The Super League | FA + PL: New Charter & Fines | UEFA: Settlement

Would you be happy if City joined this European Super League?

  • Yes

    Votes: 109 5.3%

  • No

    Votes: 1,954 94.7%
  • Total voters
    2,063
FogBlueInSanFran said:
I don't know anything about boxing, but do you think owners want to maximize revenue with a good atmosphere or not maximize revenue with a great atmosphere?

For example, do you think a lot of away fans visit the home club's shop to buy stuff?
Click to expand...
It was dire atmosphere wise when we had no away fans at Maine Road, I can't see that future being marketable.
 
wolviedinho said:
Fair point. My main concern is the Americans. Their view on sport is fundamentally different from our own which is ok until it threatens the very fabric of football in this country. Imo they view the fans as unlimited cash machines. Closed league were the peacocks of united, Liverpool, Madrid, Barca can strut around holding the rest of us in contempt all because they have a history of success.

Football goes in cycles and those clubs can’t accept the inevitable decline. Instead they chase after money almost akin to a gambler who is convinced he will win with his next roll. Only to realise that he has lost it all.

Debt regret... time to tap these cunts out of English football.
Click to expand...
Risk and reward. That is what football ownership is. Owners invest hoping that investment turns into glory for the club, the fans, and reflected back to to them.

What the American system incorporates is a virtualy ownership risk free weighted system. The US public go along with this as that is how the system evolved from inception. Our system didn't.

The financial investment to create a successful club is eye watering these days, as we all have seen from our last decade of investment. But this does not entitle any owner, or investment arm to cry "unfair". The system can be navigated as it is, it just needs highly trained professionals to handle the investment correctly.

Most of the clubs now in big debt have thrown money about recklessly the last 25 years. A lot of this financial arms race comes down to feeding the egos of the owners and their fans. Sure, go for glory, but don't overreach and put the whole of Football in jeopardy.
 
FogBlueInSanFran said:
A better parallel is NCAA basketball in terms of what the football owners were trying to do -- take a merit-based championship based on local micro-league performance and restrict it to the "big" schools.

Imagine if Duke, North Carolina, Villanova, Michigan, UCLA, Kansas, Kentucky, et al got together and said they automatically made into the NCAAs regardless of how they performed in the ACC or whatever, or the conference tournament. Actually, imagine if 48 (3/4 of 64) teams did it (pretend the play in games don't exist).

There would be fucking riots at college campuses all over the nation. Sports talk would go berserk. Knowing America, there would probably be shootings. It would never stand and every single American sports fan would talk of nothing else and wonder in amazement at the incredible stupidity of the universities.
Click to expand...
College football formed the Power 5 (Big Ten, SEC, ACC, Pac-12 & Big 12) and since then, every single participant in the college football playoff has been from those conferences. There is now talk of reducing it to 4 conferences and making a bigger playoff.

This is the exact dynamic Europe has followed. More spots to the big competitive conferences and less for the smaller. They just use recent results as an excuse to exclude teams rather then relegate and allow them back via promotion. It won’t be long before Alabama, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas and the rest get together and make a smaller league similar to the NFL. But it is easier for them, particularly given how corrupt and poorly ran the NCAA is, makes UEFA look like saints.
 
nyCITY said:
College football formed the Power 5 (Big Ten, SEC, ACC, Pac-12 & Big 12) and since then, every single participant in the college football playoff has been from those conferences. There is now talk of reducing it to 4 conferences and making a bigger playoff.

This is the exact dynamic Europe has followed. More spots to the big competitive conferences and less for the smaller. They just use recent results as an excuse to exclude teams rather then relegate and allow them back via promotion. It won’t be long before Alabama, Ohio State, Oklahoma, Texas and the rest get together and make a smaller league similar to the NFL. But it is easier for them, particularly given how corrupt and poorly ran the NCAA is, makes UEFA look like saints.
Click to expand...
I agree with this. Take 4 or 5 from each of these conferences plus Notre Dame, add a non-conference "rivalry week" where the Super League plays their traditional geographic archrival if not in the conference, then have the top bowls be the same playoff system as now while the minor bowls are for the leftover geographic conferences.

Know the feeling -- Georgetown basketball just isn't the same without Syracuse in the Big East.
 
domalino said:
To be honest what would be the problem with Inter Miami joining?

If we're designing a new international football competition, is there much difference having Inter Miami when we've got clubs from Asia it the tournament? I bet it would be easier and cheaper for away fans to go to Miami than some of the darkest corners of Easter Europe they currently travel to.

I suppose the problem is that you can't just have East coast teams, you'd have to open it up to the top x MLS teams and then travel would get stupid. And could you stop at the Americans?
Click to expand...
In other words it turns into a joke. It would no doubt make money but it would still be a joke. And as a Morrisey once said, This joke isn't funny anymore
 
Are we any wiser on which owner(singular) is seriously considering selling up, or are Sky Sports making shit up again?
 
domalino said:
Perez claimed the crowd outside Stamford Bridge was planted there by Javier Tebas live on Spanish TV as a way to hurt him (Perez) personally.

He has lost touch with reality, anyone who is using excerpts from his media appearances as fact needs to check themselves.

He's in the same situation as Laporta, who said very clearly, they aren't officially in until it's passed a vote by the members and he doesn't have the authority to put them in without a vote - and as Laporta is sane, and not peddling conspiracy theories - I'll take his word over Florentino's.
Click to expand...
Perez is a fucking lunatic.
 
Metalartin said:
Are we any wiser on which owner(singular) is seriously considering selling up, or are Sky Sports making shit up again?
Click to expand...

I imagine the Glazers are seriously considering selling up if someone gives them $4Bn, but it won't be anyone else.

Joe Lewis isn't selling Spurs, Roman's not selling Chelsea, Our lot aren't selling CFG, Kroenke isn't selling even though they want him to and Henry is hardly going to give up on Liverpool after 1 down year.
 
Didsbury Dave said:
It's driving me mad that we didn't do this. All those years of negative press, of us being the "money club", using "oil money" to buy "merceneries" to "ruin football".

We could have more or less wiped this out with one move. It could have even had major ramifications for our future support. Suddenly amongst all the big boys we would have appeared to be the ones who were about sport and not money. The real irony is that even though that's how it should be spun, the real truth is probably that we didn't really want to give our competitors a leg up and allow them equivalent spending power.
Click to expand...
I'm in the same boat as you regarding what could have been, but in the absence of a crystal ball our management had a choice to make and the choice they made was to hedge their bets by signing a letter of intent and waiting to see how they could play it out.
The same City fans that are criticising the club now would have been livid if the Superleague had taken off and we had been left on the outside.
Once the Hobson's choice was presented to them they were damned if they did and damned if they didn't depending on the eventual outcome.
As it turns out they probably should have gone the other way, but even then, who is to say what the outcome would have been if the 6th club had been someone else.
As it is, after a bit if buffeting and turbulence, we might find that we have come out of this rather well and we might even turn out to be the sole net beneficiaries from this whole sorry episode.[/
 
Dribble said:
Haven't the Glazers just put a £4bn price tag on Old Toilet?
Click to expand...
I've seen that figure banded about but I'm not sure it was the Glazers who came up with it, it was just people adding the debt to the club worth I thought. Also, the way it was phrased by the Sky Sports news guy. It sounded like he was saying "an owner of one of the big six clubs" rather than "the owners of one the big 6 clubs".

United, Liverpool would be plural I think(isn't there another major stakeholder in FSG?), not quite sure about Arsenal or Spurs these days and I doubt City or Chelsea are the club they are talking about. Maybe it was phrased that way to throw us off the scent of who it might be though. They will all end up staying anyway IMO.
 
goalmole said:
I'm in the same boat as you regarding what could have been, but in the absence of a crystal ball our management had a choice to make and the choice they made was to hedge their bets by signing a letter of intent and waiting to see how they could play it out.
The same City fans that are criticising the club now would have been livid if the Superleague had taken off and we had been left on the outside.
Once the Hobson's choice was presented to them they were damned if they did and damned if they didn't depending on the eventual outcome.
As it turns out they probably should have gone the other way, but even then, who is to say what the outcome would have been if the 6th club had been someone else.
As it is, after a bit if buffeting and turbulence, we might find that we have come out of this rather well and we might even turn out to be the sole net beneficiaries from this whole sorry episode.[/
Click to expand...

I agree.

I see the whole thing as simply:

Do I want a Super League? No

If a Super League happens, do I want City in it? Yes
 
goalmole said:
I'm in the same boat as you regarding what could have been, but in the absence of a crystal ball our management had a choice to make and the choice they made was to hedge their bets by signing a letter of intent and waiting to see how they could play it out.
The same City fans that are criticising the club now would have been livid if the Superleague had taken off and we had been left on the outside.
Once the Hobson's choice was presented to them they were damned if they did and damned if they didn't depending on the eventual outcome.
As it turns out they probably should have gone the other way, but even then, who is to say what the outcome would have been if the 6th club had been someone else.
As it is, after a bit if buffeting and turbulence, we might find that we have come out of this rather well and we might even turn out to be the sole net beneficiaries from this whole sorry episode.[/
Click to expand...
I agree that it's very easy to be wise after the event and that now we can all see that our people made the wrong call, but that is only because the scheme collapsed, and I think it was partly City's doing that it fell apart. Another outcome, which struck me as rather more likely when City weren't part of the five original English membership, was that the scheme went ahead and faced with an ultimatum from the rebel clubs UEFA does what it always does and gives in completely and cravenly. ESL is official, the debtors cartel are in and rolling in money and City are left out! Thousands of "livid" City fans as you say and the Glazers cock-a-hoop. But we know City kept in contact with Ceferin over the week end and I bet they planned the destruction of the ESL because the hard line taken by FIFA, UEFA and the PL along with City's (and Chelsea's) withdrawal scuppered it. With the help of thousands of fans who love football and know full well when they're being cheated.
 
Metalartin said:
I've seen that figure banded about but I'm not sure it was the Glazers who came up with it, it was just people adding the debt to the club worth I thought. Also, the way it was phrased by the Sky Sports news guy. It sounded like he was saying "an owner of one of the big six clubs" rather than "the owners of one the big 6 clubs".

United, Liverpool would be plural I think(isn't there another major stakeholder in FSG?), not quite sure about Arsenal or Spurs these days and I doubt City or Chelsea are the club they are talking about. Maybe it was phrased that way to throw us off the scent of who it might be though. They will all end up staying anyway IMO.
Click to expand...
The dude behind Spotify is apparently ready to bid for Arsenal. Personally I can't see any current PL owners getting off the gravy train as things stand.
 
ROCKET80 said:
I agree.

I see the whole thing as simply:

Do I want a Super League? No

If a Super League happens, do I want City in it? Yes
Click to expand...
Got it in one. I still don't get what all the fuss was about. In reality, what other choice did City have? We were the ones who stiffed the ESL, so all's well that ends well. :-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top