Are Man City Ruining Fooball?

[fatshaft]

Seems to be SSN's latest theme. Are Man City spoiling the game by buying success? They seem to miss the point that Man U do effectively the same, as do Chelsea, Real, Barca etc, but that's ok because having a worldwide following and sh*t loads of Sky TV money, is somehow different from oil money.

 

Personally I can't see the difference, and think it's good to see new faces challenging (which they will do). There was the same nonsense when Shearer signed for Blackburn, but it was good to see a totally different team give it a go. It's different when you get guys like GLazer at Man UItd, or Hicks at Stealerpool, it's not like these teams need the injection of cash, they are already rich and successfuil clubs, but why are people getting pissed off at Man City?

 

Special shout out to Stuart from Aberdeen who had his whinging email read out on this topic.

[InTaeEm]

Fair enough yeh they are taking the buying prices a bit too far but I reckon it's just because it's Man City. If it were Man United or Chelsea or any other really big clubs that were to offer

[vanderark14]

the top teams in every league have been doing this for years.

 

SPL - the old firm have all the cash and the draw of CL football

EPL - Top 4 have more cash and draw of CL football

LA Liga - Barca and Real are top dogs

 

Man City have now came along and i reckon the top 4 are maybe just afraid that someone might just come along and spoil the party.

 

money is ruining football.

[K-9]

Not ruining it themselves but continuing the theme but taking it to another level.

[Sonoftherock]

Football has changed unfortunately... it's debatable whether its a good thing or not.

 

Sadly for clubs like Aberdeen, it means that we'll never again challenge for honours in the upper echelons of European football. The Premier League in England is a by-product of footballs development... 20 years ago you'd never see so many Aberdeen fans having a "second english team." Back in the day, there was no need, as Aberdeen were a big team, capable of challenging for honours and attracting a few decent footballers.

 

I'm not criticising anyone who has a second team... that's just the way football is these days. I myself, actively follow Manchester Uniteds results. I love watching the EPL, so I pretty much figured I should pick one of Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal, Chelsea or Man City to follow. I've even been to 4 Manchester United games in the last couple of seasons (not counting the friendly at Pittodrie).....

 

However, one gripe I do have is, Scottish, Irish, Bulgarian, Macedonia... or wherever they're from, based supporters of the Big 5, who pretend like they have some sort of attachment to the city. That's bullshit. You are supporting the brand - not the city. If it weren't for Arsenal, Man United, Liverpool.... etc, etc, you wouldn't give a sh*t about what goes on in North London, Manchester or Liverpool, etc, etc... The rest of the big 5 are fair game, because in the world of sports entertainment, that is the EPL, these are your rivals. So snap out of the local squabble sh*t.... note to subconcious "You are not a Cockney/Scouser/Manc (delete where appropriate), despite how cool it may seem to be percieved as such...."

 

Its embarrassing when you hear supporters, who aren't steeped in the local culture talking about how much they hate those "scumbags" from across the city.... they're kidding themselves and making a complete arse of themselves. Two of my best friends are from Manchester, they both support Manchester United, one is a former season ticket holder... neither of them ever had a problem with Man City - until the Sheik came to town, they both quite liked City and hoped they did well, because they were Manchester.

 

Another gripe I have is Rangers constant moaning about the changing financial climate in football. They weren't complaining when the English teams were banned from Europe and The Murray Mint/Graeme Souness double act rolled into town. In fact, you dirty hun b*stards, you were essentially one of the founding members of the mega-money movement in football....

 

......what goes around comes around, eh?

[fatshaft]

The Premier League in England is a by-product of footballs development... 20 years ago you'd never see so many Aberdeen fans having a "second english team." Back in the day, there was no need, as Aberdeen were a big team, capable of challenging for honours and attracting a few decent footballers.

Not what I recall at all. Back in the day we got Sportscene on a Saturday night, one Scottish game, then an English game, and because of that nearly everyone I went ot school with had an English team as well. Maybe the city was different?

[OneZanderDiamond]

No, they're giving us players on loan

[Sonoftherock]

Not what I recall at all. Back in the day we got Sportscene on a Saturday night, one Scottish game, then an English game, and because of that nearly everyone I went ot school with had an English team as well. Maybe the city was different?

 

That's very sad to hear.... I had hoped that the obsession with the EPL in aberdeen was a recent phenomenon.

 

I grew up on the west coast and everyone at my school supported either Dumbarton or Rangers... almost without exception. There were a couple of lads whose family were from the edinburgh area that followed Hearts - i also knew one lad who supported Dundee United. I had assumed a similar pattern in Aberdeen.

[redtillidie]

Seems to be SSN's latest theme. Are Man City spoiling the game by buying success? They seem to miss the point that Man U do effectively the same, as do Chelsea, Real, Barca etc, but that's ok because having a worldwide following and sh*t loads of Sky TV money, is somehow different from oil money.

 

Premier League - Kaka: What the managers said

Eurosport - Fri, 16 Jan 15:43:00 2009

 

Premier League bosses have reacted with a mixture of envy and incredulity to Manchester City's blockbusting bid for Kaka.

 

 

Mark Hughes: "It is not something that will happen overnight and we have to let people understand what we are trying to do and understand where this club will go in the next few years. Once they understand that and recognise the people driving it forward they will become excited by what we can offer. I have no idea whether he will end up here. It is dependent on too many factors. However, people should not think this is just being done on a whim."

 

Carlo Ancelotti: "Talks are happening. I hope I can coach him for the long term. But if he leaves our objectives do not change. Our squad remains competitive even if we must lose a great player. It is a decision that will have to be made by the club together with the player. The club is considering the offer that has been presented. It is normal that great importance is attached to him given the role he has at Milan. You couldn't imagine it 20 years ago. Big investors are entering football and therefore it is normal and correct to consider (the bid)."

 

Luiz Felipe Scolari: "Manchester City have money. Kaka is one of the best in the world on the pitch and off it. He is a fantastic player and they have money to spend. How much is it normal to pay? I don't know. He is a fantastic player. I would not be surprised if he went to Manchester City. This is football. He is a professional player but maybe they offer to him not only money but an idea for the future. I know Kaka very well, money is not his problem."

 

Alex Ferguson: "I find it hard to get my head round to be honest. It is amazing. Football is football. From time to time you get shocks and surprises. This is surprising everyone."

 

Arsene Wenger: "I don't feel in connection with (the Manchester City bid) at all because we live in a football club which lives in the real world. The implications (of the transfer fee) would be a disturbance on the market. Inflationary trend in a deflationary world. We are in a world where we live from three kinds of income -- gate receipts, the sponsors and the television money. That is the real world of football. Manchester City are in a different world because they do not live with their income."

 

Steve Bruce: "The beauty of our game is that it means more to the average man in the street than anybody. I know the average man in the street now finds it very difficult to find

[Jocky Balboa]

Money is changing football certainly, but don't know if it is ruining it.

 

Hasn't it ruined it for provincial clubs like our very own AFC? Or what about clubs like Ipswich, Notts. Forest and the like?

 

The Emirates is full every week, with gooners paying top whack for their seats. It's a different crowd from Highbury. The average income of the new Arsenal regulars may well be considerably higher than before. But it's a soul-less place. Many of the suits and jackets who regularly attend have no clue about the game, and very little history of watching it.

 

Roy Keane wasn't far off when he referred to the "Prawn Sandwich munchers", nor was he exclusively referring to his own team. Arsenal and Chelski have similar demographics and it disturbs me to see how football has become less and less the "working man's game" in recent years.

 

Increased money in the game will surely increase the quality of the product, so that can not be a bad thing?

 

In our case, that has not been the case. Calderbam has had a significant budget with which to work, but we have yet to see much in the way of payback. His case, while frustrating for us, is far from exclusive when one factors in that the lower Premiership clubs are spending the kind of money that would have probably bought them the title 15yrs ago.

 

The only issue I can see which can possibly be construed as "ruining" or having an adverse effect, is where the concentration of industry generated income i.e. CL money, TV income, is distributed unevenly with the big clubs getting the lion's share. This creates the danger of perpetuating the dominance of a few at the expense of the many, and can create predictable winners and losers, thus killing the essence of sport.

 

You've answered your first sentence there, surely? It IS killing the game, in that too many clubs are not only living beyond their means, but are running on a business model which is far from sustainable. I see no positive end result for these clubs.

 

City, like Chelski, are trying to compete, using only currency to get them to the starting post. The quality of their management and performances will determine their success or otherwise.

 

Perhaps one saving grace in all of this is that despite being on his FOURTH manager, Abramovich still has not delivered the European Cup. Hats off to Fergie on that front. Nevertheless, the exception does not disprove the general rule and the fact remains that for clubs like ours, competing at the very top has gone from a distant-but-achieveable dream, to an impossibility.

 

While there was a natural order of things back in the day (i.e. some clubs were bigger than others, with the provincial clubs like ourselves being the underdogs), the playing field, while not being a LEVEL one, was still A playing field, if you know what I mean? Who could imagine Norwich and Blackburn Rovers challenging for the EPL today and Sheffield Wednesday reaching TWO cup finals in a season, unless they received a mysterious benefactor with more money than sense?