Owners

[Zidane98]

We used to be one of those clubs remember.

Maybe your granny win was a one off like Leicester

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I swear I recall you defending the cheque book clubs. I know you always stuck up for City when I was going on about them

Purely relating to FFP which is a deeply flawed premise that does more harm than good.

 

[chef]

Maybe your granny win was a one off like Leicester

Wouldnt surprise me, but thats all i ever wanted. Itch scratched.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

But you still have to be the best, money doesn't just get you results. You still need strong leaders, great players, luck to go your way. You still hjave to win the games. Moneys important but it doesn't guarantee anything.

Look at United, they are throwing money at their problems and are going nowhere.

Largely because the landscape has now changed for the worse. They have to do this to compete, whereas in the 90s-00s they would buy the odd marquee signing here or there and promote a lot of top quality youth.

Now in the chequebook era they’re forced to throw money at the problem and football is worse off for it.

 

[RPCB]

Wouldnt surprise me, but thats all i ever wanted. Itch scratched.

The Bulldogs might not win another flag because they’re hard to win but I think you’re poised for some top 4 finishes and then who knows.

 

[WealstoneRaider]

Purely relating to FFP which is a deeply flawed premise that does more harm than good.

It “harms” the teams who get oil money cheque book owners, no one else. And when those teams are getting significant boosts from their new found cash anyway it’s hardly harming them

 

[Art Vandelay_]

It “harms” the teams who get oil money cheque book owners, no one else. And when those teams are getting significant boosts from their new found cash anyway it’s hardly harming them

Nope.

It harms those who don’t have the prestige and stature of the established elite as they can’t reach the top without themselves gaining an unscrupulous owner.

FFP does not work. It shuts a door behind the elite and protects them from those who wish to join them

 

[moomba]

I've often wondered why money coming from the middle east is often referred to as oil money, and money from America, England, China etc is just money.

 

[WealstoneRaider]

Nope.

It harms those who don’t have the prestige and stature of the established elite as they can’t reach the top without themselves gaining an unscrupulous owner.

FFP does not work. It shuts a door behind the elite and protects them from those who wish to join them

It doesn’t harm them though, it just puts some restraint on them crashing the top table immediately. They can still get there in time it will just ensure they have to build their club more slowly and supporters of FFP would argue in a more sustained and fairer fashion. Everton will get there at some point, Leicester you could argue have and Wolves are well on their way. While Spurs and Arsenal who have tight owners are heading in the opposite direction

 

[chef]

Largely because the landscape has now changed for the worse. They have to do this to compete, whereas in the 90s-00s they would buy the odd marquee signing here or there and promote a lot of top quality youth.

Now in the chequebook era they’re forced to throw money at the problem and football is worse off for it.

To me its changed for the better and thats got nothing to do with the team i support, the competition in the league is deeper and i find it more interesting to follow.

 

[WealstoneRaider]

I've often wondered why money coming from the middle east is often referred to as oil money, and money from America, England, China etc is just money.

Ok blood money is probably more apt

 

[Art Vandelay_]

It doesn’t harm them though, it just puts some restraint on them crashing the top table immediately. They can still get there in time it will just ensure they have to build their club more slowly and supporters of FFP would argue in a more sustained and fairer fashion. Everton will get there at some point, Leicester you could argue have and Wolves are well on their way. While Spurs and Arsenal who have tight owners are heading in the opposite direction

That’s largely my point though WR. United achieved phenomenal success organically with the wealth and power they had, a world class manager and a philosophy on youth. Liverpool in the same period won in Europe and cup competitions based off their long held stature and power, and some good managers and players. Arsenal (welp) did likewise with a great manager.

Now here we are and United are falling behind as football has become about massive blank cheques and they’re not doing too great at throwing money at the problem. Arsenal and Spurs you mention “tight owners” that’s merely a perception because everyone spends with gay abandon, and highlights why there’s a problem, they need to spend owner funds just to keep up. Football is broken. They should be what clubs are modelled off, build through your own activities, develop your club off field and spend what you earn, but both are slipping back to the pack because football has made that perfectly reasonable business model redundant

Everton won’t get there, as soon as they hit a European competition their spending will breach FFP, thus slowing a club not already in the elite table from joining them. It simply doesn’t work.

To me its changed for the better and thats got nothing to do with the team i support, the competition in the league is deeper and i find it more interesting to follow.

You’re essentially saying the ends justify the means and to me I can’t agree.

 

[Bradesmaen]

I think it's pretty exciting for the league for another club to be able to challenge the 'big 6' so to speak. If Everton and Wolves can also keep building and spending it's going to be a fun league to watch next season when ever that starts.

Seeing 19 big teams and Liverpool getting relegated forever is the dream.

 

[WealstoneRaider]

That’s largely my point though WR. United achieved phenomenal success organically with the wealth and power they had, a world class manager and a philosophy on youth. Liverpool in the same period won in Europe and cup competitions based off their long held stature and power, and some good managers and players. Arsenal (welp) did likewise with a great manager.

Now here we are and United are falling behind as football has become about massive blank cheques and they’re not doing too great at throwing money at the problem. Arsenal and Spurs you mention “tight owners” that’s merely a perception because everyone spends with gay abandon, and highlights why there’s a problem, they need to spend owner funds just to keep up. Football is broken. They should be what clubs are modelled off, build through your own activities, develop your club off field and spend what you earn, but both are slipping back to the pack because football has made that perfectly reasonable business model redund

Everton won’t get there, as soon as they hit a European competition their spending will breach FFP, thus slowing a club not already in the elite table from joining them. It simply doesn’t work.



You’re essentially saying the ends justify the means and to me I can’t agree.

I don’t really understand what you’re advocating then because you sound contradictory on this. As you seem to be saying, if you don’t have restrictions then is simply all boils down to the clubs who acquire the most wealthy owners will dominate and with the money now involved no one else will have a chance. At least with FFP it is supposed to make these clubs more accountable. It might not be the greatest way to achieve parity but it is better to have it than not. Football should operate as a proper business does and clubs should therefore be sustainable and not run with huge annual loses

 

[chef]

That’s largely my point though WR. United achieved phenomenal success organically with the wealth and power they had, a world class manager and a philosophy on youth. Liverpool in the same period won in Europe and cup competitions based off their long held stature and power, and some good managers and players. Arsenal (welp) did likewise with a great manager.

Now here we are and United are falling behind as football has become about massive blank cheques and they’re not doing too great at throwing money at the problem. Arsenal and Spurs you mention “tight owners” that’s merely a perception because everyone spends with gay abandon, and highlights why there’s a problem, they need to spend owner funds just to keep up. Football is broken. They should be what clubs are modelled off, build through your own activities, develop your club off field and spend what you earn, but both are slipping back to the pack because football has made that perfectly reasonable business model redundant

Everton won’t get there, as soon as they hit a European competition their spending will breach FFP, thus slowing a club not already in the elite table from joining them. It simply doesn’t work.

United are spending as much as anyone, they just aren't good at it.

 

[moomba]

United are spending as much as anyone, they just aren't good at it.

And have done for decades (although they used to be good at it).

 

[chef]

You’re essentially saying the ends justify the means and to me I can’t agree.

I'd rather have what we have now over a one team league like the Bundesliga or Serie A. I'm not trying to find moral fulfillment from watching a bunch of over payed guys chase a ball around a pitch. I get that elsewhere in life.

 

[chef]

And have done for decades (although they used to be good at it).

Yep.

 

[WealstoneRaider]

And have done for decades (although they used to be good at it).

Well FFP puts restrictions on them racking up untold debt too. But they are infinitely a bigger club than City are so in a fair world they are going to have more spending power. It’s up to City and others to grow their brand organically if you like to be able to compete with united over time. In fairness the success you’ve had is helping you close the gap in this regard.

The bottom line is though United are vulnerable even as a huge club as we’ve seen since Fergie left. Man City and PSG if there were no FFP are not vulnerable in any shape or form. Even with it in place it appears you cannot be budged from your perch but that’s why you have been fiddling your books to help keep you there

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I don’t really understand what you’re advocating then because you sound contradictory on this. As you seem to be saying, if you don’t have restrictions then is simply all boils down to the clubs who acquire the most wealthy owners will dominate and with the money now involved no one else will have a chance. At least with FFP it is supposed to make these clubs more accountable. It might not be the greatest way to achieve parity but it is better to have it than not. Football should operate as a proper business does and clubs should therefore be sustainable and not run with huge annual loses

No, I’m not against financial controls as clubs at all levels need to be protected from their own greed that leads to bankruptcy. Look at Championship clubs, the £100m premier league carrot causes lots of clubs to gamble on promotion, and if they fail they’re in trouble. There needs to be protections at all levels to stop clubs bankrupting themselves.

However, FFP in its current iteration does not work.

United are spending as much as anyone, they just aren't good at it.

Unless they’ve suddenly got the glazers pouring millions of their own cash in how is that relevant chef? They spend what they earn, they just earn more.

The problem lies with the current trend of clubs who elevate their spending power massively through sugar daddy’s.

I'd rather have what we have now over a one team league like the Bundesliga or Serie A. I'm not trying to find moral fulfillment from watching a bunch of over payed guys chase a ball around a pitch. I get that elsewhere in life.

When was the last time England had a one team top division?
Easy for you to say you’re not after moral fulfilment, you’ve already found a reprobate to get you into a position that others can merely only dream of now

 

[Cruyff14]

Sport is about winning. Money helps that. I don't see the problem.

 

[moomba]

Well FFP puts restrictions on them racking up untold debt too.

The Glazer's bought United without putting a penny in, instead they used loans secured against the clubs income. Hugely damaging, and put a historically debt free club at huge risk.

FFP does **** all to stop that.

 

[chef]

Easy for you to say you’re not after moral fulfilment, you’ve already found a reprobate to get you into a position that others can merely only dream of now

I don't look for moral fulfillment from the Dogs either, it's sport. Theres better places where you can do that and actually make a difference.

 

[chef]

Unless they’ve suddenly got the glazers pouring millions of their own cash in how is that relevant chef? They spend what they earn, they just earn more.

The problem lies with the current trend of clubs who elevate their spending power massively through sugar daddy’s.

I don't have a problem with owners putting their own money in when they are doing it for the good of the club. The bigger problem is when clubs get run as businesses to make profit for the owners/chairmans pockets.

 

[Art Vandelay_]

I don't look for moral fulfillment from the Dogs either, it's sport. Theres better places where you can do that and actually make a difference.

So you’d have no issues if the dogs decided to buy gaming venues and earn 5-10m a year profiting off the misery of others via pokie machines??