LeedsCityRam

Rest in Peace Willie Carlin
love to his family and friends
my first winger that got me out of my seat. . . Well he would have done except I was standing up getting bruised in kids corner!
thanks for the memories, I’m a bit emotional 🥲 🖤 🐏 

The club have been amazing with Reuben. Rammie came down to the Children’s Hospital to see him. Some of the players and staff have sent messages. It makes such a difference to his recovery. 
 

Just an update for everyone as I have had a few messages from Derby fans on other platforms asking how he is. 
 
Reuben is doing well and is now spending more time at home during the weekends. He is still an inpatient at Birmingham Children’s Hospital. His sounds are developing and we have had glimpses of ‘mummy’ and ‘daddy’. He is starting to stand now but he is still a while from walking. His right arm is starting to get movement at the elbow but nothing at the wrist or hand yet…. So it’s all heading in the right direction. 

On disagreement, I think the slogan from Wisdom of Crowds works nicely  "Agreement is nice. But disagreement is better. And we mean that."
On Warne, It's great he's took us up but I don't feel he should get that much slack on the rope. This year we need to avoid relegation simple as that. If we're in the bottom 3 after 15-20 games Warne should be gone. We did go up but that was to be expected in the second year. Warne's record makes me quite nervous about his capability at that level I won't lie. But he's got to be given a chance to succeed or fail on his own merits. 

It's not really odd though, those terms are being thrown about because it's true to those people's experience of posting on here. My own engagement with the forum has very much been affected by it, and I'm certainly not just making it up.
 
(very long post incoming)
Everyone's allowed an opinion just long as they remember that a group of about 10 posters (not including yourself) have decided which opinions are the correct opinions, and that if you have a view that doesn't align with them - or if you offer up any kind of critical thought whatsoever that puts even the slightest doubt on the agreed narrative -  you should expect to be mercilessly ganged up on, ridiculed, accused of trying to ruin the mood for others etc. Every slight criticism (and even stuff which isn't a criticism) will be portrayed as a stick you're beating the manager with.
All 'Kevin' had to do yesterday was point out that Warne didn't take over the squad in a decimated state (fact) and that most teams would be more than happy with the squad we assembled in a few short weeks (fact) and there was a whole page of rebuttal, piss taking and propaganda in response within a few hours.
Aside from a very remote few (including yourself), nobody else will take the time to try to understand where someone's coming from with their post before attacking it, or to consider that they may have some valid points, they'll just try to find the first thing they can jump on and dismiss both the person and their opinion. 
If you're extra lucky you'll get someone publicly praying that you get banned from the forum. Lovely behaviour.
If you don't like it then apparently you should just suck it up, grow a pair, stop being oversensitive etc ("it's your problem"), stick people on ignore and just allow yourself and anyone else willing to put their head above the parapet to be rudely and aggressively dismissed (as was pointed out earlier about one particularly egregious offender), talked to like you're an idiot, and be subject to countless, mostly unprovoked (unless of course you count someone having a different opinion to the echo chamber as provocation), insidious little digs worded carefully enough not to fall foul of the rules of the board. 
Anyone who's spoken up about this has been accused of 'playing the victim card', and had a string of laughing emojis directed toward them while the ranks are closed on the notion that there's any kind of bullying (or whatever else you wish to call it) going on. The response to 'bullying' behaviour (again, call it whatever name you're most comfortable with) being called out has been to treat it exactly as a gang of bullies would. It's almost poetic. 
There will be a demand for evidence, but those demanding it know full well that the aforementioned insidious comments aren't directly quotable and and don't stand on their own as examples one can pick out, or report (as useless as it would be to do so when such comments are actively encouraged and perpetrated by some of those who'd see the report), but form the backbone of the hostile and oppressive atmosphere that some of us feel is very much alive and (sadly) thriving on this forum. 
The effect is either that some feel they can't post at all (which then gets picked up on as a 'victory' for shutting up the naysayers), that they have to be careful of what they say (walking on eggshells) or that they feel goaded into responding negatively - which just invites further ridicule. Let's punish and demean people for reacting though, give those who elicit the reaction a big old round of applause and a pat on the back.
Everything positive that's been achieved under Warne gets weaponised, any potential negatives for next season preemptively dismissed before they can even be voiced (and immediately met with ire the second they are), and it looks like that will be the case for as long as he's in charge because some posters simply can't treat others with any degree of civility.
The pretense that all this is all just a response to abuse aimed at Warne or aimed at posters for supporting Warne, or 'fighting back against those who want this to think we had a s*** season'  has long since worn out any validity it may have once had, and even that was utterly disproportionate to begin with. 
This forum is still fun if you look in the right areas, but for the past 6 months or so its largely felt mean spirited, hateful, and almost controlled by posters who's primary thought process is that 'negative' posters are there to be attacked from a position of strength afforded to them by our results. It's really quite dispiriting.
 

I disagree, the landscape of the Championship has changed and Clowes absolutely has the money to be competitive. If he believes that he has the capacity both financially and directionally to take this club into the Premier League then why would he give up a percentage of his ownership, for another voice in the boardroom and someone potentially impacting his vision for the club - and hopefully his future payout from the success of his decisions? 
I think he would consider investors, but I suspect that he also trusts himself to be able to achieve on his own at the club. 

One of those that started us on our way to become League Champions.
RiP Willie.

I agree it's a minority, but I didn't want to pick out individuals. I understand fans' desire for us not to be left behind, but I find the eagerness to become yet another club snapped up by US owners a bit sad. When we were in trouble and going under, the best America could do was Kirschner. GSE were responsible owners, but having dealt with Americans in business, I'm not a fan.

Yes. Lets not forget we have got out of league 1 in double quick time. We could very easily have been doing a Bolton and spending a couple more seasons in it. We are a big club, eventually we will rise but we need to build some foundations for a while. I think we are in for a GSE type period of incremental improvement for a couple of seasons. But there will come a point if we are managed carefully that we become a plum opportunity for an investor   

I see everyone is staying nice and patient. Willing to throw everything up in the air and take risks, just to see a premier league game at Pride Park. Unfortunately for them, I don't think Clowes will take chances with the Rams' existence and they'll just have to chill their bones until he believes he's found the right investment partner.

Because they're a big city one club team that taps into the 'Yorkshire' brand in a way no other Yorkshire club does. That said, I would be pretty dismayed as a Leeds fan letting Red Bull into the ownership structure given how they've used other clubs to purely promote their brand. 
p.s. Leeds don't see us as rivals exactly. Derby are disliked in the city still because of the playoff semifinal & with the older lads, resentment at Clough's far superior legacy to Revie & Derby stopping them winning the double in 1972. We would rank in their top 10 of most disliked but not in the top 5. Leeds will benchmark themselves against other big cities (Manchester, Liverpool, London clubs). Their perception of us a smaller foe won't be helped by some of our away crowds at Elland Road - that needs to improve going forward.
Its fair to say we're on opposite sides of this - I can't think of anything worse than having to 'trust' the intentions of any new foreign owner with no links to Derby. Just out of interest, would you want Clowes involved at all post any takeover? Observing the decision making at clubs like Birmingham & Hull has been jaw dropping at times & the lack of actual football knowledge negates any perceived financial advantage. Wrexham & Leicester have often been lauded as examples of highly successful foreign takeovers but the former has been mainly due to bullying impoverished rivals in National League/League Two (that won't work as well next season) & Leicester have been consistent FFP cheats since the Thais took over but unlike us, have been lucky at key times to avoid sanction.
Given the mood music of FFP/P&S and the medium term likelihood of a football regulator, I would prefer Derby were run sensibly along a model of progressive improvement - much in the same way Coventry, Luton & Preston have been run over the past 5 years. The key difference is our turnover is far superior to all of those 3 clubs so there shouldn't be issues around competitiveness if we have the right backroom & management team. Taking that route previously also brought us closest to promotion to the Prem - GSE under Clough & ultimately McClaren.

Understand your perspective.
 
I would really like to see us in the PL in my lifetime and the chances of that occurring with DC (our hero)  are fairly remote.  So I’d accept the risks associated with change of ownership if the change greatly improves the likelihood of promotion. 
I’d add that - despite Boehly’s antics at Chelsea - the risk of new ownership would be modest if the buyer were the owner of a major US sports franchise. I would love to think DC is trying to get his wares in front of some of those owners. There is a lot of competition for their patronage and sadly clubs in the south have more appeal. 

Because they're a big city one club team that taps into the 'Yorkshire' brand in a way no other Yorkshire club does. That said, I would be pretty dismayed as a Leeds fan letting Red Bull into the ownership structure given how they've used other clubs to purely promote their brand. 
p.s. Leeds don't see us as rivals exactly. Derby are disliked in the city still because of the playoff semifinal & with the older lads, resentment at Clough's far superior legacy to Revie & Derby stopping them winning the double in 1972. We would rank in their top 10 of most disliked but not in the top 5. Leeds will benchmark themselves against other big cities (Manchester, Liverpool, London clubs). Their perception of us a smaller foe won't be helped by some of our away crowds at Elland Road - that needs to improve going forward.
Its fair to say we're on opposite sides of this - I can't think of anything worse than having to 'trust' the intentions of any new foreign owner with no links to Derby. Just out of interest, would you want Clowes involved at all post any takeover? Observing the decision making at clubs like Birmingham & Hull has been jaw dropping at times & the lack of actual football knowledge negates any perceived financial advantage. Wrexham & Leicester have often been lauded as examples of highly successful foreign takeovers but the former has been mainly due to bullying impoverished rivals in National League/League Two (that won't work as well next season) & Leicester have been consistent FFP cheats since the Thais took over but unlike us, have been lucky at key times to avoid sanction.
Given the mood music of FFP/P&S and the medium term likelihood of a football regulator, I would prefer Derby were run sensibly along a model of progressive improvement - much in the same way Coventry, Luton & Preston have been run over the past 5 years. The key difference is our turnover is far superior to all of those 3 clubs so there shouldn't be issues around competitiveness if we have the right backroom & management team. Taking that route previously also brought us closest to promotion to the Prem - GSE under Clough & ultimately McClaren.

Because they're a big city one club team that taps into the 'Yorkshire' brand in a way no other Yorkshire club does. That said, I would be pretty dismayed as a Leeds fan letting Red Bull into the ownership structure given how they've used other clubs to purely promote their brand. 
p.s. Leeds don't see us as rivals exactly. Derby are disliked in the city still because of the playoff semifinal & with the older lads, resentment at Clough's far superior legacy to Revie & Derby stopping them winning the double in 1972. We would rank in their top 10 of most disliked but not in the top 5. Leeds will benchmark themselves against other big cities (Manchester, Liverpool, London clubs). Their perception of us a smaller foe won't be helped by some of our away crowds at Elland Road - that needs to improve going forward.
Its fair to say we're on opposite sides of this - I can't think of anything worse than having to 'trust' the intentions of any new foreign owner with no links to Derby. Just out of interest, would you want Clowes involved at all post any takeover? Observing the decision making at clubs like Birmingham & Hull has been jaw dropping at times & the lack of actual football knowledge negates any perceived financial advantage. Wrexham & Leicester have often been lauded as examples of highly successful foreign takeovers but the former has been mainly due to bullying impoverished rivals in National League/League Two (that won't work as well next season) & Leicester have been consistent FFP cheats since the Thais took over but unlike us, have been lucky at key times to avoid sanction.
Given the mood music of FFP/P&S and the medium term likelihood of a football regulator, I would prefer Derby were run sensibly along a model of progressive improvement - much in the same way Coventry, Luton & Preston have been run over the past 5 years. The key difference is our turnover is far superior to all of those 3 clubs so there shouldn't be issues around competitiveness if we have the right backroom & management team. Taking that route previously also brought us closest to promotion to the Prem - GSE under Clough & ultimately McClaren.

Because they're a big city one club team that taps into the 'Yorkshire' brand in a way no other Yorkshire club does. That said, I would be pretty dismayed as a Leeds fan letting Red Bull into the ownership structure given how they've used other clubs to purely promote their brand. 
p.s. Leeds don't see us as rivals exactly. Derby are disliked in the city still because of the playoff semifinal & with the older lads, resentment at Clough's far superior legacy to Revie & Derby stopping them winning the double in 1972. We would rank in their top 10 of most disliked but not in the top 5. Leeds will benchmark themselves against other big cities (Manchester, Liverpool, London clubs). Their perception of us a smaller foe won't be helped by some of our away crowds at Elland Road - that needs to improve going forward.
Its fair to say we're on opposite sides of this - I can't think of anything worse than having to 'trust' the intentions of any new foreign owner with no links to Derby. Just out of interest, would you want Clowes involved at all post any takeover? Observing the decision making at clubs like Birmingham & Hull has been jaw dropping at times & the lack of actual football knowledge negates any perceived financial advantage. Wrexham & Leicester have often been lauded as examples of highly successful foreign takeovers but the former has been mainly due to bullying impoverished rivals in National League/League Two (that won't work as well next season) & Leicester have been consistent FFP cheats since the Thais took over but unlike us, have been lucky at key times to avoid sanction.
Given the mood music of FFP/P&S and the medium term likelihood of a football regulator, I would prefer Derby were run sensibly along a model of progressive improvement - much in the same way Coventry, Luton & Preston have been run over the past 5 years. The key difference is our turnover is far superior to all of those 3 clubs so there shouldn't be issues around competitiveness if we have the right backroom & management team. Taking that route previously also brought us closest to promotion to the Prem - GSE under Clough & ultimately McClaren.

Because they're a big city one club team that taps into the 'Yorkshire' brand in a way no other Yorkshire club does. That said, I would be pretty dismayed as a Leeds fan letting Red Bull into the ownership structure given how they've used other clubs to purely promote their brand. 
p.s. Leeds don't see us as rivals exactly. Derby are disliked in the city still because of the playoff semifinal & with the older lads, resentment at Clough's far superior legacy to Revie & Derby stopping them winning the double in 1972. We would rank in their top 10 of most disliked but not in the top 5. Leeds will benchmark themselves against other big cities (Manchester, Liverpool, London clubs). Their perception of us a smaller foe won't be helped by some of our away crowds at Elland Road - that needs to improve going forward.
Its fair to say we're on opposite sides of this - I can't think of anything worse than having to 'trust' the intentions of any new foreign owner with no links to Derby. Just out of interest, would you want Clowes involved at all post any takeover? Observing the decision making at clubs like Birmingham & Hull has been jaw dropping at times & the lack of actual football knowledge negates any perceived financial advantage. Wrexham & Leicester have often been lauded as examples of highly successful foreign takeovers but the former has been mainly due to bullying impoverished rivals in National League/League Two (that won't work as well next season) & Leicester have been consistent FFP cheats since the Thais took over but unlike us, have been lucky at key times to avoid sanction.
Given the mood music of FFP/P&S and the medium term likelihood of a football regulator, I would prefer Derby were run sensibly along a model of progressive improvement - much in the same way Coventry, Luton & Preston have been run over the past 5 years. The key difference is our turnover is far superior to all of those 3 clubs so there shouldn't be issues around competitiveness if we have the right backroom & management team. Taking that route previously also brought us closest to promotion to the Prem - GSE under Clough & ultimately McClaren.

So last season Luton were a bigger club that Derby?
Bigger global audience due to being a PL club frequently on TV, whilst we only had a few TV games.
They were certainly able to sign better players than we could.
No difference in the ability to challenge for major trophies.
What you refer to are more closely linked to financial power - the more you spend, the more you can attact players and challenge for trophies, whilst also increasing exposure to a wider audience.
Our ceiling isn't "midtable PL". Our ceiling is no different from the likes of Leicester who have shown how a reasonable sized club can still win the league, even if the stars do need to align for it to happen. It's mostly been that way since the 70s anyway, with only Blackburn, Leeds, Forest and Villa (to a lesser degree) being surprise winners since we last won it almost 50 years ago.

Spanish top flight vs 3rd tier of English football

You're confusing stadium size with club size. If Liverpool had a 100,000 stadium, they'd fill it quite regularly with mainly Liverpool fans. If West Ham had a 100,000 stadium they might fill it occasionally, but only if there was nothing else to do in London that weekend and the tickets were cheap.
As far as your later post is concerned, you were doing so well until you mistook the temporary with the permanent, the superficial with matters of substance. While Villareal are in La Liga and Derby are not in the PL, they'll beat us to a player every time, particularly if they're from a Spanish speaking country, assuming we'd both be interested in signing them, but mid-table Premier League as a destination most likeley trumps Villareal everytime, unless a player simply decides they prefer to live in the Villareal area. 

Completely disagree. Firstly matchday revenue is a massive part of finances at this level & size of crowds correlate to overall interest in club, perception of importance & likelihood of TV screening. In the divison above, global awareness is based on history & rivalry far more than you give credit for...its the mystique of Man Utd & Liverpool that entices fans more than simple success. Man City still dont come close to either global brand at present. Going back to DCFC, the average punter will take a far greater passing interest in Derby v Forest or Leeds than say Palace v Brighton and there's no coincidence Derby were one of the most screened Championship clubs on Sky year after year, irrespective of league placing.
Re crowds, Derby average roughly 33%-50% more home fans than Birmingham & Stoke when in same division and have done for a long time. Same with Coventry. Its perverse to therefore claim we are a similiar size. FWIW Stoke are only anywhere because of the largesee of the Bet365 family, pre-ownership they were regularly getting crowds around the 12k mark. In assessing Birmingham, people make the classic big city mistake when reality is Villa dominate that area & Small Heath come in a poor 4th behind West Brom & Wolves...fans of both would laugh at the suggestion Bluee are same size.
Your comparison with European clubs doesnt really work given the total contrast in supporter culture, inequitable TV money share & relative competition in each country. Villarreal are not a big club though & were unheard of pre-1995.

I respect your opinion, and the size of clubs is subjective to how one perceives it.
Matchday revenue only takes you so far. I’d agree if we are talking a difference of 45k to 20k, but we are talking a matter or 5k here or there which for our level doesn’t impact our potential.
I don’t deny Derby vs Forest would attract a bigger audience than Palace vs Brighton if in the same league.
I just don’t think that really matters. A player isn’t going to choose Derby over Brighton because we get an extra 5k through the door, nor would it make much of a difference in terms of budgets at the top table when the overall PL commercial deal is ultimately the biggest revenue stream.
In 25 years if following Derby I’ve seen us compete in the PL for about 20% of that. I’ve seen how getting an extra 5k through the door has accounted for diddly squat when teams like Palace, Fulham, Brighton, Brentford, Leicester etc. have outperformed us during that time.
I’ve seen Derby lose their manager to Stoke, their better players to Palace and teams with lesser attendances and trophyless cabinets go on to play in Europe. 
We may have been a bigger club once. Not anymore.

Derby were a far bigger club than West Ham from the latter's first appearance in the Football League in 1920 until Derby's decline in the 1950s, and it wasn't until West Ham moved to their taxpayer-funded stadium in 2017 that they exceeded Derby's record average attendance of 37,000. Whenever we were at the same level between 1969 and 2002, I regarded us as similar sized clubs, with one being more successful in knock-out competitions but never good enough to even get close to winning a league title (they have ONE top 4 finish to their credit compared to our FIFTEEN, which of course includes 2 league titles).
They've moved ahead of us in recent years thanks entirely to their free stadium and the emergence of London as a World Class City and thus a magnet for wealthy foreign investors, but until they win a league title, they're 'all mouth and trousers'.

Takeovers and major investment can work against you: see Birmingham.  Well run clubs, like Brentford and Brighton, are the way forward.  You don't need billions, you just need good business sense and stability.
I think we need a survival year (2024/25), followed by a push on year (higher mid table) followed by a promotion chase.  We need to get them ducks in a row, and then kick on.

Not being in a relegation fight will be a big achievement, we got out of L1 with a load of frees and whoever we could get under embargo. Find the the comparisons to Ipswich honestly baffling, think some people are in for a shock if they are expecting us to be at the top end. Big window for Warne, I imagine we'll be dipping in to the Prem loan market 2 or 3 times. Probably need 6 or 7 decent permanent signings.

Coventry should be our model, not Ipswich. They haven't spent a fortune, have a decent if unsexy manager and came up from league 1. In their first season, they finished 16th then 12th then 5th then 9th with an FA Cup semi-final achieved as well. It is possible to be successful in the championship without spending a ton of money but it requires an ethos, properly planned management and consistency.  For my money anywhere between 12th and 18th is a solid achievement. Any lower than that and depending on the budget then questions should be asked. Anything higher than 12th and it's an extremely good season but I'm not expecting it.