You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
New York City FC Kit and Badge Thread
- Thread starter The Silver Surfer
- Start date
grandsolo said:Compulsive Rambler said:I was open to this new project, full attention and hoping for it's success.
However, more recently, many of the people that NYCFC have attracted as fans living in or around NY have been aggressive, ignorant and utter c**ts when it's come to MCFC.
Many distasteful comments about our club.
It seems it's just one big army of people who follow an English club whilst living in the states, the clubs are typically Arsenal/Liverpool/Rags
Taking their allegiance with them into this new club (NYCFC) but they wish to disassociate anything related to us, failing to acknowledge who their fucking owners are.
Lol. This is the problem. What kind of real fan can proudly admit that their club is owned by some bigger club from overseas. Imagine if City were owned by Barca. It's a bs concept and they have every right to try and disassociate
Dubai Blue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2007
- Messages
- 15,234
It's a completely made up, brand new football club. So who are all these so-called 'real fans' I keep hearing about? This club hasn't even started playing yet, so it's beyond precious for them to be getting so prissy about it.
The club aren't going to disassociate themselves from their owners, so if these 'fans' don't like it, they're just going to have to pick another team to follow. There are plenty to choose from.
I find the whole thing bizarre to be honest.
The club aren't going to disassociate themselves from their owners, so if these 'fans' don't like it, they're just going to have to pick another team to follow. There are plenty to choose from.
I find the whole thing bizarre to be honest.
Bokonon said:grandsolo said:Compulsive Rambler said:I was open to this new project, full attention and hoping for it's success.
However, more recently, many of the people that NYCFC have attracted as fans living in or around NY have been aggressive, ignorant and utter c**ts when it's come to MCFC.
Many distasteful comments about our club.
It seems it's just one big army of people who follow an English club whilst living in the states, the clubs are typically Arsenal/Liverpool/Rags
Taking their allegiance with them into this new club (NYCFC) but they wish to disassociate anything related to us, failing to acknowledge who their fucking owners are.
Lol. This is the problem. What kind of real fan can proudly admit that their club is owned by some bigger club from overseas. Imagine if City were owned by Barca. It's a bs concept and they have every right to try and disassociate
If my club being owned by the the same owner as another football club was going to be a problem for me I wouldnt have bought into it in the first place.
NYCFC is part of the CFG. It was made fairly clear from the outset that there would be shared shared branding, resources and the City name. If that was a problem, rather than disassociate people never should have associated.
Dribble
Well-Known Member
Its a group franchise scenario just like many banks, fast food outlets and fashion houses have global outlets with a local identity.Bokonon said:grandsolo said:Compulsive Rambler said:I was open to this new project, full attention and hoping for it's success.
However, more recently, many of the people that NYCFC have attracted as fans living in or around NY have been aggressive, ignorant and utter c**ts when it's come to MCFC.
Many distasteful comments about our club.
It seems it's just one big army of people who follow an English club whilst living in the states, the clubs are typically Arsenal/Liverpool/Rags
Taking their allegiance with them into this new club (NYCFC) but they wish to disassociate anything related to us, failing to acknowledge who their fucking owners are.
Lol. This is the problem. What kind of real fan can proudly admit that their club is owned by some bigger club from overseas. Imagine if City were owned by Barca. It's a bs concept and they have every right to try and disassociate
Partisan thinking is always going to play a part and some are just going to have to deal with CFG being the owners of NYCFC or go support another team.
Being called a 'Barca B' side would have been a bit far fetched if it hadn't been for the uncertainty of Lampard staying with MCFC until the end of the season or leaving as arranged to start pre-season with NYCFC.
On a final note about partisan support; how many of us living in New York could bring ourselves to support a New York United owned by the Glazer's?
PistonBlue
Well-Known Member
Its a group franchise scenario just like many banks, fast food outlets and fashion houses have global outlets with a local identity.Dribble said:Bokonon said:
Lol. This is the problem. What kind of real fan can proudly admit that their club is owned by some bigger club from overseas. Imagine if City were owned by Barca. It's a bs concept and they have every right to try and disassociate
Partisan thinking is always going to play a part and some are just going to have to deal with CFG being the owners of NYCFC or go support another team.
Being called a 'Barca B' side would have been a bit far fetched if it hadn't been for the uncertainty of Lampard staying with MCFC until the end of the season or leaving as arranged to start pre-season with NYCFC.
On a final note about partisan support; how many of us living in New York could bring ourselves to support a New York United owned by the Glazer's?[/quote]
None of us, but then how many would latch on to that club and then moan cos they wear red?
Dribble
Well-Known Member
Red and ManUre aren't mutually exclusive. If NYCFC had to wear red for whatever reason, I wouldn't be too disappointed, but if they were owned by the Glazer's and called United that would be a whole different ball game (pardon the pun).PistonBlue said:Its a group franchise scenario just like many banks, fast food outlets and fashion houses have global outlets with a local identity.Dribble said:Bokonon said:Lol. This is the problem. What kind of real fan can proudly admit that their club is owned by some bigger club from overseas. Imagine if City were owned by Barca. It's a bs concept and they have every right to try and disassociate
Partisan thinking is always going to play a part and some are just going to have to deal with CFG being the owners of NYCFC or go support another team.
Being called a 'Barca B' side would have been a bit far fetched if it hadn't been for the uncertainty of Lampard staying with MCFC until the end of the season or leaving as arranged to start pre-season with NYCFC.
On a final note about partisan support; how many of us living in New York could bring ourselves to support a New York United owned by the Glazer's?[/quote]
None of us, but then how many would latch on to that club and then moan cos they wear red?
Dribble said:Red and ManUre aren't mutually exclusive. If NYCFC had to wear red for whatever reason, I wouldn't be too disappointed, but if they were owned by the Glazer's and called United that would be a whole different ball game (pardon the pun).
So you'd probably make the decision not to support them when the club called United and owned by the Glazers was formed.
Or would you jump on board and then shit the bed when they come out in a red kit?
PistonBlue
Well-Known Member
Dribble said:Red and ManUre aren't mutually exclusive. If NYCFC had to wear red for whatever reason, I wouldn't be too disappointed, but if they were owned by the Glazer's and called United that would be a whole different ball game (pardon the pun).PistonBlue said:Its a group franchise scenario just like many banks, fast food outlets and fashion houses have global outlets with a local identity.
Partisan thinking is always going to play a part and some are just going to have to deal with CFG being the owners of NYCFC or go support another team.
Being called a 'Barca B' side would have been a bit far fetched if it hadn't been for the uncertainty of Lampard staying with MCFC until the end of the season or leaving as arranged to start pre-season with NYCFC.
On a final note about partisan support; how many of us living in New York could bring ourselves to support a New York United owned by the Glazer's?[/quote]
None of us, but then how many would latch on to that club and then moan cos they wear red?
You miss my point, which is if you have a problem with the owners and their connections don't choose to support their new club. And this is a choice, there is no real emotional involvement yet. Don't latch on then moan about the City connections.
You don't buy into a McDonald's franchise then pull your face when Ronald shows up.
PistonBlue
Well-Known Member
moomba said:Dribble said:Red and ManUre aren't mutually exclusive. If NYCFC had to wear red for whatever reason, I wouldn't be too disappointed, but if they were owned by the Glazer's and called United that would be a whole different ball game (pardon the pun).
So you'd probably make the decision not to support them when the club called United and owned by the Glazers was formed.
Or would you jump on board and then shit the bed when they come out in a red kit?
There's a similar thing going on in Moston with FCUM trying to tell everybody they are for all the communtiy, yeah right like there's anything there for City fans (apart maybe from the away end).