford were shockingly bad.

Rovers would be above Bohs and Shels but below Pats.

[Dodge]

Originally posted by pineapple stu

Good - UCD, Cork, Derry

OK - Shels, Rovers, Pat's

Very poor - Longford, Bohs



Don't mean to be rude lads, but the UCD one isn't good. The presentation is appaling and the articles are hit and miss.

Cork's is the best followed by Rovers. Ours looks the best but the content isn't great but its is only 2 euro so gets extra marks for VFM

[Juz the Hoop]

Shamrock Rovers - Didn't see. Usually good if not spectacular. Bobby Best does a very good job though.

Eh its Robert Goggins that edits the Rovers programme Bobby best is the photographer. IMO we still have the best prog but I have to say I was very impressed with Corks. Especially since my name was mentioned 3 times in it. ;)

BY the way CCFC commercial director isnt bad looking from the photo and she looked decent when on the pitch at half time

KOH

JUZ

[pineapple stu]

Originally posted by Juz the Hoop
Eh its Robert Goggins that edits the Rovers programme Bobby best is the photographer.

I'm aware of that! Just saying that his pictures bring a bit of quality to the programme and I wouldn't mind having someone like him on ours.

[pineapple stu]

Originally posted by Dodge
Don't mean to be rude lads, but the UCD one isn't good. The presentation is appaling and the articles are hit and miss.


Wouldn't agree with that (obviously). We can't realistically afford glossy paper - no ads - but if you reckon that glossy paper is what makes a programme good, that's ridiculous. In terms of inside presentation, I would argue that it's neat, that there's farily few stupid typos or apostrophe errors, that it's largely free of silly ranting at the opposition team and that there's no pages which are filled because we use size 20 font. As I recall, we did have a slight problem with the printers on the Pat's issue in that they shrunk the margins to the side, causeing the text boxes to get dragged away to the right, which messed up any articles with pictures - that was a once off.

As for the articles - you were praising one on the Sligo forum recently! We try to get a fair few articles in, so there's bound to be something you don't find too interesting, but then that's better than reading three pages about how the home team don't like you, isn't it? ;)

[Dodge]

No, glossy paper isn't the only thing, colour is a huge factor though. Some fanzine's have a higher production quality than the UCD programme. The Declan hughes article on Socrates was great (that would be the hit of "hit and miss") and of course I'll give credit where it's due but to call yourselves one of the best in the league is ridiculous.

And it was one article on UCD in the Pats programme, not unlikle WeAreRovers complaining about an article on Rovers in the UCD programme (to be told freedom of speech, club take no responsibility etc)

[James]

agree with the ucd prog like a fanzine in terms of presentation paper quality its poor, dont think much of it or the articles are that great either from what ive seen.. nothing spectacular (declan hughes though normally has an ok piece)

city pats and rovers for me
$hel$ is crap, drogs the same and waaaterford
longford not upto much like boez and ucd
derry above average

[Macy]

tbh I only buy the town programme, and I think it's okay - although it did go through a bad patch earlier in the season... Normally at away games I try and get a Fanzine rather than the programme...

Ultimately I feel the main role of a programme is to provide funds for the club, so I'd offset production values for increased money going into the club....

[James]

ok so dave but if ya offset production values..then surely less ppl will buy the product
ppl i hope, just aint gona buy something like sheep just cause its there (or are they!). if the quality of the product is good, sales will/shud match
simple enough imo :)

all very well the rols of prog to provide funds for club but isnt it also there to inform fans .. its the only regular official mouthpiece most clubs (especially those with no official website ;) have, and this is something the city programme does excellently with good notes from all ppl involveed in the club from the chairman to the manager to both the commercial and community liason manageresses :)
as well as pieces from both supporters clubs and the family enclosure

[Macy]

I didn't necessarily mean put any old rubbish, but say the Town one going to more pictures, colour etc with the same written content and added cost and lose money - that's no help in the long run...

I think the need for all the club notes in the programme obviously shows that those areas aren't getting their message across through the media in general (i.e. not doing their jobs)....

[patsh]

Originally posted by Macy
Ultimately I feel the main role of a programme is to provide funds for the club, so I'd offset production values for increased money going into the club....
But surely the better the quality, the more people are likely to buy it, thus increasing revenue to the club?

[James]

Originally posted by patsh
But surely the better the quality, the more people are likely to buy it, thus increasing revenue to the club?

exactly my point like :D

[Macy]

Only up to a point.... No good selling 2000 top of the range pop up programmes at €2 if there's more money to be made selling 1500 at €2 with an adequate production.....

[James]

depends on who ya talk too
the person producing may well favour as high a quality product as possible
to the club who may well only think bottom line and $$$

me personally i'd say you make it as high a quality as poss given constraints and then long term will be more beneficial.. with increased sales and a more loyal and wider fan/customer base

i take your point though

[Dodge]

Originally posted by Macy
Ultimately I feel the main role of a programme is to provide funds for the club, so I'd offset production values for increased money going into the club....
But is that the main reason, or is the programme more of a PR exercise? If so the higher production quality would be a good thing. If it projects a better image of the club, which helps attract sponsers well then losing a small percentage on sales isn't a bad thing.

A lot of programmes don't serve either function well and are done by programme fans for the sake of it with little thought put in to it (Shels being the prime example)

[pineapple stu]

Originally posted by Dodge
And it was one article on UCD in the Pats programme

Actually, there was the SEI (I think) column and the Archives piece which both directly slagged UCD, if not another piece.

The Pat's programme contained a manager's and chairman's column (both wastes of time in my opinion as they are ridiculously repetitive), various reviews on underage and junior teams and four (I think) columns, each of which rehashed the previous week's action. There were also nearly 25 pages of ads/ground details, etc. which made it hard to find reading material. That's obviously great for the club, but it lets the programme down a bit.

The UCD programme against Pat's had that Socrates article, Clive Delaney interview, look at UEFA's Fair Play award (to be drawn the next week), looks at the leagues in France, Germany, Holland and Kazakhstan, a look at the new Silver Goal rule and other stuff. There were 7 pages of ads, etc. out of 28 pages. In terms of content, then, I don't think it can be argued, admittedly using those two specific examples alone, that the Pat's programme is better than UCD's.

If you think that what makes a programme is having lots of nice colourful pictures to look at, then that's obviously you're opinion and you're entitled to it - obviously ours isn't as colourful as yours. The point was argued earlier that programmes should strive for better quality (i.e. of paper, colour, etc.) over anything else - this isn't true. UCD made a big loss on the programme last year precisely becuase we went for glossy paper, and only average glossy paper at that. Profit is the key factor, not revenue. Being colourful might get a few extra sales in the short term, but long-term, if you have a programme with no or repetitive content, your sales are going to suffer.

Personally, I couldn't care less if a programme is glossy and has lots of colour in it - I buy a programme for a good and interesting read. On that basis, I have UCD's as one of the better efforts in the league.

[Dodge]

Ok we're getting into personal opinion here but both the Pats one and the UCD one had roughly 20 pages of content. The pats one is full colour, the UCD isn't. Although we have more ads, they are matched by content so it isn't an absurd amount.

The article isn't an SEI one, its just written by someone involved in the SEI organising...

I don't want to sound like I'm having a go at the UCD programme, I just think that your self praise was misplaced. You like it and thats fine and I hope it does make UCD money. I just thought I'd give my view on it.

I also said our's wasn't great, but it serves its purpose in terms of PR, informing supporters of club events and the ads bring in much revenue.

[James]

Originally posted by Dodge
You like it and thats fine and I hope it does make UCD money. .

agreed
i hope it makes UCD money too :rolleyes: :eek:

one thing on this
other clubs programmes the money / profit goes to the respective clubs

is it true that the with the UCD programme, the profits alledgely go to the editors/ppl involved in its production? - just a rumour i heard btw
*not an allegation.. yet*

[Schumi]

Originally posted by pineapple stu
that's obviously you're opinion :eek: I'm shocked. :D

[WeAreRovers]

Of course this is all personal (biased) opinion but does the fact that Rovers programme wins Programme of the Year consistently not have any bearing?

IMHO colour and layout do count for an awful lot, which I assume is why Rovers' wins so many awards. Cork's programme is pretty good as is Pats. They'd be the best 3 for me.

UCD's is a fanzine and Boh's is straight out of the 50s. Colour, lads, colour. Then again I work in publishing so what do I know. :)

KOH

PS my favourite programme fook up of recent times - an ad in the gypo news (or whatever it's called) for ringtones. Soul Man by..........Chas and Dave. :D

[Dodge]

Over the last couple of years rovers has been the best but this years Cork's has improved dramatically

[pineapple stu]

Originally posted by Dodge
Ok we're getting into personal opinion here but both the Pats one and the UCD one had roughly 20 pages of content. The pats one is full colour, the UCD isn't. Although we have more ads, they are matched by content so it isn't an absurd amount.

I also said our's wasn't great, but it serves its purpose in terms of PR, informing supporters of club events and the ads bring in much revenue.

Right - might as well finish this off before it gets as tedious as another manager's comments!

I still don't think colour can offset content - in terms of content, ours is definitely the most varied. Pat's is obviously much better in terms of ads and PR, but I'd say what makes a good programme, especially from a fan's point of view, is content, not ads; again colour isn't content.

Your comment Pat's one was that it looks the best (agree), but that the content isn't great yet it's good value for money - contradiction surely???

Maybe I overpraised ours - easy to do really! - but I also think such words as "appalling" and "not good" were over the top. There is content and formatting/layout, which from a fan's point of view is 90% of the battle surely?

Anyway, I did say that the Pat's one was OK, so I am ceding yez something!!

[Dodge]

how is not good over the top...

And I'm only going on the UCD v Pats one which you admitted had some faults (which lead to the appaling comment (as regards presentation)

[WeAreRovers]

Originally posted by Dodge
Over the last couple of years rovers has been the best but this years Cork's has improved dramatically

I was very impressed by Cork's programme the other night (not that I bought a copy!)

Considering it's been touched by the hand of Dolan it's damn good.

KOH

[max power]

i think what macy is trying say can be put another way, new orders song blue monday was the biggest selling 12" single of all time , but they made no money because of the lavish blue vynal and the expensive blue velvet sleeve, what was the point of really expensive production costs if it meant you were going to make no money, surley the point fo a programme is to tell about the players and club and to inform away supporters while making as much money as possible for the home club ???

if the product is more important then maybe we should get in professional writers and a design team and go for the booker prize each year ???

i agree with macy, but he'll probably change his mind once he sees i've agreed with him. LOL

[pineapple stu]

Originally posted by Dodge
how is not good over the top...

And I'm only going on the UCD v Pats one which you admitted had some faults (which lead to the appaling comment (as regards presentation)

Surely though you can't make such broad and blunt (i.e. "not good") conclusions based on one issue which had a one-off problem on a couple of pages? That's like saying your programme is appalling because you missed out on four of our players in the team line-outs or because our crest was only in black and white throughout the programme! The content is really what makes a programme (again from the fan's viewpoint), and I'd much rather read interesting snippets on the Iraqi league (or even four "hit-and-miss" articles for that matter) than five columns, each of which rehashed the previous two weeks' games. You've admitted the Pat's content isn't great yet you still rate it good value for money - how's that? You rate the Pat's programme better than the UCD one because it has more colour and roughly the same number of pages of content -


both the Pats one and the UCD one had roughly 20 pages of content. The Pat's one is full colour, the UCD isn't.

Again, by that logic, if a programme contained twenty pages of "xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx" in red font, it'd be better again.

Anyway, are we finished cyber-ranting at each other yet?:D

Oh, and I'd like to answer James' earlier comment by stating that most of the proceeds from the programme do indeed go back (indirectly) to the club.






That club being Angel's...;)

[The Donie Forde]

Originally posted by WeAreRovers
I was very impressed by Cork's programme the other night (not that I bought a copy!)

Considering it's been touched by the hand of Dolan it's damn good.

KOH

Thanks for the praise, cheapskate! ;)
Always good to hear a positive word or two from visiting fans. FYI, Pat Dolan's contribution to City Edition is simply and solely his programme notes.

Robert Goggins is doing a top job with your own issue, IMO, and he's also extremely helpful to us whenever we request anything Rovers-related.

Donie

[James]

Originally posted by pineapple stu
by stating that most of the proceeds from the programme do indeed go back (indirectly) to the club.


where do the rest of the proceeds go
tut tut so much for doing prog for the love of your club..student scum :D