[bucko]

Having had time to reflect since the leading scorer in the football league was "sold"

In my opinion the club has shown a lack of ambition, and with that I mean keeping Doyle and therefore making a statement to us fans we are going to give it all we've got to attempt to make the play -offs , and no one can deny we were in a strong position.

We were achieving the 7k average crowds and now I can't fail to see how many will see that we've been sold down the river yet again, and it will be the fans to blame for not coming to support the club and the average will end up just over 6k

Turner stated no need to sell at beginning of January, no pressure yet how it panned out I can't help but think we panicked and just went for the £££ signs

Doyle was under contract and was demonstrating form that could easily have seen another 10 to 15 goals which would of added to his value and made our play off chances more achievable and then take a look in the summer at offers.

We keep supporting the club as we will always do that regardless of who is running the club and whoever pulls on that blue shirt but I can't help but think this season and with the squad we had with Doyle in it had the best chance in years to do something really special and now see that hard work slipping away as we slide down the table.
5th when Doyle left and 4 games later with just 3 points added we have dropped to 9th.
Defeat Saturday could see us in the bottom half and looking over our shoulder at teams below.

I want to remain positive as I believe the season overall has been but we raised the bar and expectations and like so many occasions we are left deflated.

[SixYardBox]

martatcross, on 18 February 2015 - 08:27 AM, said:

why so sure that other players will command money out of the players you mention? can Cook keep bringing them in everytime the crown jewels are sold. How long before he gets P O'd or someone else sees his potential and we sell him too . You say the business will be at a more stable level in 4 years time' yet the off pitch activities i.e concerts lost money what if no one bids silly money for our players because they know Chesterfield sell on the cheap. The Chesterfield footballing public do not historically go to the game if things are not going well. If the home support dwindles to the 4000 mark then selling Doyle for peanuts will be swallowed up by the 3000 bums on seats budgeted for who are not there. ( There is nothing to say the sell ons will ever be activated and we have to wait for the second installment on Doyle) will come back and kick the board right up the seat of the pants.

Add Lavery and Gboly to that list!

[trickytrevsfanclub]

SixYardBox, on 10 March 2015 - 08:00 AM, said:

Add Lavery and Gboly to that list!

Lavery isn't our player.

[Wooden Spoon]

some of the over reactions on this thread are funny, and yet here we sit, just 2 points off the play offs and 12 games to go.

If we are still in with a shout of the play offs, by the time we plat Bristol, then it will have a been a very very good season.

[RikShaw]

a kick in the balls, on 11 March 2015 - 08:56 PM, said:

some of the over reactions on this thread are funny, and yet here we sit, just 2 points off the play offs and 12 games to go.

If we are still in with a shout of the play offs, by the time we plat Bristol, then it will have a been a very very good season.

I agree and it's good to see the feel good factor and optimism returning. Hope even more Spireites are feeling the same way and attend the game on Saturday.
#COYB

[sophocles]

Ok, a few predicted, in the wake of the Doyle debacle, that we'd plummet into the relegation zone, but most of us who disagreed with the decision simply suggested that our progress would be curtailed, the positivity would be dampened, and attendances and therefore revenue would fall. Well we were, of course, correct because that is precisely what happened. As predicted by myself and others, our excellent manager has steadied the ship and will steer us to at least a comfortable mid-table finish or even better. That doesn't invalidate in any way the criticism of that decision because we would in all probability have been at least 5 or 6 points better off if we had avoided the dismal run following Doyle's sale - and that would have placed us right now comfortably in a playoff place. I'm all for positivity now the blunder has been committed, but however well we do from now on it will remain a blunder because we could have done even better. Now that can't be taken as fact, but it is the most likely situation to have occurred if we had retained the leading scorer until the end of the season, so IMO the inference that giving ED away didn't matter or have a negative effect is wide of the mark.

This post has been edited by sophocles: 11 March 2015 - 11:02 PM

[Wooden Spoon]

sophocles, on 11 March 2015 - 10:59 PM, said:

Ok, a few predicted, in the wake of the Doyle debacle, that we'd plummet into the relegation zone, but most of us who disagreed with the decision simply suggested that our progress would be curtailed, the positivity would be dampened, and attendances and therefore revenue would fall. Well we were, of course, correct because that is precisely what happened. As predicted by myself and others, our excellent manager has steadied the ship and will steer us to at least a comfortable mid-table finish or even better. That doesn't invalidate in any way the criticism of that decision because we would in all probability have been at least 5 or 6 points better off if we had avoided the dismal run following Doyle's sale - and that would have placed us right now comfortably in a playoff place. I'm all for positivity now the blunder has been committed, but however well we do from now on it will remain a blunder because we could have done even better. Now that can't be taken as fact, but it is the most likely situation to have occurred if we had retained the leading scorer until the end of the season, so IMO the inference that giving ED away didn't matter or have a negative effect is wide of the mark.

More to do with Roberts being out than Doyle

[dim view]

sophocles, on 11 March 2015 - 10:59 PM, said:

most of us who disagreed with the decision simply suggested that our progress would be curtailed, the positivity would be dampened, and attendances and therefore revenue would fall. Well we were, of course, correct because that is precisely what happened. As predicted by myself and others, our excellent manager has steadied the ship and will steer us to at least a comfortable mid-table finish or even better. That doesn't invalidate in any way the criticism of that decision because we would in all probability have been at least 5 or 6 points better off if we had avoided the dismal run following Doyle's sale - and that would have placed us right now comfortably in a playoff place. I'm all for positivity now the blunder has been committed, but however well we do from now on it will remain a blunder because we could have done even better. Now that can't be taken as fact....

....no, but this is possibly the best stat....

39/27 = 1.44 points a game before Doyle left , then 9/7 since he left = 1.29.

48/34 = 1.41 points a game overall + £1m in the bank + a replacement.

So, if we win Saturday we move to 51/35 = 1.46 overall, and 12/8 since Doyle left = 1.5.

At which time we'll be doing better than when Doyle was here. Progress has not been curtailed. Attendances have not fallen.

[brianclose]

dim view, on 12 March 2015 - 08:44 AM, said:

....no, but this is possibly the best stat....

39/27 = 1.44 points a game before Doyle left , then 9/7 since he left = 1.29.

48/34 = 1.41 points a game overall + £1m in the bank + a replacement.

So, if we win Saturday we move to 51/35 = 1.46 overall, and 12/8 since Doyle left = 1.5.

At which time we'll be doing better than when Doyle was here. Progress has not been curtailed. Attendances have not fallen.

As long as we are within a sniff of the play offs and playing decent football interest will be maintained.

I will reserve judgement on attendances as bar Bristol we do not have any attractive home games from now till EOS. If Bristol is a sell out we will probably just about make the 7k average.

This post has been edited by brianclose: 12 March 2015 - 11:10 AM

[Wooden Spoon]

dim view, on 12 March 2015 - 08:44 AM, said:

At which time we'll be doing better than when Doyle was here. Progress has not been curtailed. Attendances have not fallen.

you cant go around using facts on this message board you know,

You have to use FACTS

Doyle was sold on the cheap, attendances will drop, no chance of the play offs and the club has no ambition. FACT.

[sophocles]

dim view, on 12 March 2015 - 08:44 AM, said:

....no, but this is possibly the best stat....

39/27 = 1.44 points a game before Doyle left , then 9/7 since he left = 1.29.

48/34 = 1.41 points a game overall + £1m in the bank + a replacement.

So, if we win Saturday we move to 51/35 = 1.46 overall, and 12/8 since Doyle left = 1.5.

At which time we'll be doing better than when Doyle was here. Progress has not been curtailed. Attendances have not fallen.

Peculiar post - your own figures show we actually HAVE had worse results since Doyle went. You've also missed the point that, whatever we achieve from now - it would probably have been even better without the slump post Doyle - NO points from 12 in case you hadn't noticed. Just add the 4 or 5 points (minimum) we would have gained from those games to our current total and spot the difference. For me, the apologists who tried to defend the Doyle blunder can't hide behind subsequent good performances from players and management.As I said at the time - we put it behind us, support the players and manager as usual, but the effects ARE being felt, and will be for a long time.

[dim view]

sophocles, on 12 March 2015 - 05:00 PM, said:

Peculiar post - your own figures show we actually HAVE had worse results since Doyle went. You've also missed the point that, whatever we achieve from now - it would probably have been even better without the slump post Doyle - NO points from 12 in case you hadn't noticed. Just add the 4 or 5 points (minimum) we would have gained from those games to our current total and spot the difference. For me, the apologists who tried to defend the Doyle blunder can't hide behind subsequent good performances from players and management.As I said at the time - we put it behind us, support the players and manager as usual, but the effects ARE being felt, and will be for a long time.

The post clearly says that the figures will not catch up unless we win on Saturday. If we do, the apologists will be able to point to the fact that we actually HAVE had better results since Doyle went. The statistical blip of no points from 4 is more than compensated for by the new statistic of no draws from 7 matches.

IF the win happens, you have no data to support your theory that there are any adverse effects unless the crowd is lower than expected.

[Guest_freelander2_*]

a kick in the balls, on 12 March 2015 - 03:45 PM, said:

you cant go around using facts on this message board you know,

You have to use FACTS

Doyle was sold on the cheap, attendances will drop, no chance of the play offs and the club has no ambition. FACT.

A quick look shows that prior to Doyle leaving we had averaged 7,036 in the league. In the 3 games following his departure, 6,443, bringing the total average for the season down to 6,932.

[dim view]

freelander2, on 12 March 2015 - 06:32 PM, said:

A quick look shows that prior to Doyle leaving we had averaged 7,036 in the league. In the 3 games following his departure, 6,443, bringing the total average for the season down to 6,932.

It seems Doyle's departure had a great effect on away fans. They deserted in their droves. Meanwhile, the home fans didn't.

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

dim view, on 12 March 2015 - 08:44 AM, said:

....no, but this is possibly the best stat....

39/27 = 1.44 points a game before Doyle left , then 9/7 since he left = 1.29.

48/34 = 1.41 points a game overall + £1m in the bank + a replacement.

So, if we win Saturday we move to 51/35 = 1.46 overall, and 12/8 since Doyle left = 1.5.

At which time we'll be doing better than when Doyle was here. Progress has not been curtailed. Attendances have not fallen.

It's far too early for such a definitive post-Doyle assessment and there're a few flaws in your case, Dave.

Even you admit we've secured fewer points since he left, then you rely on that massive word 'if' regarding the future. What's more saying we've a million in the bank is a huge oversimplification based on hope rather than fact. We're due to receive around eight hundred grand over time (only reaching a million perhaps and maybe), but we've absolutely no idea if it'll be banked, reduce debt, or be swallowed up by ongoing costs. And his replacement? Lavery's doing well, very well, yet is a Bowels player at the end of the day. Harrison? I like the look of him, however only goals scored will decide if he's an adequate understudy or not.

As for attendances, don't forget they've been bolstered by free tickets for kids on a couple of occasions.

I would've been happy with a mid-table finish in August so I'm not gonna throw a wobbly if that's what we end up with in May. The crunch will come, though, when we discover if the sale of two players left us in a healthier position financially or was merely to offset more questionable losses.

[dim view]

MDCCCLXVI, on 12 March 2015 - 06:56 PM, said:

It's far too early for such a definitive post-Doyle assessment and there're a few flaws in your case, Dave.

I agree entirely. Just pointing out what scant facts there are. Meanwhile the man who provided the definitive post-doyle assessment, and affirms that 'effects are being felt', provides none.
I'm happy to debate the finances, but they are not flaws in my argument as I haven't mentioned 'em.

[sophocles]

dim view, on 12 March 2015 - 05:42 PM, said:

The post clearly says that the figures will not catch up unless we win on Saturday. If we do, the apologists will be able to point to the fact that we actually HAVE had better results since Doyle went. The statistical blip of no points from 4 is more than compensated for by the new statistic of no draws from 7 matches.

IF the win happens, you have no data to support your theory that there are any adverse effects unless the crowd is lower than expected.

You're still using 'if' and totally missing the point that no matter what level we achieve, it would almost certainly have been higher if we had kept Doyle until the end of the season. Your attendance argument has been comprehensively debunked too.

[Wooden Spoon]

freelander2, on 12 March 2015 - 06:32 PM, said:

A quick look shows that prior to Doyle leaving we had averaged 7,036 in the league. In the 3 games following his departure, 6,443, bringing the total average for the season down to 6,932.

how about numbers in the home stands?

[dim view]

sophocles, on 12 March 2015 - 07:52 PM, said:

You're still using 'if' and totally missing the point that no matter what level we achieve, it would almost certainly have been higher if we had kept Doyle until the end of the season. Your attendance argument has been comprehensively debunked too.

As Chris says, it's far to early to tell. I presume you will concede that a comparison of the points gained before and after is the best indicator?.

What home fan attendance are you predicting in order to support your argument?.

[Bonnyman]

dim view, on 12 March 2015 - 05:42 PM, said:

The post clearly says that the figures will not catch up unless we win on Saturday. If we do, the apologists will be able to point to the fact that we actually HAVE had better results since Doyle went. The statistical blip of no points from 4 is more than compensated for by the new statistic of no draws from 7 matches.

IF the win happens, you have no data to support your theory that there are any adverse effects unless the crowd is lower than expected.

How ridiculous to compile stats off such small figures the before and after doyle stats have no substance a bit like the million in the bank that you quoted.