It's Quiet 17 - Glory Thread

Alan Harper's Tash said:
I actually asked a few Oldham fans when discussing something similar last season and they told me politely to fuck off.

That was whilst they were owned by their previous, awful owner too.

I guess the only way we could think of it in their terms is if we were offered to be the rag B team in 1999, how would you respond?
Click to expand...
When you put it like that... :-)

HOWEVER, City have never been Oldham's bitter rivals outside of the few season our paths crossed.

Scenario: When Bury were about to go under, do you think they'd have told City to fuck off if we came with a buyout plan & to also transfer our U23's to them & keep the best of what they already had?

If I was a Bury fan & that was the only way to save my club, I'd have bitten City's bleedin hand off!
 
Dribble said:
When you put it like that... :-)

HOWEVER, City have never been Oldham's bitter rivals outside of the few season our paths crossed.

Scenario: When Bury were about to go under, do you think they'd have told City to fuck off if we came with a buyout plan & to also transfer our U23's to them & keep the best of what they already had?

If I was a Bury fan & that was the only way to save my club, I'd have bitten City's bleedin hand off!
Click to expand...
I think it’d take the Bury scenario to change people’s minds.

It’s the loss of their identity. They’re not Oldham anymore in anything but name. They become City B etc.

If I were them, I’d definitely have some form of partnership where they can take 6 players on loan from us each season.
 
Alan Harper's Tash said:
I think it’d take the Bury scenario to change people’s minds.

It’s the loss of their identity. They’re not Oldham anymore in anything but name. They become City B etc.

If I were them, I’d definitely have some form of partnership where they can take 6 players on loan from us each season.
Click to expand...
I'd choose the loss of identity over the loss of the club. I disagree with them becoming Bury FC in name only.

Years ago I worked for a company who were taken over by a multinational. Everything on the surface remained the same. We retained our name & management & the only differences we saw is a few different faces around, massive investment in our infrastructure & better pension benefits.

The company is still going very strong & has grown exponentially with many of the staff I worked with still there & many working there until retirement.

If I were Oldham or Bury, I'd take that over what they've currently got. I'd probably see it as City securing the future of a local club.
 
Dribble said:
I'd choose the loss of identity over the loss of the club. I disagree with them becoming Bury FC in name only.

Years ago I worked for a company who were taken over by a multinational. Everything on the surface remained the same. We retained our name & management & the only differences we saw is a few different faces around, massive investment in our infrastructure & better pension benefits.

The company is still going very strong & has grown exponentially with many of the staff I worked with still there & many working there until retirement.

If I were Oldham or Bury, I'd take that over what they've currently got. I'd probably see it as City securing the future of a local club.
Click to expand...
It definitely makes business sense.

We’ll probably never know what it would feel like at the time of making the decision.

Having an rich owner with nothing to do with your club geographically isn’t that dissimilar, I guess.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.