Random Task
WW Lynchpin
I think that you missed my joke
They've said that they're going to strip City of all their Champions League titles.
Yeah, but we don't win CL titles so...
Oh, I see.
I think that you missed my joke
They've said that they're going to strip City of all their Champions League titles.
@padr81 has closed his account! That must be recent (as he'd commented in this thread).Where's @Gentleman Jim and the rest of his City comrades hiding?
They could have the common courtesy to allow us poor United fans the opportunity to rub it in a bit.
Selfish.
Hope it's a joke about them getting their titles rescinded. Purely because the players and manager did actually win those titles. Yes, the means which they assembled the squad was cheating and I think they should be banned from the CL and moved down a league as punishment to the entire club. But I don't like the idea of saying "actually liverpool or United won it that year now" because that moment has passed, we can't celebrate it. It would feel empty and meaningless, since we didn't actually win it. When Rio was banned for missing a so called drugs test they didn't strip him of his premier league medals from previous seasons (and the thought of 'pool getting a hollow title turns my stomach).
There's no good outcome, is there? If we get the decision reversed then the business wing of a royal family have opened the floodgates for predatory capitalists to do as they please. If we don't, then UEFA have confirmed that clubs from outside the established elite are barred. The only solution is for there to be a way for clubs to "do a Leicester" (or a "Spurs") and still sustain success instead of being picked apart by clubs who can afford ginormous wage packages and keep hold of their best players. Can't see that happening, though.
There's no good outcome, is there? If we get the decision reversed then the business wing of a royal family have opened the floodgates for predatory capitalists to do as they please. If we don't, then UEFA have confirmed that clubs from outside the established elite are barred. The only solution is for there to be a way for clubs to "do a Leicester" (or a "Spurs") and still sustain success instead of being picked apart by clubs who can afford ginormous wage packages and keep hold of their best players. Can't see that happening, though.
We are talking more so about clubs spending beyond their means. Sugar daddies are just the best examples of such. Ask the Pompey fans how the feel NOW. It's ridiculous to think they preferred nearly losing their club to not being as good of team as they were. And Newcastle fans may hate Mike Ashley for not spending but I guarantee if you ask them whether or not they would want Ashley to spend money at the risk of becoming insolvent they woud be against the idea just like any sensible fan who gives a shit about the club surviving. Truth is most fans don't understand the risks until they are in that situation.portsmouth and blackburn attained success with their owners though however fleeting and then too we are not strictly talking sugar daddy type ownership here. you should see how the pompey fans at the time felt around 2007 when they were signing a lot of players they would not otherwise have been able to sign. not all non plcs are necessarily sugar daddy pet projects. Newcastle fans still complain of Mike ashley and he is not what you would call a sugar daddy at all.
1) There are plenty more examples: Spurs, Sheffield United, Bournemouth, Dortmund, etc, etc.you should read up on how leicester weren't ffp compliant until 2016, it includes the period after their title win. this thread has the information in it. it wasn't completely some feel-good romantic story of a club against all odds doing it without any investment from outside at all.
For one, I never disputed the chance nature of the commercialization in football. Secondly, you seem to ignore that randomness and chance are rife in all sports. I don't even understand why you think this is controversial. Sure, a side effect of FFP is that it entrenches the position of big clubs but surely this is less important than making sure callous businessmen don't bring a club to the brink of financial collapse. Also, you are completely guessing about whether a European super league will be formed so that isn't relevant.it may not be a fault of theirs but it is still less disingenuous to recognize the chance nature of what occurred then and seeing that it is not all about trying to preserve your own status quo now which is just hypocritical. there is luck and acting like someone with a feifdom who doesn't want someone else rising up. And certainly with talks of a European super league which will probably happen sooner rather than later this will become even more evident. everyone did benefit yes, but some more than others.
Sport isn't designed to undo chance and sustained success. Chance works both ways. Small clubs rise up from obscurity all the time. Outliers disrupt the system constantly. Look at the current PL table ffs. It's easy to ignore recent history and past examples and just blame the established clubs, but that would be disingenuous wouldn't it?sport is not designed to calcify the existing hierarchy nor take away the aspect of someone being able to achieve glory and success tomorrow even if it seems improbable today and vice versa. if it isn't possible to do so - as now over 2 decades seems to show - its quite likely a romantic and far fetched notion that many just don't ascribe to. why not ask yourself that, that is as much a reality. Clubs going insolvent is neither here nor there, there's as much chance of a club getting fecked over by a PLC board and it's decisions in the long run as that of a sugar daddy's whims. one isn't inherently that much more nobler than the other.
I wish Spurs' model was a realistic option for everybody but Levy is very a specific case. And, sadly, it's not just that it hasn't turned into trophies for Spurs, it's that you haven't really been able to keep hold of enough of your best players while adding to them with better ones. So much in football is made of transfer expenditure when really it's the wage packets making all the difference, and the fact that you try to keep your wage expenditure below a certain level means you'll almost always be blown out of the water when chasing key targets or picked apart by the likes of us (or, in recent weeks, Inter).Thing is, I agree FFP was partly put in to keep the elite as it is and the whole structure of football is broken. But City (and Chelsea) are not the way forward, for the game anyway. All they've actually done is made it even more difficult for clubs trying to grow organically.
Levy (and Spurs) get a lot of shade thrown at them on here, probably mostly because of Glaston in fairness, but I think what he and the team have done in the last 20 years is exactly the way it should be approached. Yes, I know we haven't won trophies yet, who knows if we will. But the financial growth of the club has been incredible and we're not getting to a stage where we can try to consistently compete for trophies and actually compete on transfer (and most importantly, wages).
Part of the problem is though that most football fans (and humans in general) want instant results and have short memories.
No way. Thats a pity. He had me feeling sorry for City fans yesterday. Briefly. He was a good poster@padr81 has closed his account! That must be recent (as he'd commented in this thread).
Think Leeds are worth throwing in with City and Chelsea. Agree with Spurs (and somewhat Arsenal) suffering from them more than most.Thing is, I agree FFP was partly put in to keep the elite as it is and the whole structure of football is broken. But City (and Chelsea) are not the way forward, for the game anyway. All they've actually done is made it even more difficult for clubs trying to grow organically.
Levy (and Spurs) get a lot of shade thrown at them on here, probably mostly because of Glaston in fairness, but I think what he and the team have done in the last 20 years is exactly the way it should be approached. Yes, I know we haven't won trophies yet, who knows if we will. But the financial growth of the club has been incredible and we're not getting to a stage where we can try to consistently compete for trophies and actually compete on transfer (and most importantly, wages).
Part of the problem is though that most football fans (and humans in general) want instant results and have short memories.
I wish Spurs' model was a realistic option for everybody but Levy is very a specific case. And, sadly, it's not just that it hasn't turned into trophies for Spurs, it's that you haven't really been able to keep hold of enough of your best players while adding to them with better ones. So much in football is made of transfer expenditure when really it's the wage packets making all the difference, and the fact that you try to keep your wage expenditure below a certain level means you'll almost always be blown out of the water when chasing key targets or picked apart by the likes of us (or, in recent weeks, Inter).
And even then, your good patch in recent years has still seen you hovering on the fringes of the elite rather than joining them. It's also worth mentioning that your recent period of relative success since 2014 only came under one manager. If you can sustain top four finishes and go deep into the Champions League under Mourinho (and whoever comes after him) then it will absolutely be time to start considering Levy's type of business model, but until then (whether we like it or not) this recent purple patch might only be credited to Pochettino.
I'm friends with a couple of Spurs fans and they're frustrated with Levy as they are fond of him because of the way he approaches things as an owner.
There's no good outcome, is there? If we get the decision reversed then the business wing of a royal family have opened the floodgates for predatory capitalists to do as they please. If we don't, then UEFA have confirmed that clubs from outside the established elite are barred. The only solution is for there to be a way for clubs to "do a Leicester" (or a "Spurs") and still sustain success instead of being picked apart by clubs who can afford ginormous wage packages and keep hold of their best players. Can't see that happening, though.
City becoming untouchable by smashing UEFA into pieces in the courts is certainly the worst case scenario. Think I will just call it a day on football if that happens in all honesty, it’s not really the game I knew anymore.
What game did you know?
Find me on the boxing thread at the moment mate.Where's @Gentleman Jim and the rest of his City comrades hiding?
They could have the common courtesy to allow us poor United fans the opportunity to rub it in a bit.
Selfish.
a game where football was the focus. Not agents and Billions and Millions.
What game did you know?
Find me on the boxing thread at the moment mate.
The game's gone.
![]()
Its all well and good lauding Levy for great job he has done with Tottenham but the point people miss is it's owned by a Billionaire as well do you think all the great training facility and new stadium which Tottenham have built would have been possible had it been not backed by Billionaire owner I don't think so it would have been really difficult to raise the capital for all this growth.Thing is, I agree FFP was partly put in to keep the elite as it is and the whole structure of football is broken. But City (and Chelsea) are not the way forward, for the game anyway. All they've actually done is made it even more difficult for clubs trying to grow organically.
Levy (and Spurs) get a lot of shade thrown at them on here, probably mostly because of Glaston in fairness, but I think what he and the team have done in the last 20 years is exactly the way it should be approached. Yes, I know we haven't won trophies yet, who knows if we will. But the financial growth of the club has been incredible and we're not getting to a stage where we can try to consistently compete for trophies and actually compete on transfer (and most importantly, wages).
Part of the problem is though that most football fans (and humans in general) want instant results and have short memories.
a game where football was the focus. Not agents and Billions and Millions.
Its all well and good lauding Levy for great job he has done with Tottenham but the point people miss is it's owned by a Billionaire as well do you think all the great training facility and new stadium which Tottenham have built would have been possible had it been not backed by Billionaire owner I don't think so it would have been really difficult to raise the capital for all this growth.
Though I would like to disclose I am fundamentally against the idea of FFP it was designed to serve interests of traditional big clubs nothing more.
Sounds amazing to be fair, when did the football stop being the focus?
But it's a pretty good show like...
"What are you gonna do, ban us from the Champions League?"
- Quote from team banned from the Champions League
Well I started a thread then. It was called Man Cheaty. I was harangued in here, called bitter. Mods closed my thread!This is the argument of 'bitter United' from 2008/9/10 when City became the richest in the world.
I remember having arguments about how United should be able to spend as we earned our profits via success on the pitch and brand marketing. I remember being told I was simply bitter because City were spendibg a shit ton of money.
This is why we had this argument... because City, Chelsea, PSG had this artificial financial doping and wouldn't survive such scrutiny.
Arsene Wenger accuses Manchester City and Real Madrid of 'financial doping
He accused them of Financial Doping 11 years ago
He's probably all smiles now![]()
Yes I do. We've paid for literally all of that through club money, years and years of an essentially neutral net spend as well as (large) bank loans as well.
Lewis doesn't put any of his money into Tottenham, its pretty much Levy's project now.
Said.People comparing American franchise-based sports system and European football need to get a grip. These are two separate universies.
1. NFL, NBA etc. are franchises. There is no relegation. It makes a huge difference in the whole dynamics
2. In NFL, teams play total of 16 games per season! Fecking 16! And they have nothing like Champions League, cup games or anything like that.
3. In US, college sports is huge. Professional players predominantly first go through college leagues and then get drafted into professional teams. That is an entirely different approach to European Football where you have academies, age-group leagues etc.
You cannot just take financial part of these two radically different worlds and slap it on European football. We can talk about what the changes should be in UEFA regulations, but talking about drafts etc. is a waste of time and nonsensical.
There's no good outcome, is there? If we get the decision reversed then the business wing of a royal family have opened the floodgates for predatory capitalists to do as they please. If we don't, then UEFA have confirmed that clubs from outside the established elite are barred. The only solution is for there to be a way for clubs to "do a Leicester" (or a "Spurs") and still sustain success instead of being picked apart by clubs who can afford ginormous wage packages and keep hold of their best players. Can't see that happening, though.
Why is no one accusing Liverpool of doping?
Another thing with spurs, which I think people miss when viewing the rights and wrongs of FFP, is how much they’ve grown even with City being took over. It’s not the Manchester United’s etc that really suffer when one of these clubs comes along, it’s the teams who’ve organically grown and are nearly there. The likes of Everton and Villa were pushing the top 4 at the back end of the noughties, then City come along and swat them down a place and make it all the harder. Who knows where villa could have got to with a champions league qualification and the influx of money that brings.I don't want to throw this thread too far off topic but:
The trickle of top players leaving against our will has gotten less and less as time has gone on and the financial power of the club has increased though. What was initially almost every season or two has been...what? Eriksen is the first key player we've lost that we really wanted to keep since Bale in 2013 (50 million for Walker was an offer that was too good to refuse imo).
This is what I mean though. Football fans often can't see beyond the last couple of weeks, let alone more than a couple of years. Last set of accounts was the first time we weren't the pauper of the top 6 anymore, first time we broke into the top 10 across Europe I believe, first time we started to see some effects of the new stadium. And the stadium means that isn't going to be fleeting, we'll be in and around there financially for the foreseeable future.
Pochettino did a sensational job but its also easy to forget that Redknapp finished top 4 twice and Jol and AVB both finished a couple of points off so it isn't like we came from nowhere under Poch. If it wasn't for the two sugar daddy clubs in the league, we'd have been finishing top 4 more often than not in the 2010s and late 2000s too, with the CL money that comes with it.
The wages we paid were in line with the finances. We can look at Villa, Newcastle, Everton, Fulham, Bolton, QPR etc, all of whom have at times been around Spur's level and have fallen down because they spent beyond their means/ were funded by an owner who could no longer do so.
If in 5 years time (I know, blasphemy in football) we've still won nothing, Levy is still scrimping on deadline day, we've not kicked on and still not paying similar wages despite having similar turnover to some of the other clubs in the league, then I'll say thank you Levy but that's enough. As it is, its mostly just fans being spolit brats and wanting everything right now.
Perhaps you should start a thread on it exposing all the juicy details.
Because we're just doing FINANCIAL doping at the moment... the other type will follow.Why is no one accusing Liverpool of doping?