Explain increased money. How does the proposal as is increse money availale to a club?
We already did that thanks. I don't see why our attendances should require us to do it again.Originally Posted by NY Hoop
Except that increased prize money doesn't require hand picking clubs, while UEFA licencing should bring about the infrastructural stuff on its own.This is the turning point for the league. With increased money clubs can improve facilities...
You can't spell failure without FAI
Well congratulations then. All very good projects *thumbs up*
But, serious question here.... Do you think that people in the surrounding area of UCD would have a problem supporting a team with UCD in its title?? People who never attended UCD. People who attended another University and would refuse to support UCD. Working class people in the area who find Universities elitest??
I seriously think that UCD are limiting their options with this name.
None. But I find myself being envious of the way that the IRFU radically changed rugby on this island 10 years (or so) ago. Look at Munster and Leinster now. They are huge. It just goes to show what good marketing can do. I would love if CCFC were as big as Munster.
I honstly feel that the FAI are trying to change our league for the better. And these proposals could possibly do the trick.
I'm sure it has an effect, but I don't think it's something that can't be overcome. No one ever attended a "Bohemians", but it's not bothering their fans. The area's primarily middle class anyway too.
You can't spell failure without FAI
Not addressing the core problems affecting a weak league, purely on the grounds that by it's nature there can never be any conclusive evidence to prove or dispute the impact of any proposed change, is a farcical manifesto for complete inertia.
Sure let's all just sit around doing nothing and just pray for things to get better....
Licensing would be an incredibly slow way of achieving exactly the same desired end. Why tease the proverbial plaster off the wound slowly, when conventional wisdom suggest the pain is less if you rip it off quickly ? If the rigidity of Licensing criteria did increase progressively, there would undoubtedly come a time when clubs like UCD and Dublin City would no longer to meet them - so you'd be in the same position you are now ! You're already complaining about a proposal to increase the required number of seats from 1,500 to 3,000 (as if 3,000 seats would ever be acceptable ina successful preier league anyway !). What if that got pushed to 4,000 ? Why should changes be delayed for the rest of the league, just to prolong the eventual day on which certain clubs inevitably find they no longer meet the rising tide of standards ? That is the key point here - clubs with limited potential are exposed one way or another.
If the FAI really wanted to, they could just raise the Licensing bar to exclude the likes of UCD, which negates somewhat your conspiracy theory.
Thank you. And it was an expression of a vision that I'm sure everyone with an interest in Irish football would like to see happen. Attendances may be more or they may be less under such changes - we can only estimate them. But trying to denigrate a proposal for progress on the minutae on one person's individual vision for the positive impact it could have is straw-clutching.
Last edited by dcfcsteve; 26/05/2006 at 11:36 AM.
It is. Which makes it a good idea - something to be praised rather than mocked. Which is why other clubs are copying us. So your point, again, is moot.
The problem here is that a lot of people are remarkably stuck in their prejudicial views about UCD as a club, even though those views bear no resemblance to reality.
But there's no indication that the proposal is analogous to ripping the plaster off. Conventional wisdom would also state that it's at least better to rip the plaster off slowly rather than hack your arm off to cure the cut.
Sitting around doing nothing? **** off with your strawman argument.Sure let's all just sit around doing nothing and just pray for things to get better....
Would it? You think cherry picking teams is going to suddenly fix everything, but you've still shown nothing to back that up.As for your reference back to Licensing - that would be an incredibly slow way of achieving the same desired end.
Licencing will improve the product and that can't hurt. That's why we support it. Dicking around with everyone outside the top four or five will do nothing but futher harm the competitiveness of the league.
You can't spell failure without FAI
It would be foolish. But it's not what I'm proposing. I'm calling for proper implementation of UEFA Licencing. You've so far ignored my calls to explain why UEFA Licencing (which we have) can't do what you think this new proposal will.
Links to their local communities/families passing on the trend of following Bohemians/History.
Rugby fans then
In that case, yes - I agree. But it should be pointed out that our link with the college is a very clever way of being competitive rather than a way of leeching off someone else financially, as you initially argued.
But there's no indication that cutting UCD and Dublin City from the premier league is analogous to hacking your arm off. More like clipping toe nails if you ask me.
Some of our best fans are rugby fans. Of course, some of us are less interested in it too. Pineapple even goes so far as to dislike it.Rugby fans then
You can't spell failure without FAI
I still can't get this. We set criteria, we judge clubs on this criteria and we establish the division based on this and then what? We have 12 super clubs?
Does it give any indication of the how? Is the how just a marketing plan?
Forget who is in or out for now, anyone who has seen this explain the how please.
But my overall point is that you still haven't shown why this is so much better than competent implementation of UEFA Licencing, which we currently have.
Why vote in a more extreme version of what we we already have? One which will more likely drag the league through the mire once again rather than promote it?
And when we grow back? Is the league going to keep relegating us on the grounds that we're not cool enough? Why does relegating us on non-football grounds help the league?
You can't spell failure without FAI
Exactly.
You can't spell failure without FAI
That was a joke by the way.
There is no guarantee you will be relegated. So enough with the siege mentality. Secondly from looking at this it looks as if its a one off proposal. AGAIN see the bigger picture please.
KOH
From having read the document- UCD are unlikely to suffer much from the changes, but Dublin City probably are. Overall it looks good, although it makes no sense to me to keep the 12 team premier for 2 years and then change. What if it's working out well- why change again? If the 12 team premier isn't the way to go why leave it there for 2 years? I'd prefer a 12 team premier with plenty of ups and downs every year.
The big winners are going to be Shamrock Rovers, who will gain a lot of points based on their performance when they were a financial basket case. Big losers could be Sligo Rovers who need to finish well up this year to avoid being dragged down by their 5 year record.
Also, there no mention of an U18 league or dual registration, both of which I think are very important.
I haven't ignored your calls - I've answered them very clearly above !
Licensing can achieve broadly the same result, but over a dramatically longer time scale. You may think that Irish football has 10 years to play around with creeping towards exactly the same point that this new FAI proposal would get it to anyway, but I don't. Why delay the ineviatble ??
Licensing will not save UCD either. Under increasingly stringent criteria, there will come a time when UCD will inevitably fall foul of it, and find themslves removed form the premiership on off-the-pitch criteria. As I mentioned - you're already complaining about the increase in seat requirement from 1,500 to 3,000. As if 3,000 seats should ever be even close to acceptable in our Premier Division !! What about when the requirement gets raised to 4,000 seats ? Then 5,000 ? Then higher still ? Are you honestly telling me that UCD will be able to maintain the same pace in meeting increases in the height of the Licensing bar as much bigger clubs will be ? If not, then you'll inevitably fall foul of them at some stage. At which stage you'll be removed from the Premier for failing to meet off-the-field criteria. Why are you holding faith in licensing when the end result is almost certain to be the same, and every other club will have been held-back in the meantime ?
Posting Permissions
Quote
Bookmarks