Player topic: Frank Lampard (2014/15)

[Damocles]

Re: Frank Lampard

You sound like the rags that used to have a go at us with that platic club bollocks.

What are they, if not plastic? Tags are just jealous that they've got the Yanks and we haven't. City are completely different to NYC though. Unlike us, they've got no history. They've got no fans. The entire reason for their existence is that they're an Arab's sweet plaything.

Haha

Aguerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrroooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Take that rag.

Not a rag. Just a sad, homeless Blue looking to stir some trouble for other Blues on here unfortunately. Never really understood that mindset personally.

 

[stony]

Re: Frank Lampard

What are they, if not plastic? Tags are just jealous that they've got the Yanks and we haven't. City are completely different to NYC though. Unlike us, they've got no history. They've got no fans. The entire reason for their existence is that they're an Arab's sweet plaything.

Haha

Aguerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrroooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Take that rag.

Not a rag. Just a sad, homeless Blue looking to stir some trouble for other Blues on here unfortunately. Never really understood that mindset personally.

They always come back.

 

[ChicagoBlue]

Re: Frank Lampard

Funny thing about NYCFC, they were originally going to be funded by a wealthy New Yorker (NY Mets guy, which is ironic!) in concert with Barcelona FC. However, when Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme lost a ton of his dough, he was not so interested. And, when Ferran came to City, MLS saw another opportunity and approached again. It was NOT the Sheikh who went looking for a global plaything, but MLS who was looking for SERIOUS INVESTORS willing to help expand MLS. That is also why you have deep pockets funding Orlando.

On the subject of Lampard, I expect the solution to be a fairly simple one:

NYCFC's season opener in MLS is March 8th. AFCON ends about a month earlier, so Yaya will be back. However, Yaya is banned for the Barca game in late Feb. Sooooo, makes it easy for everyone that Lamps stays until after the Barca home game and then returns to NYCFC for a few weeks of getting to know the lads and do the publicity stint.

Maybe, just maybe, we keep him until after the Liverpool game, but that gets him to onyl a week before their season starts.

So, for me, the easiest and best solution is Lamps stays until Feb 24th, maybe as late as March 1st, but then is gone, baby, gone.

And he will go with the best of wishes from me and thousands of other City fans!

 

[Justin62]

Re: Frank Lampard

As a long time Man City fan and a new NYCFC fan who lives in New York, I think a lot of you are misinterpreting why it is that its such a huge deal in NYC that Lampard may extend his stay. We understand that Man City is a parent club but that does not give them the right to dictate where Frank plays. Frank's contract isn't owned by City group, its owned by MLS, and MLS should be able to rip him out and bring him back if they are so inclined. However they won't and its a huge problem.

MLS has already had a set up like NYCFC before with the team Chivas USA who were owned by Liga MX team Chinas Guadalajara. That entire operation was a failure and resulted in Chinas being sold and put on hiatus for the next couple years. Guadalajara tried, along with many other issues like being terrible on field and employing racist policies, to dictate the players owned by Chivas. Many MLS fans are terribly worried the same thing is happening with NYCFC, and so far rightfully so. They see this a being disrespectful not just to the league but also fans like myself who have already shovelled a good deal of money into season tickets and merchandise. I have been seeing the argument that were a plastic club who doesn't have true fans and that should be thankful that City group brought a team to New York but that's ridiculous. NYC has been guaranteed another MLS team for a while, and the commissioner just decided to give ownership to City group when there were likely several groups who would have paid the fee to own them. NYC technically already has the Red Bulls but they play in New Jersey. So for true fans located in the heart of NYC, we have been clamouring for a team within the city as opposed to outside of it. And that's why NYCFC already has a solid fan base.

For Man City to be able to come in and dictate where a player who belongs to NYCFC and MLS plays is ridiculous. Its great to have these relations, but when it comes to a big time player who was marketed as the clubs face to not be here when the season opens is unfair to all those who paid specifically to see him. Its ok to loan him to Man City when they are not playing but to extend the loan into the MLS season isn't. Not when he's a DP. Which in itself is another issue. If we loan Frank it has to be until the MLS season is over or else we lose a Designated Player slot. For those who don't know the MLS operates under a cap structure, and only 3 players are allowed to be signed outside the cap. Which would mean, a disadvantage for NYCFC being an expansion club who can't fill their 3 DP slots. This entire situation could end up an embarrassment to all parties involved unless Lampard is in NYC for training in January. City group needs to show NYC fans that they are more than just a cash grab or feeder club to Man City or else they could lose support quick and end up a financial failure, which is what happened with Chivas despite being in a major market in LA.

 

[Hinchys Cross]

Re: Frank Lampard

As a long time Man City fan and a new NYCFC fan who lives in New York, I think a lot of you are misinterpreting why it is that its such a huge deal in NYC that Lampard may extend his stay. We understand that Man City is a parent club but that does not give them the right to dictate where Frank plays. Frank's contract isn't owned by City group, its owned by MLS, and MLS should be able to rip him out and bring him back if they are so inclined. However they won't and its a huge problem.

MLS has already had a set up like NYCFC before with the team Chivas USA who were owned by Liga MX team Chinas Guadalajara. That entire operation was a failure and resulted in Chinas being sold and put on hiatus for the next couple years. Guadalajara tried, along with many other issues like being terrible on field and employing racist policies, to dictate the players owned by Chivas. Many MLS fans are terribly worried the same thing is happening with NYCFC, and so far rightfully so. They see this a being disrespectful not just to the league but also fans like myself who have already shovelled a good deal of money into season tickets and merchandise. I have been seeing the argument that were a plastic club who doesn't have true fans and that should be thankful that City group brought a team to New York but that's ridiculous. NYC has been guaranteed another MLS team for a while, and the commissioner just decided to give ownership to City group when there were likely several groups who would have paid the fee to own them. NYC technically already has the Red Bulls but they play in New Jersey. So for true fans located in the heart of NYC, we have been clamouring for a team within the city as opposed to outside of it. And that's why NYCFC already has a solid fan base.

For Man City to be able to come in and dictate where a player who belongs to NYCFC and MLS plays is ridiculous. Its great to have these relations, but when it comes to a big time player who was marketed as the clubs face to not be here when the season opens is unfair to all those who paid specifically to see him. Its ok to loan him to Man City when they are not playing but to extend the loan into the MLS season isn't. Not when he's a DP. Which in itself is another issue. If we loan Frank it has to be until the MLS season is over or else we lose a Designated Player slot. For those who don't know the MLS operates under a cap structure, and only 3 players are allowed to be signed outside the cap. Which would mean, a disadvantage for NYCFC being an expansion club who can't fill their 3 DP slots. This entire situation could end up an embarrassment to all parties involved unless Lampard is in NYC for training in January. City group needs to show NYC fans that they are more than just a cash grab or feeder club to Man City or else they could lose support quick and end up a financial failure, which is what happened with Chivas despite being in a major market in LA.

MCFC will do what is best for MCFC in my opinion in relation to this. I was hoping for an extension until March.

 

[Bill]

Re: Frank Lampard

Haha

Aguerrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrroooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

Take that rag.

Not a rag. Just a sad, homeless Blue looking to stir some trouble for other Blues on here unfortunately. Never really understood that mindset personally.

They always come back.

yep, they always do. if only for a short visit.

 

[Bill]

Re: Frank Lampard

As a long time Man City fan and a new NYCFC fan who lives in New York, I think a lot of you are misinterpreting why it is that its such a huge deal in NYC that Lampard may extend his stay. We understand that Man City is a parent club but that does not give them the right to dictate where Frank plays. Frank's contract isn't owned by City group, its owned by MLS, and MLS should be able to rip him out and bring him back if they are so inclined. However they won't and its a huge problem.

MLS has already had a set up like NYCFC before with the team Chivas USA who were owned by Liga MX team Chinas Guadalajara. That entire operation was a failure and resulted in Chinas being sold and put on hiatus for the next couple years. Guadalajara tried, along with many other issues like being terrible on field and employing racist policies, to dictate the players owned by Chivas. Many MLS fans are terribly worried the same thing is happening with NYCFC, and so far rightfully so. They see this a being disrespectful not just to the league but also fans like myself who have already shovelled a good deal of money into season tickets and merchandise. I have been seeing the argument that were a plastic club who doesn't have true fans and that should be thankful that City group brought a team to New York but that's ridiculous. NYC has been guaranteed another MLS team for a while, and the commissioner just decided to give ownership to City group when there were likely several groups who would have paid the fee to own them. NYC technically already has the Red Bulls but they play in New Jersey. So for true fans located in the heart of NYC, we have been clamouring for a team within the city as opposed to outside of it. And that's why NYCFC already has a solid fan base.

For Man City to be able to come in and dictate where a player who belongs to NYCFC and MLS plays is ridiculous. Its great to have these relations, but when it comes to a big time player who was marketed as the clubs face to not be here when the season opens is unfair to all those who paid specifically to see him. Its ok to loan him to Man City when they are not playing but to extend the loan into the MLS season isn't. Not when he's a DP. Which in itself is another issue. If we loan Frank it has to be until the MLS season is over or else we lose a Designated Player slot. For those who don't know the MLS operates under a cap structure, and only 3 players are allowed to be signed outside the cap. Which would mean, a disadvantage for NYCFC being an expansion club who can't fill their 3 DP slots. This entire situation could end up an embarrassment to all parties involved unless Lampard is in NYC for training in January. City group needs to show NYC fans that they are more than just a cash grab or feeder club to Man City or else they could lose support quick and end up a financial failure, which is what happened with Chivas despite being in a major market in LA.

MCFC will do what is best for MCFC in my opinion in relation to this. I was hoping for an extension until March.

pmsl.

 

[1961_vintage]

Re: Frank Lampard

To be honest, given the time of year, anything other than an extended stay with us is likely to leave Frank incensed.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Re: Frank Lampard

To be honest, given the time of year, anything other than an extended stay with us is likely to leave Frank incensed.

Comedy gold, mate. Pure myrrhth.

 

[the blue panther]

Re: Frank Lampard

I'm hoping his future is stable, but, it's up to the manger.