So what if there are no buyers and the owner is bankrupt?
In the situation of Man City, Chelsea, Liverpool etc, it would be a good thing. Stop buying trophies. All the clubs are to the owners is status symbols that they can show of at rich boy club.
The British Transfer Thread
Not sure that a possibility in Man City's case. As long as they can sustain a team, they should be able to spend what they want. Surely they would be better off getting approval from the FA before major purchases (players, stadium upgrades etc.) by proving to them they can service any debt and offering security. If the FA isn't convinced, then the move/purchase isn't sanctioned.
So what if there are no buyers and the owner is bankrupt?
In the situation of Man City, Chelsea, Liverpool etc, it would be a good thing. Stop buying trophies. All the clubs are to the owners is status symbols that they can show of at rich boy club.
Not sure if you're fishing for a bite but I'm not sure you can put Liverpool in with the likes of Chelsea, City, PSG, Monaco etc.
Are you an Americas Cup fan?
Are you an Americas Cup fan?
Nope, but I am a fan of encouraging Bill Gates to buy LFC
Are you an Americas Cup fan?
Nope, but I am a fan of encouraging Bill Gates to buy LFC
You don't worry about the identity of the club or how it treats its fans? Win at all costs?
Are you an Americas Cup fan?
Nope, but I am a fan of encouraging Bill Gates to buy LFC
You don't worry about the identity of the club or how it treats its fans? Win at all costs?
Not at all. If an owner can show they are motivated to grow the club, that it is a long term investment and they are keeping the club from administration why shouldn't they spend what they want? The development Man City have done is incredible, not just the purchasing of a new squad but their brand expansion into Australia, USA and the development of their complex in the City of Manchester with the academy stadium and training facilities.
Besides, FFP still favours the biggest clubs as they have the highest existing stream of income thanks to TV Rights, merchandise and marketability. Adding rigid FFP rules will discourage more wealthy owners from investing in the Premier League. the bigger the names, the bigger the money, the more worldwide interest.
Are you an Americas Cup fan?
Nope, but I am a fan of encouraging Bill Gates to buy LFC
You don't worry about the identity of the club or how it treats its fans? Win at all costs?
Not at all. If an owner can show they are motivated to grow the club, that it is a long term investment and they are keeping the club from administration why shouldn't they spend what they want? The development Man City have done is incredible, not just the purchasing of a new squad but their brand expansion into Australia, USA and the development of their complex in the City of Manchester with the academy stadium and training facilities.
What does the "club" have that ties it to its fans, just the location? When the cheapest season ticket for LFC is 710 quid (526 average for the league), where do you draw the line between buying success and having the fans best interest at heart?
Are you an Americas Cup fan?
Nope, but I am a fan of encouraging Bill Gates to buy LFC
You don't worry about the identity of the club or how it treats its fans? Win at all costs?
Not at all. If an owner can show they are motivated to grow the club, that it is a long term investment and they are keeping the club from administration why shouldn't they spend what they want? The development Man City have done is incredible, not just the purchasing of a new squad but their brand expansion into Australia, USA and the development of their complex in the City of Manchester with the academy stadium and training facilities.
What does the "club" have that ties it to its fans, just the location? When the cheapest season ticket for LFC is 710 quid (526 average for the league), where do you draw the line between buying success and having the fans best interest at heart?
Liverpool aren't hanging on the back of billionaire owners though. Their spending is generally offset by their gains of late and they are also funding a buy-up and extension of Anfield which surely benefits the fans, especially given they decided against a move away from Anfield to retain the club identity. This isn't a Liverpool discussion though, its a discussion on whether FFP is a good idea or not. I'd suggest it's not, as it will not help to level the playing field. However, if you're doing it to stop clubs going into administration, this MAAAY help, but my thinking would be that if you have a poor financial plan in place, you'll stuff up either way.
Are you an Americas Cup fan?
Nope, but I am a fan of encouraging Bill Gates to buy LFC
You don't worry about the identity of the club or how it treats its fans? Win at all costs?
Not at all. If an owner can show they are motivated to grow the club, that it is a long term investment and they are keeping the club from administration why shouldn't they spend what they want? The development Man City have done is incredible, not just the purchasing of a new squad but their brand expansion into Australia, USA and the development of their complex in the City of Manchester with the academy stadium and training facilities.
What does the "club" have that ties it to its fans, just the location? When the cheapest season ticket for LFC is 710 quid (526 average for the league), where do you draw the line between buying success and having the fans best interest at heart?
Liverpool aren't hanging on the back of billionaire owners though. Their spending is generally offset by their gains of late and they are also funding a buy-up and extension of Anfield which surely benefits the fans, especially given they decided against a move away from Anfield to retain the club identity. This isn't a Liverpool discussion though, its a discussion on whether FFP is a good idea or not. I'd suggest it's not, as it will not help to level the playing field. However, if you're doing it to stop clubs going into administration, this MAAAY help, but my thinking would be that if you have a poor financial plan in place, you'll stuff up either way.
Liverpool still have spent close to 400million on players over the last 5 years. I just find it hard to reconcile how much is spent, while clubs leverage the cash cows that fans are. There are not many instances of football teams as clubs built around a community in the top tier of English football anymore. The fans might feel they are part of some community but that doesn't infiltrate the boardrooms of these clubs where they are viewed as the target market.
Are you an Americas Cup fan?
Nope, but I am a fan of encouraging Bill Gates to buy LFC
You don't worry about the identity of the club or how it treats its fans? Win at all costs?
Not at all. If an owner can show they are motivated to grow the club, that it is a long term investment and they are keeping the club from administration why shouldn't they spend what they want? The development Man City have done is incredible, not just the purchasing of a new squad but their brand expansion into Australia, USA and the development of their complex in the City of Manchester with the academy stadium and training facilities.
What does the "club" have that ties it to its fans, just the location? When the cheapest season ticket for LFC is 710 quid (526 average for the league), where do you draw the line between buying success and having the fans best interest at heart?
Liverpool aren't hanging on the back of billionaire owners though. Their spending is generally offset by their gains of late and they are also funding a buy-up and extension of Anfield which surely benefits the fans, especially given they decided against a move away from Anfield to retain the club identity. This isn't a Liverpool discussion though, its a discussion on whether FFP is a good idea or not. I'd suggest it's not, as it will not help to level the playing field. However, if you're doing it to stop clubs going into administration, this MAAAY help, but my thinking would be that if you have a poor financial plan in place, you'll stuff up either way.
Liverpool still have spent close to 400million on players over the last 5 years. I just find it hard to reconcile how much is spent, while clubs leverage the cash cows that fans are. There are not many instances of football teams as clubs built around a community in the top tier of English football anymore. The fans might feel they are part of some community but that doesn't infiltrate the boardrooms of these clubs where they are viewed as the target market.
...but to some degree the fans are getting what they want, a winning team, a title, a cup, a challenge after years in the wilderness. if you compare everything to Germany, it will always look that way but then, Germany has a league that only two teams are likely to challenge for each year, or Spain, with 3 clubs challenging. At least in the BPL you have 5 or 6 realistic challengers and 2 or 3 others who could push for Champs League spots.
Are you an Americas Cup fan?
Nope, but I am a fan of encouraging Bill Gates to buy LFC
You don't worry about the identity of the club or how it treats its fans? Win at all costs?
Not at all. If an owner can show they are motivated to grow the club, that it is a long term investment and they are keeping the club from administration why shouldn't they spend what they want? The development Man City have done is incredible, not just the purchasing of a new squad but their brand expansion into Australia, USA and the development of their complex in the City of Manchester with the academy stadium and training facilities.
What does the "club" have that ties it to its fans, just the location? When the cheapest season ticket for LFC is 710 quid (526 average for the league), where do you draw the line between buying success and having the fans best interest at heart?
Liverpool aren't hanging on the back of billionaire owners though. Their spending is generally offset by their gains of late and they are also funding a buy-up and extension of Anfield which surely benefits the fans, especially given they decided against a move away from Anfield to retain the club identity. This isn't a Liverpool discussion though, its a discussion on whether FFP is a good idea or not. I'd suggest it's not, as it will not help to level the playing field. However, if you're doing it to stop clubs going into administration, this MAAAY help, but my thinking would be that if you have a poor financial plan in place, you'll stuff up either way.
Liverpool still have spent close to 400million on players over the last 5 years. I just find it hard to reconcile how much is spent, while clubs leverage the cash cows that fans are. There are not many instances of football teams as clubs built around a community in the top tier of English football anymore. The fans might feel they are part of some community but that doesn't infiltrate the boardrooms of these clubs where they are viewed as the target market.
...but to some degree the fans are getting what they want, a winning team, a title, a cup, a challenge after years in the wilderness. if you compare everything to Germany, it will always look that way but then, Germany has a league that only two teams are likely to challenge for each year, or Spain, with 3 clubs challenging. At least in the BPL you have 5 or 6 realistic challengers and 2 or 3 others who could push for Champs League spots.
To some degree they are, sure. Though, if you look at the other leagues where clubs do have high levels of fan representation/club membership - fans generally vote in favour/try to protect policies that are in their interest - keeping ticket prices low and protecting the fan experience (standing areas etc.).
And btw, Germany's most recent 1st time winner of the Bundesliga was Wolfsburg in 08/09, England's was Nottingham Forest. The past decade has seen 5 different winners. Though your right that because of Bayern Munich's financial success they are competing for the title most seasons along with one or two others, they do have 200,000 members.
If FFP takes hold, teams further down the money tree will be stuck there forever with no chance of new ownership boosting their fortunes.
If FFP takes hold, teams further down the money tree will be stuck there forever with no chance of new ownership boosting their fortunes.
I do agree with this. It will take wealthy fans that donate money to their club that will see them progress/compete in a quicker fashion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietmar_Hopp
Though for some it's more than that, it is about community and their local team
http://www.espnfc.com/blogs/72/post/1853642/uli-hesse-the-state-of-union-berlin
If FFP takes hold, teams further down the money tree will be stuck there forever with no chance of new ownership boosting their fortunes.
It's precisely because football accepted any cash from any gangster that FFP is required. It's a bit rough to blame FFP as futile for small clubs when both common sense and a genuine sense of fair play would have prevented the succession of dubious owners and lax admin that ensured ceratin clubs at the head of the table.
FFP is a step in the right direction, but the teeth of the works have been dulled. This is directly due to back room deals and to circumnavigate "the meaning of the regulations" by the very clubs most needing to be hauled in, and if still not controllable, broken up.
Any transfer news?
yes, big clubs continue fleecing small clubs best players, further diluting the competition.
Haha.
I read that United have moved from Vidal to Alex Song. Now that would be a laugh.
I keep reading the Falcao / Cavani rumours but really don't see either coming in before the end of the window. Chelsea or Liverpool would be the only ones really too. Liverpool would be best suited to go all out for a striker, lest they go Tottenham and exchange a superstar for a bigger squad.
Haha.
I read that United have moved from Vidal to Alex Song. Now that would be a laugh.
I keep reading the Falcao / Cavani rumours but really don't see either coming in before the end of the window. Chelsea or Liverpool would be the only ones really too. Liverpool would be best suited to go all out for a striker, lest they go Tottenham and exchange a superstar for a bigger squad.
...and new manager(s) and a slide down the table. And an extra coat as it just gets colder and colder in the shade.
Any transfer news?
The bigger sides still have a fair bit of shopping to do. And then teams such as Burnley have an absolute mountain to climb in order to get some quality in the door.
The most complete squad? The Chavs' bus looks like there isn't too many spare seats. Torres is still probably up front with the driver, just waiting to get off at the next stop. Or is he slung underneath with the kit bags? What happens if Costa is injured/out of form?
Citeh have numbers but their second string looked a little dicey this morning. I forgot Scott Sinclair was there!
Liverlol do, I fear, have a bit of the Sp*rs about them with some of their purchases to make up for the Bitey Racist. Still, two solid signings (up front and a top defender somewhere in the back 4) and they would be comfortable heading arf to Europe this term.
Arsenal - centre half is in the red danger zone like no other top club. Arteta is the new captain so that is Bender/Khedira/Carvalho ruled out I feel. More midfielders than is healthy?
ManUre - a back 4 required. They've that new fat guy from Southampton who looks tasty (in a bacon roll kinda way?) but the rest of that defense will need a hand/gentle push. More midfield quality required.
Everton - fairly handy squad, but as always light. Still think Lukaku is an amazing signing. With the massive increases in income for all clubs in the League (not just those kit deal/shirt sponsorship increases - I'm just talking about telly money) then 28m for the chap is not a stratospheric price.
Hotsp*rts - Levy will fek it all up.
Here are some nice clean Soap Opera rumours with no arguing over FFP and what's right or wrong
- PSG have pulled out of the race for Di Marie making Man Utd red hot favourites for his services
- Agger will make a move to Arsenal after Barca went with Vermaelen. Rodgers has said in the press that L'pool have received no offers for him as of yet though.
- Real Madrid are to make a bid for Glen Johnson (whhhhyy?!?!)
- Zaha to Newcastle for 7m after news that LvG wants him out. LvG also wants rid of Fellaini, Anderson, Nani and Hernandez (who is looking likely for a move to Southampton)
- Liverpool are still being linked with Moreno, Reus, Cavani and Falcao with Rodgers saying he wants to make two more signings befpre the window closes. Borini is still likely to move to Sunderland but they are looking elsewhere in case it falls through (if BR can't sign a new striker, he'll need Borini for the depth.
Liverpool are still being linked with Moreno, Reus, Cavani and Falcao with Rodgers saying he wants to make two more signings befpre the window closes. Borini is still likely to move to Sunderland but they are looking elsewhere in case it falls through (if BR can't sign a new striker, he'll need Borini for the depth.
Has learnt his lesson from selling Carroll two summers ago in anticipation of new signings, only for possible replacements to fall through (read: be snatched by Tottenham).
Liverpool are still being linked with Moreno, Reus, Cavani and Falcao with Rodgers saying he wants to make two more signings befpre the window closes. Borini is still likely to move to Sunderland but they are looking elsewhere in case it falls through (if BR can't sign a new striker, he'll need Borini for the depth.
Has learnt his lesson from selling Carroll two summers ago in anticipation of new signings, only for possible replacements to fall through (read: be snatched by Tottenham).
It has been suggested by people within the Liverpool scout/coaching set up that they should also consider playing Emre Can at left back as he has the ability, great vision and very strong defence.
A few bits and pieces here:
- Lavezzi the diver (not of the football variety) has turned down a new contract with PSG and is on Liverpool's radar. With Eto'o likely to go to Ajax either Lavezzi or Bony are seen as one of the last pieces to the puzzle for LFC. They are still looking at a keeper (possibly Romero from Sampdoria) and are so confident in Konoplyankha joining them that they are leaving him until last.
- di Maria no longer moving to United so a move for AM's Turan is the next rumour doing the rounds. They are also likely to miss out on Vidal who is now being courted by Barca.
- Schurrle from Chelski to Athletico is doing to the rounds - I give this about a 1% chance of happening
Cavani has signed for Liverpool!!!
Yea great clip that ... ... ...
:)
Apparently Di Maria has turned down ManU because he wants champs league football
lolz
LOL Just goes to show that you should not believe everything you read.
Di Maria is a good signing but the main problem is centre midfield.
Di Maria is a good signing but the main problem is centre midfield.
And another defender.
With defenders we are fine if we have no injuries. The depth isn't great and the defenders themselves aren't standouts but we have 6 or so guys who are united quality. We currently have one holding midfielder who is united quality.
With defenders we are fine if we have no injuries. The depth isn't great and the defenders themselves aren't standouts but we have 6 or so guys who are united quality. We currently have one holding midfielder who is united quality.
I would very much like to hear who these 6 or so defenders are (unless "United quality" means the quality of United now, as opposed to the last 30 years).
With defenders we are fine if we have no injuries. The depth isn't great and the defenders themselves aren't standouts but we have 6 or so guys who are united quality. We currently have one holding midfielder who is united quality.
I would very much like to hear who these 6 or so defenders are (unless "United quality" means the quality of United now, as opposed to the last 30 years).
Shaw, Jones, Rojo, Evans, Smalling and perhaps Blackett (can't really say yet) are all good enough. None of them are standouts as I said but none of them are liabilities. They are good enough to play Champions league football.
Besides anyone we sign isn't going to be a huge upgrade on those guys but will just provide depth. Is Benatia really so much better than Evans/Jones/Rojo? I honestly don't know. Blind will just provide left back cover for Shaw or be used in midfield. Any defender we sign will not dramatically improve the team because they will sit on the bench or replace a player of lightly lower quality. There is a huge gap between Vidal or even De Jong and Cleverley.
Two guys who haven't played a competitive game for united and another who has played twice?
Two guys who haven't played a competitive game for united and another who has played twice?
So we spent 27 million pounds and then 16 million pounds on players who are not good enough to play for United? I don't think we're that stupid. They clearly have the quality. As for Blackett, who knows? Not me, that's for sure. He's probably been our best player this season (as little as that's worth).
If we are going to play 3-5-2 then our defensive depth is going to be more exposed. If we play 4-2-3-1 or 4-1-3-2 as we should then we could be fine. If Benatia is going, then we should sign him but no defenders we sign will significantly improve the squad in the way a central midfielder would.
Two guys who haven't played a competitive game for united and another who has played twice?
So we spent 27 million pounds and then 16 million pounds on players who are not good enough to play for united?
Two guys who haven't played a competitive game for united and another who has played twice?
So we spent 27 million pounds and then 16 million pounds on players who are not good enough to play for united?
You mean like Senderos, Arshavin,Inamoto, Richard Wright,Jeffers,Reyes. Some great signings from AW. LOL
Two guys who haven't played a competitive game for united and another who has played twice?
So we spent 27 million pounds and then 16 million pounds on players who are not good enough to play for united?
He's good enough but how would you pick him or Mata in the same team? If Mata doesn't play then Kagawa plays and you have the same problem. Shaw and Rojo don't have to fit into a system like that especially when we go back to 4 at the back.
With defenders we are fine if we have no injuries. The depth isn't great and the defenders themselves aren't standouts but we have 6 or so guys who are united quality. We currently have one holding midfielder who is united quality.
I would very much like to hear who these 6 or so defenders are (unless "United quality" means the quality of United now, as opposed to the last 30 years).
Shaw, Jones, Rojo, Evans, Smalling and perhaps Blackett (can't really say yet) are all good enough. None of them are standouts as I said but none of them are liabilities. They are good enough to play Champions league football.
So what is "United quality" then? I would have thought that for defenders, "United quality" would have meant Pallister, Bruce, Vidic, Ferdinand, Irwin, Neville, etc - you really think that Jones, Evans or Smalling are anywhere near that quality?
Two guys who haven't played a competitive game for united and another who has played twice?
So we spent 27 million pounds and then 16 million pounds on players who are not good enough to play for united?
You mean like Senderos, Arshavin,Inamoto, Richard Wright,Jeffers,Reyes. Some great signings from AW. LOL