So do I. That happens and teams can buy/acquire players above their standing with the investment of funds a a rich back - it happens in pretty much every division in every league in the world. My original comment was purely that I was disappointed for us and Max that he has made a sideways/backward move (and I was talking about "on the pitch" rather than money) - no one can doubt Bristol Rovers finished below us last season can they (although judging from previous posts, some might try). My comment about "blowing smoke up the arse" of other clubs was aimed at some bizarre attempts to try to prove Bristol Rovers are a bigger club than us by making statements like they were once a top flight club (they never have been) and in their promotion season, they got double our average attendance (they didn't get anything like that).
As a backer of my own club, when it comes to a debate about whether we are bigger or better than a rival (and I am of course biased, which is the very nature of supporting or backing your club), in respect of us v Rover, I would point out that we had five successful seasons in the second tier in fairly recent memory, they haven't attained that status (let alone top flight status) for about 30 years and have been a non league club in the past decade, we haven't in my lifetime, rather than making things up about top flight status and fictional average attendances.
There you go, running on about historical success again. Absolutely, they are not much bigger than us historically. But what you seem to keep missing is that just because they havnt been bigger than us in the past, that it may have changed. Even if they finished below us last season, next season is a different story.
They have funding and are spending good money in comparison to alot of the other clubs in this division. Its likely that with good management they could/should be up there (note, its by no means a cert, but with good management its achievable). Last seasons performance has no bearing on next seasons, nor does the last 30 years. Thats the classic circular argument that so many 'big clubs' used to have when we were in the championship, waving their dicks around claiming they are a bigger club than the others. Its pathetic. No one cares how big you are when the players turn up on the pitch.i used ti love it when we beat these big time charlies that were more focused on their historical size. If it was up to them the league table would be decided purely on average 100 year league postion and attendances, without the need to play any games. But i have diverged...
The key point that was made when he went there was that we just couldn't afford to offer the money they are able to, in fact we couldn't even offer a contract as the season had not even been announced.
While Bristol rovers are absolutely a club weve been able to compete with financially in the past (just last year didnt our keeper come from there?), they now are spending big it seems, so we just cant compete any more.
Unfortunately for us, bristol rovers could risk it/afford it and did.
We simply cannot compete against the money bristol rovers are now able to offer.
Whether that fits with your weird assessment of the last 30 years of their success (or lack of it), or 'whos bigger than who', is irrelevant to their current situation vs our current situation.
They will be expecting to be much more successful than us next year. And if the money they've spent has been spent wisely they probably will achievd it. Thats surely the two key points on ehmers mind in this move:
Is he better off financially? Yes
Is the club likely to do well or better than gills next year? Well yes, he'll be thinking with the spending they have done, they will do very nicely too.