Kyle McFadzean

[sitwell]

Yes, that was a bit naughty. Couldn't resist.

Not getting at you ,genuine question ,who did you support 10 years ago and why did you change ?

 

[Pinchy]

I'm pretty sure Kyle isn't going anywhere and certainly not to a League One club. If you listen to his post match interview after we won promotion he says he can't wait for next season.

League status and positions are transient. History and tradition are not. Milton Keynes have no tradition and their history begins with a sleight of hand.

Any player worth his salt would crawl from Milton (or is it Keynes) to join the Blades.

 

[Latters]

Oh dear. We are now being patronised by fans of a franchise. This shows how far we have fallen.

Out of interest, where are the other branches in the MK Dons franchise? I'm only aware of the Milton Keynes one, which doesn't make it much of a franchise. Certainly not on McDonald's or Pizza Hut's scale.

 

[axel smeets]

Out of interest, where are the other branches in the MK Dons franchise? I'm only aware of the Milton Keynes one, which doesn't make it much of a franchise. Certainly not on McDonald's or Pizza Hut's scale.

I thought that a franchise was a club that was moved from one place to another, for purely financial reasons. An example could be NFL team LA Rams, which became the St Louis Rams. That is only one team. It did not need multiple branches to be classed as a franchise. Neither did Wimbledon FC when they were bastardised to become MK Cons.

 

[Stony bloke]

Out of interest, where are the other branches in the MK Dons franchise? I'm only aware of the Milton Keynes one, which doesn't make it much of a franchise. Certainly not on McDonald's or Pizza Hut's scale.

Well spotted. I glad someone understands the principle of franchising.

 

[Latters]

I thought that a franchise was a club that was moved from one place to another, for purely financial reasons. An example could be NFL team LA Rams, which became the St Louis Rams. That is only one team. It did not need multiple branches to be classed as a franchise. Neither did Wimbledon FC when they were bastardised to become MK Cons.

My understanding of it is that a franchise is when you pay to use an established company's name or work under their banner in order to benefit from their reputation (and sometimes product range). Quite the opposite of what MK did when they got rid of the established club's name.

 

[WORKSOPBLADE]

Where is NC meeting Kyle do you know? And do yhou know Kyle personally?

Don't know where the meet is. Don't know him personally but spoke to someone very close to him to confirm the situation. Got to be keen to meet and MK to sell to get this far.

 

[Stony bloke]

Not getting at you ,genuine question ,who did you support 10 years ago and why did you change ?

A common question levelled at all MK Dons fans. Well, as MK is/was a new town, then by definintion most of its residents came from elsewhere, chiefly London. Therefore these residents by and large supported the club of their home town. The same applies to me. I was born in Preston but moved to Blackburn when I was five. Consequently my dad took me to Blackburn Rovers who I supported until I came down to Milton Keynes in 1974 to help build the new town. With a small family it was impractical to get back to Blackburn on a regular basis but I still followed their progress. Come 2003 and Wimbledon FC decided to move here. This is an important point. They weren't dragged here. It was that or go bust. Having a football team on my doorstep I went along and, as they say, have supported them ever since. Not sure how I'll feel next season when we play Blackburn. I have, among my friends, on match days, a number of Wimbledon FC supporters who chose to follow their club here rather than throw their toys out of the pram. I'm sure my case is typical of many others here. Another factor is that Prem League prices have now excluded a lot of people, especially if they have kids.

 

[Stony bloke]

My understanding of it is that a franchise is when you pay to use an established company's name or work under their banner in order to benefit from their reputation (and sometimes product range). Quite the opposite of what MK did when they got rid of the established club's name.

Precisely. So they're not a franchise then.

 

[Stony bloke]

I thought that a franchise was a club that was moved from one place to another, for purely financial reasons. An example could be NFL team LA Rams, which became the St Louis Rams. That is only one team. It did not need multiple branches to be classed as a franchise. Neither did Wimbledon FC when they were bastardised to become MK Cons.

Definition
Franchising is the practice of the right to use a firm's business model and brand for a prescribed period of time.

The term has been much abused and distorted.

 

[sitwell]

A common question levelled at all MK Dons fans. Well, as MK is/was a new town, then by definintion most of its residents came from elsewhere, chiefly London. Therefore these residents by and large supported the club of their home town. The same applies to me. I was born in Preston but moved to Blackburn when I was five. Consequently my dad took me to Blackburn Rovers who I supported until I came down to Milton Keynes in 1974 to help build the new town. With a small family it was impractical to get back to Blackburn on a regular basis but I still followed their progress. Come 2003 and Wimbledon FC decided to move here. This is an important point. They weren't dragged here. It was that or go bust. Having a football team on my doorstep I went along and, as they say, have supported them ever since. Not sure how I'll feel next season when we play Blackburn. I have, among my friends, on match days, a number of Wimbledon FC supporters who chose to follow their club here rather than throw their toys out of the pram. I'm sure my case is typical of many others here. Another factor is that Prem League prices have now excluded a lot of people, especially if they have kids.

Fair enough ,I don't see a problem with that.

 

[Darren]

I thought that a franchise was a club that was moved from one place to another, for purely financial reasons. An example could be NFL team LA Rams, which became the St Louis Rams. That is only one team. It did not need multiple branches to be classed as a franchise. Neither did Wimbledon FC when they were bastardised to become MK Cons.

MKD were called "Franchise FC" because of the way the NFL operates - i.e. on a franchise. The NFL gives franchises to teams to play it in it's league. It can revoke the franchise in one town and give it to another town. Often, it's legally the same club, who just move town, but, as I understand it, they have to apply for a new NFL franchise if they want to move town. Hence all teams playing in the NFL are franchisees of the NFL - just like MacDonald's could take away it's franchise from a burger joint in the High Street and give it to one in Church Street.

The Football League effectivelty withdrawing their "franchise" from a club in South London and giving it to one in Milton Keynes was seen as analogous to that

 

[Stony bloke]

MKD were called "Franchise FC" because of the way the NFL operates - i.e. on a franchise. The NFL gives franchises to teams to play it in it's league. It can revoke the franchise in one town and give it to another town. Often, it's legally the same club, who just move town, but, as I understand it, they have to apply for a new NFL franchise if they want to move town. Hence all teams playing in the NFL are franchisees of the NFL - just like MacDonald's could take away it's franchise from a burger joint in the High Street and give it to one in Church Street.

The Football League effectivelty withdrawing their "franchise" from a club in South London and giving it to one in Milton Keynes was seen as analogous to that

First paragraph reasonably correct. Second para. wrong.
Clubs in the Football League do not operate as franchises, as I'm sure you will agree. Therefore the FA couldn't give the Wimbledon 'franchise' to a club in Milton Keynes, not just for this reason but because there was no club in Milton Keynes at that time to give it to. Wimbledon FC physically moved their club to Milton Keynes in order to survive. The supporters who disagreed with this move decided to form a new club, AFC Wimbledon. This club was formed in 2002 and was actually playing at Kingsmeadow at the same time as Wimbledon FC were playing at Crystal Palace's ground, and after that, at the Milton Keynes Hockey Stadium, which had been converted to a football stadium as a temporary measure until the new stadium was complete.

 

[FleaPitBlade]

Come 2003 and Wimbledon FC decided to move here. This is an important point. They weren't dragged here. It was that or go bust.

Dont try and sugar coat it, you stole a place in the football league. If the football people of MK had anything about them, they'd have shunned their new club in solidarity with the people of Wimbledon who'd had theirs dragged away from them.

 

[Darren]

First paragraph reasonably correct. Second para. wrong.
Clubs in the Football League do not operate as franchises, as I'm sure you will agree. Therefore the FA couldn't give the Wimbledon 'franchise' to a club in Milton Keynes, not just for this reason but because there was no club in Milton Keynes at that time to give it to. Wimbledon FC physically moved their club to Milton Keynes in order to survive. The supporters who disagreed with this move decided to form a new club, AFC Wimbledon. This club was formed in 2002 and was actually playing at Kingsmeadow at the same time as Wimbledon FC were playing at Crystal Palace's ground, and after that, at the Milton Keynes Hockey Stadium, which had been converted to a football stadium as a temporary measure until the new stadium was complete.

Note the word "effectively".

An NFL team wants to move from LA to St Louis. It asks the NFL if it can have a franchise for St Louis. The NFL says yes
A FL team wants to move from South London to MK. It asks the FL if it can. The FL says yes.

Very little difference.

 

[axel smeets]

My understanding of it is that a franchise is when you pay to use an established company's name or work under their banner in order to benefit from their reputation (and sometimes product range). Quite the opposite of what MK did when they got rid of the established club's name.

They kept the 'Dons' part of Wimbledon's nickname, yes?

 

[Stony bloke]

Dont try and sugar coat it, you stole a place in the football league. If the football people of MK had anything about them, they'd have shunned their new club in solidarity with the people of Wimbledon who'd had theirs dragged away from them.

Sorry, this a sugar free story. All I have stated is fact. If you wish to stick to your version because of some misguided desire to hate someone for the move, try starting with Wimbledons owners, who were determined to move, followed by Merton Council and the FA who assisted in the move. Just don't blame residents of Milton Keynes who had nothing to do with it. Most people sympathised with the move since it was that or go bust.

 

[Stony bloke]

Note the word "effectively".

An NFL team wants to move from LA to St Louis. It asks the NFL if it can have a franchise for St Louis. The NFL says yes
A FL team wants to move from South London to MK. It asks the FL if it can. The FL says yes.

Very little difference.

May be little to you but a very important difference. It wasn't a franchise. End of.

 

[Latters]

They kept the 'Dons' part of Wimbledon's nickname, yes?

You're clutching at straws. Just like when Burger Knight opened in Meadowhall back in around 2008 in a unit that had recently been vacated by Burger King. (Yes, this actually happened). They kept the "Burger" part of the name. They were no more a franchise of Burger King than MK Dons are. They, like MK, are more just a knock off.

 

[Stony bloke]

They kept the 'Dons' part of Wimbledon's nickname, yes?

Correct, since they were the same players, before and after the name change. They were still 'Dons' and this was retained in recognition of their origins. 'Wimbledon' was changed to 'Milton Keynes' to reflect the change in location. The name change was agreed between the club and the Wimbledon Independent Supporters Association at the time, although now they are trying wriggle out of it. This is all documented by the way.

 

[maxstertheblade]

Don't know where the meet is. Don't know him personally but spoke to someone very close to him to confirm the situation. Got to be keen to meet and MK to sell to get this far.

Has a fee been talked about? And heard any feed back from NC and Kyle's convo?

 

[axel smeets]

Correct, since they were the same players, before and after the name change. They were still 'Dons' and this was retained in recognition of their origins. 'Wimbledon' was changed to 'Milton Keynes' to reflect the change in location. The name change was agreed between the club and the Wimbledon Independent Supporters Association at the time, although now they are trying wriggle out of it. This is all documented by the way.

Christ, you must be desperate, trawling another club's message board, trying to justify the naming of your franchised football team.

'Wimbledon was changed to Milton Keynes to reflect the change in location.'

A franchise.

 

[axel smeets]

You're clutching at straws. Just like when Burger Knight opened in Meadowhall back in around 2008 in a unit that had recently been vacated by Burger King. (Yes, this actually happened). They kept the "Burger" part of the name. They were no more a franchise of Burger King than MK Dons are. They, like MK, are more just a knock off.

You've made my point for me. MK are a franchise. Thankyou.

 

[Stony bloke]

You've made my point for me. MK are a franchise. Thankyou.

Sorry? Can you read?

 

[Stony bloke]

Christ, you must be desperate, trawling another club's message board, trying to justify the naming of your franchised football team.

'Wimbledon was changed to Milton Keynes to reflect the change in location.'

A franchise.

Sorry to tax your brain but if you care to go to the beginning of the thread I came on only to discuss Kyle McFadzean. I was asked a question about MK Dons and it progressed from there. Most of your reasonable posters seem to accept the argument but there will always be some who will disagree however strong the evidence.

 

[axel smeets]

A franchise.

 

[gavtheblade]

Plastic

 

[FleaPitBlade]

There can only be two categories of MK Dons fans.

1. Those who supported somebody else before something closer came along
2. Those who had no prior interest in football prior to a league team turning up.

Our friend has nailed his colours to mast number one.

I'm not one to have a dig at other clubs fans on here but anyone who comes on trying to claim that what MK did was anything other than disgusting can expect nothing but disdain from anyone who really follows football

 

[Sothall_Blade]

A common question levelled at all MK Dons fans. Well, as MK is/was a new town, then by definintion most of its residents came from elsewhere, chiefly London. Therefore these residents by and large supported the club of their home town. The same applies to me. I was born in Preston but moved to Blackburn when I was five. Consequently my dad took me to Blackburn Rovers who I supported until I came down to Milton Keynes in 1974 to help build the new town. With a small family it was impractical to get back to Blackburn on a regular basis but I still followed their progress. Come 2003 and Wimbledon FC decided to move here. This is an important point. They weren't dragged here. It was that or go bust. Having a football team on my doorstep I went along and, as they say, have supported them ever since. Not sure how I'll feel next season when we play Blackburn. I have, among my friends, on match days, a number of Wimbledon FC supporters who chose to follow their club here rather than throw their toys out of the pram. I'm sure my case is typical of many others here. Another factor is that Prem League prices have now excluded a lot of people, especially if they have kids.

Why slag off AFC Wimbledon fans who chose to support a club local to them?
Which is the same thing that you've done. A bit contradictory?

If Wimbledon FC had gone bust a different longstanding and more deserving non-league club would have taken their place in the "4th Division".

MK Whatever could and should have started at the bottom and worked their way up like AFC Wimbledon ended up having to do.

 

[Pinchy]

Sorry to tax your brain but if you care to go to the beginning of the thread I came on only to discuss Kyle McFadzean. I was asked a question about MK Dons and it progressed from there. Most of your reasonable posters seem to accept the argument but there will always be some who will disagree however strong the evidence.

And you betray your ignorance and/or disdain of the history and heritage of the game. A suggestion that a player will not leave Milton Keynes for "a "league one club" when that club is SUFC, is absurd. League status is a snapshot in time, that's all. On any sensible view, MK really don't register as a club, compared to the Blades.