"Sports Direct Ibrox Stadium"

[kuznetsov 0]

  simplythebest said:

Even 2 and a half million is good money for a club in the bottom tier of Scotland and no European football at all for a while.

 

that maybe but is our pride and dignity not worth more or has all that went out the window now?

[simplythebest 0]

  kuznetsov said:

that maybe but is our pride and dignity not worth more or has all that went out the window now?

 

I suppose that goes back to point of view, for me this is nothing more than a glorified sponsorship and virtually money for nothing.

 

A new company was a bigger change than this and how many of us care about that?

[kuznetsov 0]

  simplythebest said:

I suppose that goes back to point of view, for me this is nothing more than a glorified sponsorship and virtually money for nothing.

 

A new company was a bigger change than this and how many of us care about that?

 

do you really think it was mate? i am not so sure. there is nothing visual in a company changeover but when the name of the ground changes and big ugly signs will be on show everywhere, that is materialistically on the mind and in plain view.

[simplythebest 0]

  kuznetsov said:

do you really think it was mate? i am not so sure. there is nothing visual in a company changeover but when the name of the ground changes and big ugly signs will be on show everywhere, that is materialistically on the mind and in plain view.

The new company meant a change in many many years of a corporate identity, not that it mattered in terms of being the same club but it was still a big break in tradition, that company had been running us since 1899.

 

The signs may not be attractive but that's what sponsorship is, serms similar to the sponsors on the jerseys. The name of the ground, well for one it looks like Ibrox would still be in it but secondly it makes no difference to what we know it as and the mhedia constantly spout mistruths about us anyway so why does it matter what they say?

 

That isn't to say I don't have any limits like the name of the team being changed or the kits rebranded but there's no reason to assume it's a chain reaction, both of those situations are rare in football while stadium naming rights being sold is pretty common now. You need to get with the times and the I feel the tradition arguments are a little weak, but it's just my opinion.

[kuznetsov 0]

  simplythebest said:

The new company meant a change in many many years of a corporate identity, not that it mattered in terms of being the same club but it was still a big break in tradition, that company had been running us since 1899.

 

The signs may not be attractive but that's what sponsorship is, serms similar to the sponsors on the jerseys. The name of the ground, well for one it looks like Ibrox would still be in it but secondly it makes no difference to what we know it as and the mhedia constantly spout mistruths about us anyway so why does it matter what they say?

 

That isn't to say I don't have any limits like the name of the team being changed or the kits rebranded but there's no reason to assume it's a chain reaction, both of those situations are rare in football while stadium naming rights being sold is pretty common now. You need to get with the times and the I feel the tradition arguments are a little weak, but it's just my opinion.

 

thanks mate though i didnt need reminding of my age! lol i just feel standards of all kinds at our club have gradually been declining for around a decade now and i am not liking what i see from many aspects of the club these days.

 

on the shirt sponsor thing, i actually love the french tops which are plastered with sponsors, i dont mind shirt sponsors at all.

[simplythebest 0]

  kuznetsov said:

thanks mate though i didnt need reminding of my age! lol i just feel standards of all kinds at our club have gradually been declining for around a decade now and i am not liking what i see from many aspects of the club these days.

 

on the shirt sponsor thing, i actually love the french tops which are plastered with sponsors, i dont mind shirt sponsors at all.

 

I do think Charles wouldn't go ahead with it if there were mass protests outside Ibrox, people handing back their season tickets etc as he needs the fans but apart from a few BF1 displays and the odd banner the response hasn't been that hostile. Therefore I don't think he can be expected to turn down the cash.

[GovanAllan 0]

Rather funny that some would plaster the top in brand names for all to see selling the soul of the jersey but sticking a name in front of Ibrox Stadium and covering the advertising boards in the same name is some how selling our soul to the devil.

[kuznetsov 0]

  GovanAllan said:

Rather funny that some would plaster the top in brand names for all to see selling the soul of the jersey but sticking a name in front of Ibrox Stadium and covering the advertising boards in the same name is some how selling our soul to the devil.

 

by some you mean me. i dont see sponsoring a shirt as selling the soul though, those are your words. i said selling the stadium name is.

[GovanAllan 0]

  kuznetsov said:

by some you mean me. i dont see sponsoring a shirt as selling the soul though, those are your words. i said selling the stadium name is.

 

And I think plastering more that one sponsor on our top is selling our jersey, in fact I would rather see a stadium sponsor and the jersey left alone, but that's never going to happen so if you can sponsor a top you should be able to sponsor a stadium.

[kuznetsov 0]

  GovanAllan said:

And I think plastering more that one sponsor on our top is selling our jersey, in fact I would rather see a stadium sponsor and the jersey left alone, but that's never going to happen so if you can sponsor a top you should be able to sponsor a stadium.

 

fair enough, i respect that opinion and completely understand it, i just dont agree with it.