Can't choose your family can you? Something you and Jack have in common. Any stories about Ronnie Clayton being an unpleasant scumbag? Peter White being a white supremacist? Nobody has ever said anything about Jack like this on the forum before. Seems strange that it's coming up now all as an excuse to defend a lowlife like Ferguson. Why don't you give some specific examples it's not like I'm asking for names and national insurance numbers. Not that I would agree with it anyway but at least try to back it up. The most negative thing I could ever say about Jack is that he was too nice. This ruthless bastard you're making him out to be would have fired Mackay the second he walked in the door. He would have got rid of several others too and I'm not talking about the players that were sold. Sure someone might bring up his tax exile status. One of the reasons he moved to Jersey was so he could safeguard his employees jobs whom he was so horrible towards. What about the workers who were loyal to the point they broke pickets from their own union members (but not Jack's employees)? Yeah he was an awful, dreadful man. ?. Even Ferguson with his media stooges can't cover up his bullying nature. You can't cover up any such stories with Jack because they don't exist. Your relatives must have confused him with Fred.

I'm not pro monarchy so it wouldn't make sense to acknowledge knighthoods. Not against the UK but would prefer if it was renamed the Union Republic. I don't care what his prefix is. Once again I bring up Liverpool Echo referring to the S*n, etc. If you insist on using a prefix how about "Slur Alex" which fits his reputation as a vulgar, crass person. What about the women's team who were denied a promotion because of Man United? What about the transfer ban Rovers got because of corrupt rules influenced by UEFA and Man United? There would have been countless reasons to kick the man out.

Did you disagree with him? If the mods remove this can you at least have the courtesy to explain why? Are you not allowed to ask questions now?

Why shouldn't I call it FUP or refuse to call Ferguson "sir"? If you were on a Liverpool forum would you question people who refer to the S*n or the Scum? The Liverpool Echo even call it the former!

So who are they? Genuinely I've not heard one person speak negatively of Jack in his roles at Walkersteel, Flybe, etc. There were strike pickets outside Walkersteel at one point but they didn't even work for him! Being around Glasgow I guess you have heard the stories about Jock Stein? An even worse bully who didn't even tell a player that his wife had suffered a miscarriage. Claims he covered up numerous cases of child abuse. Ferguson considered him a friend, worked as his Scotland assistant and no doubt patterned some of his bullying nature after him. That's the type of lowlife he associated with. You wouldn't hear Celtic fans say a bad word about Stein (which perhaps says more about them) but Rovers fans of course are very unique. If Jack was a ruthless bastard he would have fired Don Mackay the second he walked in the door. He only gave him the opportunity out of kindness. Kidd would have been fired after relegation. I was disappointed by Hodgson's firing but looking back you can't defend most of his signings.

...and when did he ever bully or use crass language? He fired a few managers justifiably and no doubt fired some employees during his business career as well. That's not being horrible to people. If anything Jack was too nice whereas his family (and likes of Ferguson) are the absolute opposite. Anyway I didn't mean to take the thread off topic (I was only responding with a question for someone else) and given it's only page 2 plenty of time to get it back on track. I won't prevent that.

Jack Walker was 10000 times the man he is on his worst day. People need to know that. If that's what it took to drum that point across so be it.

He's bullied countless people and banned them. Many would enjoy seeing someone like that get a taste of their own medicine. Many people would be attracted to a club that is edgier and no nonsense. Kids in the area would see it as cool. That's the type of market that could be tapped (not in the way Ferguson often tapped)

The same types who defended Steve Kean and showed nothing but contempt for Jack Walker while he was alive and after his death? I wouldn't give a toss.

So if they called it the "anti-Jack Walker rule" you would go along with that? Got to do as you're told. It's about getting rid of what's wrong with the mindset of many clubs. The majority of my post (other than the specific things that would apply to this club only) could apply to any Championship club. There's nothing wrong with different ideas.

Maybe the club would have to be in the EPL to avoid that "no stepping stone" level. In all likelihood with FUP (and billionaires virtually cancelling each other out anyway) midtable EPL is the peak anyway and perhaps Europa League. I'll admit my personal aim would be avoiding the sale of anyone to one particular club. You could sign midtable level players, encourage them to show personality (which might appeal to them more than being corporate robots) and try to sustain that for as long as possible. Also while ensuring the club is the least boring in football and targeting a younger, edgier, counter culture fanbase and similar staff. I would distribute free tickets (a percentage of course has to go to EPL but you could easily pay the minimum from Tv funds) to those types of people only and some of the existing fans. People who belittled the club, defended the Walker family, attacked protesters, etc would never set foot in Ewood on my watch that's for sure. I would do the above at any club who's realistic peak is midtable/Europa with FUP. The one difference is I would know right away which fans to get rid of here. The biggest scores wouldn't be on the pitch that's for sure. They would be the ones settled. Managers could easily be rotated every 4-5 years as well and 65-70. Or someone like Maradona.

Too young, not enough personality. I'm not answering the other questions with those initials being used. Don't take it personally either you could replace with "any Championship club".

Yeah because Academy players would never do that. ? If I had my way at Ewood (or other Championship clubs) players like that wouldn't be there anyway. If that meant only signing players 28 and over (with personality) so be it.

...and why do you think it may not be effective?

So would you be an advocate of only signing players who are at an age where "stepping stones" are increasingly unlikely? I went into some detail on this recently. Particularly if in the EPL signing players like Emerton/Pedersen ability level (with more personality) given the FUP limits and inability to climb higher. Stoke City hardly sold anybody as a "stepping stone" while in the EPL. Of course they were about as interesting as paint drying too but anybody with creativity and vision could change that. Reaching out to more rebellious types and younger fans for instance who won't feel constantly let down by people leaving.

...and here's a simple but effective way to keep supporters away. https://global.espn.com/football/eintracht-frankfurt/story/4093150/eintracht-frankfurt-chief-to-fans-dont-show-up-or-well-get-a-loss

However evident other faults may have been it's hard not to view people like that with contempt. I guarantee there's people like that at Ewood and nobody gives them less than an easy ride. Forget placing staff on furlough it's a good opportunity to get rid of some of them permanently. I would have just fired those types of people at Sunderland rather than bullied them.

Most of those clubs that are facing bankruptcy should really be admitted right back to the division they came from. They can just form a new holding company and take it from there. OK you might not be able to save every single one of them in a short space of time but others would see someone step in. Especially if they had some guarantees of league status. I can't see why anyone would disagree with that and it can be made clear in the extreme circumstances such allowances can be made. I'm not sure how it would apply to the one football league club that was kicked out of the league recently but "before" and "after" are very different things. One scientist said it would be like "BC" and "AD" in scientific terms.

As stated recently I would let fans in for free or as cheaply as allowed. If you want to attract an edgier, cooler fanbase that's probably what it would take. Could apply to virtually any Championship club (and even some lower half EPL ones) if you're not allowed to chase the best (and billionaires are virtually at point of cancelling each other out) then be the most interesting and controversial. It's what I would do and if it upset the existing fans...so be it.

I didn't get short changed. It's true what you say in general though some people definitely got short changed. One of my neighbours for instance is such a moron he's definitely in that category. I've tried to be understanding though he could have been physically abused as a kid or worse.

Patronising people isn't a "throwback".

Not to enough people or the right demographics. Especially with FUP. That's why you would need to rebuild the fanbase and as I've said it could apply to many Championship clubs. Maybe you're right about "joining the dots" because my ideas are somewhat haphazard (partly because there's so many of them) but I can picture my vision even if it's not so easy to put into context. Wimbledon was mentioned but imagine "crazy gang x 100" and you might start getting anywhere near it.

Take time making the case for cooler, edgier marketing and you get threads with titles like this bumped up to page 1. ? Why don't you just draw a picture of someone with a flat cap to go with it?

I guess being more rebellious is a form is commercialism. Yes granted the MLS is corporate. It's a more even league though and all teams have the hope of achieving something unlike European clubs. Salary caps are not based on an absolutely crooked FUP system. Granted most European clubs don't get major takeovers (and really how many sheikhs are there?) and become the biggest spending club (in England at least in Rovers case for a period) out there. A takeover was the answer for me in the past but what's the point of trying to be the absolute best you can be anymore? Be the most different and try to be as competitive as you can. If there's a position to fill and the more marketable player isn't as good as a better option go for the marketable player if they are still good enough for the Championship. As I've said before if you reach that consistent peak level (midtable EPL in all likelihood enough more competent owners could be required) then you can avoid signing "stepping stone" type players altogether. As I've said signing players who are 28. 29 etc won't be purchased from the Championship as often as younger ones do. Occasionally they might get the chance of a move but if it's to a midtable EPL club the step isn't all that big. A couple of years later you could be in that position yourselves.