today and the future

[jpuncheonstar]

Doom & Gloom, heard it all before in 2001. Get some perspective please. Barnet have good non-league pedigree, and if you look at the clubs down there, we are more than at home. Yes it hurts to go down, but we will be back. Alot of people have this fear that the conference is alot better than when we were last there, I dont think it has change that much. At the end of the day, it doesnt matter how many punters are in the stadium, its the 11 on the pitch and the manager that makes the difference. We outperformed Carlisle in 2005 remember???

Not sure why people think moving to the hive is the answer? Is it not already evident that it is incredibly hard to gain any new fans as it is, nevermind moving to a new part of london which isnt even associated with the name "Barnet". I believe Barnet as we know it would die if we moved to the hive, and be re-formed as some sort of Harrow/Cannons Park FC. The majority of our suppourt derives form the the Barnet/Finchley/Potters Bar area anyway...it will be a pain to get to for most of the current fans. People in the harrow area already have their own clubs, and will not be won over by lower league dross football at £15-£20 a match.

TK has done alot for this club and will be gutted about our pending relegation. It not the lack of funds that will sent us down, it was the man Mark Stimson who did. Yes TK appointed him, and im sure he is aware of his mistake, but life goes on. Do you think Kabba, McLeod, Cole, Dennehy, come cheap? I just hope TK doesnt get fed up and sell to some meiser who will sell underhill and really leave us up sh1t creak.

Onwards & Upwards.

[Sam_BFC]

Another sensible post.

Although

Yes it hurts to go down, but we will be back.

There is clearly no guarantee of this.

[Peter Piper]

Hang on a mo. How long was Stimson in charge? Was he in charge last season when we avoided relegation on the final day? Was he in charge the season before when PF, who had built his team over a number of years, had us nosediving towards the Conference before he was replaced?

I didn't like/rate Stimson before, or after, we signed him but it's far too convenient to blame him for what has been a sustained period of failure.

Is anybody so naive as to think that Stimson was given a large wedge to spend on players but decided, on his own initiative, to go cheap and build the raggle-taggle army we ended up with?

I would hazard a guess that one of the major reasons he got the job in the first place was that he was prepared to run the team on a lower budget than better qualified candidates would have been happy to contemplate.

At this point I should say that I have had no contact with players or their in-laws so I cannot vouch for the accuracy of their views, nor do I know how much we spend a year on player operations, or on loan player's wages relative to the parent clubs input, nor do I know the definition of a player not 'coming cheap' or even one 'probably being on good money'. But neither does anyone else so making an argument for, or against, a position with these non-facts is pretty pointless.

It would be very comforting to tie all this up in a bundle and lay it at Stimson's door, but the bottom line is we've been consistently awful for a good few years under a few different managers, and dozens of different players, so perhaps the answers lie elsewhere.

[Spanker Ridley]

Hang on a mo. How long was Stimson in charge? Was he in charge last season when we avoided relegation on the final day? Was he in charge the season before when PF, who had built his team over a number of years, had us nosediving towards the Conference before he was replaced?

I didn't like/rate Stimson before, or after, we signed him but it's far too convenient to blame him for what has been a sustained period of failure.

Is anybody so naive as to think that Stimson was given a large wedge to spend on players but decided, on his own initiative, to go cheap and build the raggle-taggle army we ended up with?

I would hazard a guess that one of the major reasons he got the job in the first place was that he was prepared to run the team on a lower budget than better qualified candidates would have been happy to contemplate.

At this point I should say that I have had no contact with players or their in-laws so I cannot vouch for the accuracy of their views, nor do I know how much we spend a year on player operations, or on loan player's wages relative to the parent clubs input, nor do I know the definition of a player not 'coming cheap' or even one 'probably being on good money'. But neither does anyone else so making an argument for, or against, a position with these non-facts is pretty pointless.

It would be very comforting to tie all this up in a bundle and lay it at Stimson's door, but the bottom line is we've been consistently awful for a good few years under a few different managers, and dozens of different players, so perhaps the answers lie elsewhere.

Yet another sensible post.

[amberforever]

Yet, I maintain that stimson brought to the club not only the poorest quality players I can remember seeing in 40 years, but the poorest quality of club-player-fan affinity in 40 years.....sadly, very sadly.

[John_Carp1]

The difference between us and the likes of Morecambe was summed up by the substitutions on Saturday.

We bring on three kids with about 20 league appearances between them. Morecambe bring on a former League 2 goal machine who has won promotion from the division, and a 28 year old who has played over 200 games in League One or above.

Why is our squad SO weak and SO inexperienced?