Bury for definite for me
That'll be a good "Manchester" overnighter for the away game ...

I can also see both "Wimbledon" sides slipping down ..... who would've thought MK Dons eh ??

I have mixed feelings about the possibility of MK Dons being relegated. On the one hand I would have to miss a home game as I'll never step foot in a ground where they are playing. On the other hand it would be nice to consider the possibility of waving them out of the EFL so they can have an attempt at earning their place in the top four divisions like the other 91 clubs did.

I hope Wimbledon stay up.

Kevinmoorefellover wrote:I have mixed feelings about the possibility of MK Dons being relegated. On the one hand I would have to miss a home game as I'll never step foot in a ground where they are playing. On the other hand it would be nice to consider the possibility of waving them out of the EFL so they can have an attempt at earning their place in the top four divisions like the other 91 clubs did.

I hope Wimbledon stay up.

not all bad.........

Milton Keynes Dons have built a reputation for youth development, runs 16 disability teams and its football trust engages around 60 000 people; between 2012 and 2013 the club produced 11 young players who have been called into age group national teams and between 2004 and 2014 the club gave first-team debuts to 14 local academy graduates, including the England international midfielder Dele Alli.

Well it wasn’t until they mentioned Dele bloody Alli

I applaud their good work. They identified a location that could support the initiatives you’ve listed above and moved there. I would have preferred it if they had developed their initiatives without moving an existing football team away from their community. I regularly hear the point that it all happened a long time ago - but we forget at our peril. Had it not turned out to be an unpopular move, who would have been next? Maybe another lower league club that struggles to secure a decent fan base amongst the local population and has no ground of its own?

Kevinmoorefellover wrote:I applaud their good work. They identified a location that could support the initiatives you’ve listed above and moved there. I would have preferred it if they had developed their initiatives without moving an existing football team away from their community. I regularly hear the point that it all happened a long time ago - but we forget at our peril. Had it not turned out to be an unpopular move, who would have been next? Maybe another lower league club that struggles to secure a decent fan base amongst the local population and has no ground of its own?

Isn't there, or wasn't there at one time, a club called Milton Keynes Town FC?..... what impact, if any, did the Dons moving to the locality have on the most senior team already in the town? I'm sure I read at the time a league rule something like: "no team shall move to a locality if such a move would affect any club already in that locality"..... If I remember rightly, it was one of the reasons that quickly ruled out a QPR relocation to Ruislip ( I'm actually in favour of such a move and have told Tony Fernandes the reasons why - I'm even in favour of a name change to Queen's Park Ruislip FC - In fact, IIRC, none of QPR's past 16 or so home grounds have ever been located in Queen's Park - or maybe just one of them).... I suppose in MK Dons defence, at least they DID take the name of the location they represent.
And didn't the league say that any such future moves would require the team to adopt the name of the location......IIRC, Karren Brady was in favour of "West Ham Olympic FC"....

As far as teams coming down goes, it's obviously any four from seven: Oldham, Walsall, Wimbledon, Bury, Northampton, Rochdale or MK Dons...

Anyone know what the away followings are like for those seven clubs? I don't think Walsall bring many do they?

newgroundrodney wrote:As far as teams coming down goes, it's obviously any four from seven: Oldham, Walsall, Wimbledon, Bury, Northampton, Rochdale or MK Dons...

Anyone know what the away followings are like for those seven clubs? I don't think Walsall bring many do they?

Dunno ?
But just imagine if Bury , Oldham AND Rochdale came down !
With Macclesfield looking like they may come up , and with what we have in League 2 already , how many "North West" teams will see next season ????
Morecombe , Crewe , Carlisle ..... the list goes on

newgroundrodney wrote:

Kevinmoorefellover wrote:I applaud their good work. They identified a location that could support the initiatives you’ve listed above and moved there. I would have preferred it if they had developed their initiatives without moving an existing football team away from their community. I regularly hear the point that it all happened a long time ago - but we forget at our peril. Had it not turned out to be an unpopular move, who would have been next? Maybe another lower league club that struggles to secure a decent fan base amongst the local population and has no ground of its own?

Isn't there, or wasn't there at one time, a club called Milton Keynes Town FC?..... what impact, if any, did the Dons moving to the locality have on the most senior team already in the town? I'm sure I read at the time a league rule something like: "no team shall move to a locality if such a move would affect any club already in that locality"..... If I remember rightly, it was one of the reasons that quickly ruled out a QPR relocation to Ruislip ( I'm actually in favour of such a move and have told Tony Fernandes the reasons why - I'm even in favour of a name change to Queen's Park Ruislip FC - In fact, IIRC, none of QPR's past 16 or so home grounds have ever been located in Queen's Park - or maybe just one of them).... I suppose in MK Dons defence, at least they DID take the name of the location they represent.
And didn't the league say that any such future moves would require the team to adopt the name of the location......IIRC, Karren Brady was in favour of "West Ham Olympic FC"....

Without going into whether the move was right or wrong (and for me it's the latter) there have been several non-league clubs in and around MK over the years - all down at level 8/9ish so the crowds would have been small (50-200). Had one of these teams got up to level 5/6 and been reasonably well supported things might have been different.

rgds Dave

newgroundrodney wrote:

Kevinmoorefellover wrote:I applaud their good work. They identified a location that could support the initiatives you’ve listed above and moved there. I would have preferred it if they had developed their initiatives without moving an existing football team away from their community. I regularly hear the point that it all happened a long time ago - but we forget at our peril. Had it not turned out to be an unpopular move, who would have been next? Maybe another lower league club that struggles to secure a decent fan base amongst the local population and has no ground of its own?

Isn't there, or wasn't there at one time, a club called Milton Keynes Town FC?..... what impact, if any, did the Dons moving to the locality have on the most senior team already in the town? I'm sure I read at the time a league rule something like: "no team shall move to a locality if such a move would affect any club already in that locality"..... If I remember rightly, it was one of the reasons that quickly ruled out a QPR relocation to Ruislip ( I'm actually in favour of such a move and have told Tony Fernandes the reasons why - I'm even in favour of a name change to Queen's Park Ruislip FC - In fact, IIRC, none of QPR's past 16 or so home grounds have ever been located in Queen's Park - or maybe just one of them).... I suppose in MK Dons defence, at least they DID take the name of the location they represent.
And didn't the league say that any such future moves would require the team to adopt the name of the location......IIRC, Karren Brady was in favour of "West Ham Olympic FC"....

Brady forced through the re brand to West Ham London, dropping the United and also the castle (Anne Boleyn's Castle, hence the Boleyn Ground) from the club badge.

She has destroyed the club.

whoareya wrote:

newgroundrodney wrote:

Kevinmoorefellover wrote:I applaud their good work. They identified a location that could support the initiatives you’ve listed above and moved there. I would have preferred it if they had developed their initiatives without moving an existing football team away from their community. I regularly hear the point that it all happened a long time ago - but we forget at our peril. Had it not turned out to be an unpopular move, who would have been next? Maybe another lower league club that struggles to secure a decent fan base amongst the local population and has no ground of its own?

Isn't there, or wasn't there at one time, a club called Milton Keynes Town FC?..... what impact, if any, did the Dons moving to the locality have on the most senior team already in the town? I'm sure I read at the time a league rule something like: "no team shall move to a locality if such a move would affect any club already in that locality"..... If I remember rightly, it was one of the reasons that quickly ruled out a QPR relocation to Ruislip ( I'm actually in favour of such a move and have told Tony Fernandes the reasons why - I'm even in favour of a name change to Queen's Park Ruislip FC - In fact, IIRC, none of QPR's past 16 or so home grounds have ever been located in Queen's Park - or maybe just one of them).... I suppose in MK Dons defence, at least they DID take the name of the location they represent.
And didn't the league say that any such future moves would require the team to adopt the name of the location......IIRC, Karren Brady was in favour of "West Ham Olympic FC"....

Brady forced through the re brand to West Ham London, dropping the United and also the castle (Anne Boleyn's Castle, hence the Boleyn Ground) from the club badge.

She has destroyed the club.

Didn't realise they'd dropped the "United" bit ?
They've probably done that to create a new business cos the original was going under .....
Spivs ... the lot of em

Corpaboy wrote:

whoareya wrote:
Brady forced through the re brand to West Ham London, dropping the United and also the castle (Anne Boleyn's Castle, hence the Boleyn Ground) from the club badge.

She has destroyed the club.

Didn't realise they'd dropped the "United" bit ?
They've probably done that to create a new business cos the original was going under .....
Spivs ... the lot of em

From a branding perspective the club is now known as West Ham London with just two crossed hammers as a badge - its a marketing ploy to attract world wide tourists to take in a Premier League game whilst on a London city break. They have a partnership with Thomas Cook that offers hotel and match ticket from £199 - even though home games are supposedly sold out to season ticket holders and club members........so the stadium has loads of day-trippers from around the world that cheer for either team, or sit there sending selfies and talking bollox.

The West Ham United I had season tickets for no longer exists.

Just been on west hams web and it quite clearly says West Ham united. Nothing about London don't know where you got that information from

Thomas Cook website has a West Ham United London badge. West Han United at the top, hammer in the middle, London at the bottom. The web page is titled West Ham United - Thomas Cook Sport.

Recent events can't be doing the day tripper business much good.

countymadbel wrote:Just been on west hams web and it quite clearly says West Ham united. Nothing about London don't know where you got that information from

Nothing about London?

Are you blind?