[Albion] Television derbies

[Barham's tash]

Do we as fans have a fiscal responsibility to the club to treat games v Southampton and Bournemouth as more of a derby occasion than we currently do?

Every time we’re on live tv is worth another £1m in the coffers so perhaps if we made it slightly more spicy and took more interest in it then we could guarantee the club an extra £4-6m to play with.

I expect Sky or BT will lose relative interest in showing said games (they’ll probably avoid Palace for now given the issues last year) if either the games don’t live up to much and there is a muted response in the grounds.

I hate them being billed as such as much as the next person but for this season at least we’re still perceived as “new” and interesting to them to show games but if we survive then we don’t want to be billed as a Burnley style proposition and only get shown the contractually obliged number of times a season.

Discuss.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Teams that are 55 miles and 99 miles away are derbies? The only thing we have in common is the south coast.

 

[Coldeanseagull]

I quite like the south coast derbies. Beats watching us play manc or london clubs, plus when we do get points against them, they seem to be worth more

 

[Barham's tash]

Teams that are 55 miles and 99 miles away are derbies? The only thing we have in common is the south coast.

I don’t count them as derbies at all (although some older fans will tell you the Bournemouth and Boscombe games were THE games before the Palace rivalry started...) but the tv companies do and that’s the important thing as far the ££££ is concerned.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Thunder Bolt]

I don’t count them as derbies at all (although some older fans will tell you the Bournemouth and Boscombe games were THE games before the Palace rivalry started...) but the tv companies do and that’s the important thing as far the ££££ is concerned.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm an older fan and Portsmouth were considered to be the games before the 70s.

 

[Green Cross Code Man]

I'm an older fan and Portsmouth were considered to be the games before the 70s.

But only for a short while as we haven't played Pompey much in our history.

 

[Kalimantan Gull]

Do we as fans have a fiscal responsibility to the club to treat games v Southampton and Bournemouth as more of a derby occasion than we currently do?

Every time we’re on live tv is worth another £1m in the coffers so perhaps if we made it slightly more spicy and took more interest in it then we could guarantee the club an extra £4-6m to play with.

I expect Sky or BT will lose relative interest in showing said games (they’ll probably avoid Palace for now given the issues last year) if either the games don’t live up to much and there is a muted response in the grounds.

I hate them being billed as such as much as the next person but for this season at least we’re still perceived as “new” and interesting to them to show games but if we survive then we don’t want to be billed as a Burnley style proposition and only get shown the contractually obliged number of times a season.

Discuss.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

OOOOH I hate thread starters who end their post with the word discuss

But if you insist, I do find a slight frissance in the games, perhaps because we've had some good matches with both clubs down in the third tier in recent times, perhaps because they're more local than most. Certainly more interesting than playing Burnley, Newcastle, Wolves imho4

PLUS, if we do both stay in the premier league for a while, I predict Southampton v Brighton is rivalry waiting to explode

 

[Knocky's Nose]

Well, if Eastbourne Borough bucked their ideas up and stopped farting about in the 'Roy's Wallpaper Paste League, Lower Southern Division 1' it might get interesting...

However, I genuinely don't think we qualify for any 'Derbies'. The links are tenuous at best with Cladding - it's a Motorway... and as previously said, Southampton and Portsmouth : sand, pebbles, and a large distance.

 

[LlcoolJ]

Not sure we need to worry about creating any false rivalries to get on TV. We seem to be on most weeks anyway.

 

[GOM]

Not sure we need to worry about creating any false rivalries to get on TV. We seem to be on most weeks anyway.

We are only on most weeks at the beginning of the season, same as last season, to get our contractual quota out of the way. Sky/BT can then get on with showing the big teams limitlessly.

 

[Barham's tash]

Not sure we need to worry about creating any false rivalries to get on TV. We seem to be on most weeks anyway.

But for now sky see us v anyone remotely close as a fresh fixture and the club gets huge payments at the end of the season based on number of live games home or away.

So my point which appears to have been missed
by most is not whether these ARE derbies but that we shouldn’t lose out on the cash cow that could be worth an additional £4-6m a season for maintaining or upping the rivalry aspect. Shit as it is to even be considering it who can deny that such an amount of money could be enough to finance wages of a ‘star’ player.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[father_and_son]

But for now sky see us v anyone remotely close as a fresh fixture and the club gets huge payments at the end of the season based on number of live games home or away.

So my point which appears to have been missed
by most is not whether these ARE derbies but that we shouldn’t lose out on the cash cow that could be worth an additional £4-6m a season for maintaining or upping the rivalry aspect. Shit as it is to even be considering it who can deny that such an amount of money could be enough to finance wages of a ‘star’ player.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The games are being televised now because they are seen as potentially enjoyable games to watch for neutrals and because the facilities for Sky/BT at the Amex are excellent and they clearly like being here (we must give them free coffee or something!)

The latter will continue to be the case until there are upgrades or new stadia with better facilities (and better coffee). The former will continue to be the case for as long as we are reasonably closely matched in skill and don't cancel each other out (like in the Palace game).

The "South Coast Derby" hype is just that ... hype.
We don't have to believe it because we aren't the target audience being hyped!

I strongly believe we are currently in the sweet spot where our ground is somewhere the TV crews want to be for the weekend and they will find excuses to be here. We don't have to do anything or change anything as fans, it is for the club to continually work on the TV facilities and continue to buy nice coffee for them. Fake rivalries won't change anything.

 

[Gazwag]

Teams that are 55 miles and 99 miles away are derbies? The only thing we have in common is the south coast.

Its 45 miles between Norwich and Ipswich

 

[Gazwag]

I strongly believe we are currently in the sweet spot where our ground is somewhere the TV crews want to be for the weekend and they will find excuses to be here. We don't have to do anything or change anything as fans, it is for the club to continually work on the TV facilities and continue to buy nice coffee for them. Fake rivalries won't change anything.

Quite, the Amex is just about as close to plug and play for sky/bt as it gets, they almost don't need to unpack the lorries which are parked a few metres from where they plug in the cables.

 

[GT49er]

I'm an older fan and Portsmouth were considered to be the games before the 70s.

Older than that and Portsmouth were usually two divisions above us, so not really on our radar at all!

 

[Thunder Bolt]

Its 45 miles between Norwich and Ipswich

They are the only league clubs in that vicinity.

All the London clubs are nearer to us than Bournemouth.

 

[Not Andy Naylor]

I don't see why it matters whether we hype up an alleged derby, or Sky do, or nobody does. I don't really care about other people's derbies so why should a fan elsewhere in the country care about one involving us? Does anyone on here think that West Ham v Fulham would be a must-watch because it is a London derby? Or that Midlands classic, Leicester v Wolves?

 

[Taybha]

Every club has it's Derby by it's very nature the term Derbie's is a nonsensical term as they do not exist , Brighton v Palace is the Derby , or the one i consider our Derby to be , Pompey and the like are just quicker games to get to by car coach and rail , that's it .

 

[Barham's tash]

I don't see why it matters whether we hype up an alleged derby, or Sky do, or nobody does. I don't really care about other people's derbies so why should a fan elsewhere in the country care about one involving us? Does anyone on here think that West Ham v Fulham would be a must-watch because it is a London derby? Or that Midlands classic, Leicester v Wolves?

Likewise, I don’t either, but in the context of it making a financial difference to the club coffers I do/will. Just feel seeing a disinterested crowd makes these perceived derbies less attractive for tv choice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[A1X]

No, my absolute favourite thing about these "derbies" is how Sky big them up as derbies and literally nobody who is going to the game on either side really thinks about it being a derby in any way, shape or form.