Re: Thoughts on Peacock : Sun Oct 02, 2016 6:33 pm  

Peacock is not to blame solely for this season. This has been coming since a few years ago.
Hudgel and Crossland bare the brunt for this horrible horrible season, and I will also say Chester also (good luck wakey next year, you'll need it now he's got a full season and pre season with you).
We've gone down the cheap route since 2009 and the progressive decline should of set alarm bells ringing well before this season.
So now we are in this mess and the thing that does spring to mind harps back the the fans forum, when a guy ask the question that rovers could be relagated. Peacock literally scoffed and made fun at the possibility of it, that now has become a reality and I hope that this air of arrogance has now gone. Anything can happen.

It looks like we're going full time next year. Hudge has pretty much confirmed this. So the players we need to keep, I hope have a conscience, and realise they've got us in this mess and be good enough to repay both the club and fans by staying. Tho I'm not naive to realise some will not give a fig and move elsewhere.

Hudge and Crossland now look set to lose £1.5 million between them now. Time to stop ploughing money into sponsoring Hull city and put that money into our club.
Going to be an interesting week to say the least.

Re: Thoughts on Peacock : Sun Oct 02, 2016 6:41 pm  

add albert Kelly to that list aswell if he had of played against either Huddersfield or Salford we wouldn't have been in this position even more annoying is he was as fit as he had ever been in a kr jersey

Re: Thoughts on Peacock : Sun Oct 02, 2016 6:47 pm  

rover 2000 wrote:

I can see why the wool fc sharks supporters are irate with peacock hes just knocked about 7/800 off next years average attendance for them

Unlikely and we were fine before you were promoted and will be next season. We just made a tidy sum from the Cup win and there may be extra sponsorship revenues with us being the city's only Super League club.

To be honest you should be more concerned with your own attendances. Only 5500 home supporters there yesterday.

Re: Thoughts on Peacock : Sun Oct 02, 2016 6:53 pm  

rover 2000 wrote:

add albert Kelly to that list aswell if he had of played against either Huddersfield or Salford we wouldn't have been in this position even more annoying is he was as fit as he had ever been in a kr jersey

I don't fully agree with this. We did enough to win both games but blew them. Kelly wiuldn't have had the mental strength to xhange much.

However, we'll never know and dwelling on it doesn't help. Move on, accept our fate and hope the board invest heavily this year in the right places to fet promotion ASAP.

Re: Thoughts on Peacock : Sun Oct 02, 2016 6:55 pm  

rover 2000 wrote:

I can see why the wool fc sharks supporters are irate with peacock hes just knocked about 7/800 off next years average attendance for them

Well I dare say, with the season we've just had, we may make that up in season ticket sales

Re: Thoughts on Peacock : Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:02 pm  

ComeOnYouUll wrote:

Unlikely and we were fine before you were promoted and will be next season. We just made a tidy sum from the Cup win and there may be extra sponsorship revenues with us being the city's only Super League club.

To be honest you should be more concerned with your own attendances. Only 5500 home supporters there yesterday.

5501 you missed one adam will be pleased you've covered his loss of income next year

Re: Thoughts on Peacock : Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:04 pm  

I'm less concerned about JP and more concerned about what Remington Mike has spent the last few years doing, ultimately, he's the one who's responsible for "running" the club.

Re: Thoughts on Peacock : Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:05 pm  

rover 2000 wrote:

I can see why the wool fc sharks supporters are irate with peacock hes just knocked about 7/800 off next years average attendance for them

Thanks for the concern, but with greater sponsorship, more corporate and increase in gates from neutrals thanks to Rovers going down, I think we will survive.

On Peacock, he will be on a high salary, so he staying isn't exactly doing Rovers a favour like some are suggesting on Twitter, he has to take big responsibly he was involved in recruitment, pre season, the decision to sack Chester and appoint Webster, Kelly situation and no loan signing except a reserve winger who hardly played.

On another note if you had no money for a signing how could Peacock play, doesn't his full salary go onto the cap once he plays (this is what happened to us with Andy Last and cost us points for a salary cap breach)

Re: Thoughts on Peacock : Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:11 pm  

Large Paws wrote:

Well I dare say, with the season we've just had, we may make that up in season ticket sales

They must have been saving themselves for next year if you only averaged 10,500.
Didn't Pearson state that he needed 14,500 to balance the books?

Re: Thoughts on Peacock : Sun Oct 02, 2016 7:24 pm  

Keith_Lard wrote:

They must have been saving themselves for next year if you only averaged 10,500.
Didn't Pearson state that he needed 14,500 to balance the books?

If you say so. All I'm saying is, if we improve pass sales by 500, we'll cover the drop in average attendance that was mentioned. Anything above that will obviously be a bonus. For what it's worth, I didn't want you to be relegated. I will miss the derby games.