Why wouldn’t he adkProject funded in part by Government money doesn't sound too good.
For government funding if It’s there for this purpose? Most likely he has made donations to the Tory party at times, so time for back scratching to be returned
Why wouldn’t he adkProject funded in part by Government money doesn't sound too good.
Winters coming!Winterfell Stadium - The Wembley of the North!
That is so 2023. Jimtrafford is the new trend. Or Jimberley.The A.I Sheikh Stadium
I think the Crypto.com arena is even higher at $700m over 20 years.Current record is SoFi in LA (20 years from 2019, $600m), I'd expect higher for us
But that's only for a new stadium, existing ones (like Nou Camp) can't ask as much as most people just keep using the old name
INEOS Stadium.
£50m per year.
Thanks.
If Ratcliffe gets it done and INEOS (the company) either fund it somehow or takes on the repayment liability then it’s a good compromise. I’d be wholly against it if INEOS the company didn’t have any financial involvement and just benefited from the naming rights.I said the same in a different thread too mate, I can see ‘The Ineos Arena’ happening
I think the Crypto.com arena is even higher at $700m over 20 years.
If Ratcliffe gets it done and INEOS (the company) either fund it somehow or takes on the repayment liability then it’s a good compromise. I’d be wholly against it if INEOS the company didn’t have any financial involvement and just benefited from the naming rights.
I’d be massively surprised if Ineos have no involvement with United as Ratcliffe and Ineos for most purposes are one and the same BUT as far as the ownership thing it needs to be seen as separate to Nice, this is why Ratcliffe set up Trawler’s Limited.
I’m not 100% sure but I’m 99% sure that Ratcliffe can do building/redevelopment work with loans that go on to Ineos rather than the club or through Trawlers and then Ineos acquire the stadium naming rights, building and redevelopment work isn’t included in FFP or the new FSR so I’m sure Ratcliffe is allowed to do that through Ineos regardless of involvement with Nice as it isn’t a conflict of interests issue.
Regardless of who the manager is, "who the manager wants" is an anachronistic approach that we should move away from completely.All i want to see Sir Jim and his group do is stop over spending on shit players and actually purchase players that the fit what we need and fit the player profile
i would say who the manager wants but makes me a bit gun shy if EtH actually pushed for the likes of Antony, Weghorst, Malacia and Mount
Regardless of who the manager is, "who the manager wants" is an anachronistic approach that we should move away from completely.
Having a lot of theoretical money to burn in the summer makes me even more nervous if ETH is still around.
Brobbey and Dumfries anyone?
Having a lot of theoretical money to burn in the summer makes me even more nervous if ETH is still around.
Brobbey and Dumfries anyone?
but the manager needs to have a say in the matter of player recruitment simply bc he may or may not fit the system and style of play.....what the INEOS guys should hopefully do is look at the squad, find the deficiencies(clearly a partner for Kobe plus another winger/striker along with a CB) and make that priority area to addressRegardless of who the manager is, "who the manager wants" is an anachronistic approach that we should move away from completely.
This is an insane take. A manager should be in sync with the board, if not then that’s on the board if the manager is still there.Regardless of who the manager is, "who the manager wants" is an anachronistic approach that we should move away from completely.
The idea is the manager no longer leads this though, they will have some input on player preferences right at the end but the focus is on the club deciding on the style of play, the scouting team and DoF working on key profiles that fit each role in that style, and then identifying targets after that. I think the manager will have a say but only once the recruitment team have filtered through candidates - in which case, any manager's scope for error is mitigated.but the manager needs to have a say in the matter of player recruitment simply bc he may or may not fit the system and style of play.....what the INEOS guys should hopefully do is look at the squad, find the deficiencies(clearly a partner for Kobe plus another winger/striker along with a CB) and make that priority area to address
then focus on a handful of targets identified by the recruitment staff and get the deals done in a timely manner
I never said the manager shouldn't have a say. Of course all parties need to be on the same page (otherwise the manager should probably be replaced). The manager shouldn't be the driving force behind recruitment decisions, and definitely shouldn't be indulged on signings.This is an insane take. A manager should be in sync with the board, if not then that’s on the board if the manager is still there.
It’s 2024, tactics have evolved. If a player isn’t wanted by the manager for whatever reason, be it tactically, personality wise etc then it’s idiotic to make a move for him.
City can afford it but their squad has a good 3/4 players Pep just doesn’t go near, he clearly doesn’t want them at the club and they don’t play,
At the end of his video, he hinted at something exciting on Friday
Apparently, FFP won't be an issue this upcoming summer
Sorry if someone else has posted it already
Ah now don't be naive!This should silence the doom merchants
People who are concerned about our finances (which have not been in good shape in recent years) are doom merchants?This should silence the doom merchants
Apparently, FFP won't be an issue this upcoming summer
Sorry if someone else has posted it already
Dont forget De Ligt.
The idea is the manager no longer leads this though, they will have some input on player preferences right at the end but the focus is on the club deciding on the style of play, the scouting team and DoF working on key profiles that fit each role in that style, and then identifying targets after that. I think the manager will have a say but only once the recruitment team have filtered through candidates - in which case, any manager's scope for error is mitigated.
As examples from our recruitment of ETH specific players, what could have happened in an alternate reality:
Antony - likely would not have got past the filter. Good season in Holland but lacking in pace and not a standout player. Add in the fee and it would have never got past a first look.
Licha - maybe one which shows it's not all plain sailing with a DoF, he likely would not have been considered given his height, lack of pace and fee. He's an absolute worldie of a player and this is one ETH got right.
Amrabat - would like to think the scouting team would deem him not good enough.
Onana - I think this one would have still happened, he fits the mould of a modern keeper and his stock was super high. Comparatively the fee wasn't that high either.
Malacia - I think this still has a chance, cheap, squad player at a good age.
I think Ineos will decide high level where we’re heading stylistically and then you pick coaches who fit the style. It avoids the clusterfeck we’ve witness too by from Moyes to LVG to Mou to Ole to ETHthe club should never decide the style of play...that is squarely on the coach staff. To me, that's when it is up to the scouting team and DoF to identify key players that fit the managers style of play but more so fit in the culture and profile of the club...young, exciting talent...english or not ....and within a reasonable price
People get so caught up with these sorts of phrases. Wembley of the North was clearly used to describe it as being the focal point of football in the north of England. A wonder of the world.So it's not even going to be called New Trafford and instead Wembley of the North.
ffs.