Football has never been a level playing field and never will be.
We've spent decades working hard to flog our brand around the world earning the pennies, only to see the likes of Abramovich and the Sheikh just come in and chuck money at their clubs willy nilly and bypass all the hard work that we did.
What's fair about that?........It isn't. But that's life and we have to deal with it.
Some people don't like it but that's life unfortunately. In every walk of life, not just football, there are the fat cats and then there are the mice. We just happen to be one of the fat cats.
"Football - No Longer a Level Playing Field"
Macca?
I have good Evertonian friends who have practically given up on ever winning a title in their lifetime. That's an astonishing thing to hear.
----------------------------------
No it's not!
City and a Chelsea don't nearly have the global brand of United, the oil barons coming in have helped level the playing field in my opinion, otherwise United would by far be the richest club and would win everything.
City and a Chelsea don't nearly have the global brand of United, the oil barons coming in have helped level the playing field in my opinion, otherwise United would by far be the richest club and would win everything.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where are the negatives to that scenario?
City and a Chelsea don't nearly have the global brand of United, the oil barons coming in have helped level the playing field in my opinion, otherwise United would by far be the richest club and would win everything.
----
An interesting point to be fair but at the time of Romans arrival, the wealth was unprecedented
Metro
Sadly this is what we have to do to be able to compete with the oil teams.
You didn't work hard to flog your brand around the world you picked a convenient time to be successful when all the tv money came in
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 3 minutes ago
"Football - No Longer a Level Playing Field"
Macca?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Seeing as corporations are basically recognised to have the rights (but not responsibilities) of humans, what's the difference between Adidas and Abramovich pumping money into their respective teams?
A lot
I'm just being silly.
League Sponsorship and kit manufacturer.
much like the leagues tv deal, a league sponsorship whereby everyclub wears nike/adidas/warrior and every club is sponsored by emirates/chevrolet/standard chartered, or whichever offers the most money.
money then gets either split for all teams, or goes 50% of the total sum split equally amongst all, then the remaining 50% based on position.
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 2 minutes ago
Metro
Sadly this is what we have to do to be able to compete with the oil teams.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eh? nothing to do with it, would of happened anyway.
comment by (U19680)
posted 20 seconds ago
You didn't work hard to flog your brand around the world you picked a convenient time to be successful when all the tv money came in
----------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yes, deliberately not winning the league for 26 years was a masterstroke.
I don't think football has had "a level playing field" for ages has it?
We used to have a lot more cash than most of our rivals. We won the pools, long before Chelsea won the lottery.
Thank you that's exactly what I meant clockwork you dullard
I seem to remember Liverpool fans buzzing about the Warrior kit deal - I assume the OP did a similar piece about that deal.
For what it's worth I think he's right, when a club can get £75m a year off their shirt maker and £57m a year for a company to stick their names on the shirts the games gone barmy.
comment by Clockwork Red: And sometimes they were very sa... (U4892)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by (U19680)
posted 20 seconds ago
You didn't work hard to flog your brand around the world you picked a convenient time to be successful when all the tv money came in
----------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yes, deliberately not winning the league for 26 years was a masterstroke.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You didn't work hard to flog your brand around the world you picked a convenient time to be successful when all the tv money came in
--------------------------------
Let's not forget that the TV money from the Premiership has always been shared between all clubs. Also United were for many years at the start of the Premiership the only club that still made more from gate receipts than other revenue streams.
Adidas and Chevvy could buy you a Ronaldo every season
You didn't work hard to flog your brand around the world you picked a convenient time to be successful when all the tv money came in
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Picked a time?
Yeah because clubs pick not to be successful also right?
My word there are some cretins that dwell on here.
And we've been a massively supported club for a lot longer than since 92. Ever since the days of the busby babes we've had a huge following. First English team to win the European Cup etc.
It doesn't matter about prize money you got the most exposure so of course your brand grew more than other clubs
comment by (U19680)
posted 22 seconds ago
Thank you that's exactly what I meant clockwork you dullard
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you will find utds reputation and standing in english and world football was established before that 26 year drought. Fact of the matter is utd were still the biggest club in england during that period.
comment by Clockwork Red: And sometimes they were very sad (U4892)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U19680)
posted 20 seconds ago
You didn't work hard to flog your brand around the world you picked a convenient time to be successful when all the tv money came in
----------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yes, deliberately not winning the league for 26 years was a masterstroke.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not that concerned to be honest.
I'd rather have 4 or 5 teams full of superstars who are competing with the top teams in Europe than 20 teams each with one superstar and a load of average English garbage.
Guess what, that's life! The rich get richer whilst the middle and lower classes become more ostracised. It's just the way things are unfortunately due to the nature of capitalism.
Nothing will change this.
Sign in if you want to comment
Football - No Longer a Level Playing Field
Page 1 of 7
6 | 7
posted on 15/7/14
Football has never been a level playing field and never will be.
We've spent decades working hard to flog our brand around the world earning the pennies, only to see the likes of Abramovich and the Sheikh just come in and chuck money at their clubs willy nilly and bypass all the hard work that we did.
What's fair about that?........It isn't. But that's life and we have to deal with it.
Some people don't like it but that's life unfortunately. In every walk of life, not just football, there are the fat cats and then there are the mice. We just happen to be one of the fat cats.
posted on 15/7/14
"Football - No Longer a Level Playing Field"
Macca?
posted on 15/7/14
I have good Evertonian friends who have practically given up on ever winning a title in their lifetime. That's an astonishing thing to hear.
----------------------------------
No it's not!
posted on 15/7/14
City and a Chelsea don't nearly have the global brand of United, the oil barons coming in have helped level the playing field in my opinion, otherwise United would by far be the richest club and would win everything.
posted on 15/7/14
City and a Chelsea don't nearly have the global brand of United, the oil barons coming in have helped level the playing field in my opinion, otherwise United would by far be the richest club and would win everything.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Where are the negatives to that scenario?
posted on 15/7/14
City and a Chelsea don't nearly have the global brand of United, the oil barons coming in have helped level the playing field in my opinion, otherwise United would by far be the richest club and would win everything.
----
An interesting point to be fair but at the time of Romans arrival, the wealth was unprecedented
posted on 15/7/14
Metro
Sadly this is what we have to do to be able to compete with the oil teams.
posted on 15/7/14
You didn't work hard to flog your brand around the world you picked a convenient time to be successful when all the tv money came in
posted on 15/7/14
comment by Pride of the North (U6803)
posted 3 minutes ago
"Football - No Longer a Level Playing Field"
Macca?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 15/7/14
Seeing as corporations are basically recognised to have the rights (but not responsibilities) of humans, what's the difference between Adidas and Abramovich pumping money into their respective teams?
A lot
I'm just being silly.
posted on 15/7/14
League Sponsorship and kit manufacturer.
much like the leagues tv deal, a league sponsorship whereby everyclub wears nike/adidas/warrior and every club is sponsored by emirates/chevrolet/standard chartered, or whichever offers the most money.
money then gets either split for all teams, or goes 50% of the total sum split equally amongst all, then the remaining 50% based on position.
posted on 15/7/14
comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
posted 2 minutes ago
Metro
Sadly this is what we have to do to be able to compete with the oil teams.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Eh? nothing to do with it, would of happened anyway.
posted on 15/7/14
comment by (U19680)
posted 20 seconds ago
You didn't work hard to flog your brand around the world you picked a convenient time to be successful when all the tv money came in
----------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yes, deliberately not winning the league for 26 years was a masterstroke.
posted on 15/7/14
I don't think football has had "a level playing field" for ages has it?
We used to have a lot more cash than most of our rivals. We won the pools, long before Chelsea won the lottery.
posted on 15/7/14
Thank you that's exactly what I meant clockwork you dullard
posted on 15/7/14
I seem to remember Liverpool fans buzzing about the Warrior kit deal - I assume the OP did a similar piece about that deal.
For what it's worth I think he's right, when a club can get £75m a year off their shirt maker and £57m a year for a company to stick their names on the shirts the games gone barmy.
posted on 15/7/14
comment by Clockwork Red: And sometimes they were very sa... (U4892)
posted 22 seconds ago
comment by (U19680)
posted 20 seconds ago
You didn't work hard to flog your brand around the world you picked a convenient time to be successful when all the tv money came in
----------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yes, deliberately not winning the league for 26 years was a masterstroke.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 15/7/14
You didn't work hard to flog your brand around the world you picked a convenient time to be successful when all the tv money came in
--------------------------------
Let's not forget that the TV money from the Premiership has always been shared between all clubs. Also United were for many years at the start of the Premiership the only club that still made more from gate receipts than other revenue streams.
posted on 15/7/14
Adidas and Chevvy could buy you a Ronaldo every season
posted on 15/7/14
You didn't work hard to flog your brand around the world you picked a convenient time to be successful when all the tv money came in
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Picked a time?
Yeah because clubs pick not to be successful also right?
My word there are some cretins that dwell on here.
And we've been a massively supported club for a lot longer than since 92. Ever since the days of the busby babes we've had a huge following. First English team to win the European Cup etc.
posted on 15/7/14
It doesn't matter about prize money you got the most exposure so of course your brand grew more than other clubs
posted on 15/7/14
comment by (U19680)
posted 22 seconds ago
Thank you that's exactly what I meant clockwork you dullard
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think you will find utds reputation and standing in english and world football was established before that 26 year drought. Fact of the matter is utd were still the biggest club in england during that period.
posted on 15/7/14
comment by Clockwork Red: And sometimes they were very sad (U4892)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by (U19680)
posted 20 seconds ago
You didn't work hard to flog your brand around the world you picked a convenient time to be successful when all the tv money came in
----------------------------------
------------------------------------
Yes, deliberately not winning the league for 26 years was a masterstroke.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
posted on 15/7/14
Not that concerned to be honest.
I'd rather have 4 or 5 teams full of superstars who are competing with the top teams in Europe than 20 teams each with one superstar and a load of average English garbage.
posted on 15/7/14
Guess what, that's life! The rich get richer whilst the middle and lower classes become more ostracised. It's just the way things are unfortunately due to the nature of capitalism.
Nothing will change this.
Page 1 of 7
6 | 7