comment by Dwight K Schrute (U22590)
posted 15 seconds ago
how is that a threat to City tho?
their owners will create their own TV Channel and buy the rights for 1bn pounds a season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably because they won't be able to. They will have to sell to as many fans as they can and their global reach has grown with their 'success' in fairness.
But it's not on the level of Madrid, Barca n United.
Time to get ready for Line of Duty.
I assume 'H' is a member of the Abu Dhabi Royal Family.
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 2 minutes ago
Or just wait to see when we can sell our TV rights cutting out SKY and BT and all you bottom feeder clubs and see how you like it then. If you can take the pee then so can we.
You like that one don't you.
Do you honestly think the other clubs would let you televise games from their stadiums if they didn't get an equal share.
Welcome to MUTV where you can watch all 19 of United's home games and nothing else.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Given that most of the teams have massive fanbases and their own TV channels why should they worry.
It's only Tinpot clubs with small fanbases like you lot who'd be in trouble.
comment by moreinjuredthanowen (U9641)
posted 2 minutes ago
I took a look at the revenues of the prem and uefa
The prem made 5mil just in revenue in 2019 and uefa less.
I recokn these clubs see an opportunity to run two leagues side by side with a far more "attractive" super league bringing in at least another 5million annually all for them.
I reckonw they would want the prem cut to 8 clubs to stay in as well. No league cup and a severely curtailed FA cup (for them) (say the 6 want to enter at 5th round level lol)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't even know why the Prem teams would even be interested. They have a financial advantage with the Premier League over La Liga and Serie A.
If they want a competitive advantage they should let the financial struggles of Madrid, Barca, Juve play out. They are doing these clubs a favour with this Super League.
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 10 minutes ago
SAF not keen on the idea either
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only people who are are money men, children amd plastics.
Everybody else recognises and appreciates the damage it’d do to the sport.
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
i am with Neville absolutely
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 47 seconds ago
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And the owners of which clubs are bothered about the long term?
Our owners just paid themselves £20m in dividends during a global pandemic in which the club posted record Q losses and the debt against the club has risen something like £200m.
comment by rosso - can’t waste a day when the night brings a hearse (U17054)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 47 seconds ago
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And the owners of which clubs are bothered about the long term?
Our owners just paid themselves £20m in dividends during a global pandemic in which the club posted record Q losses and the debt against the club has risen something like £200m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure they'll like to see the value of their assets go downwards. Will be an awful commercial decision.
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 21 seconds ago
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They don’t care about long term, m buying a club is an investment that pays handsomely, they’ll treat it like a longer term stock and move it into a position in medium term that will see the best return by manipulating , which is what they are doing, Reap it and fack off on to the next venture.
Gordon gecko would wholeheartedly approve of this plan.
No doubt greed and profits are behind this too. It's not just about City.
However but for the Sheikh buying City we'd have a minimum of 4 more titles and we'd not be pushing for a change would we?
Just watched Gary Nev and agree with everything he said.
‘It’s nothing personal, just business’...
No doubt greed and profits are behind this too. It's not just about City.
—
Let it go dude. We look worse than them in this. From an article I read a few days back city weren’t believed to even board to start with.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 21 seconds ago
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Given how much the Americans seem to be in on this, can only assume they think they're creating the 'soccer' version of the NFL
same teams, competing every year for the super bowl.
I do wonder if their proposal has some of the things in that league that guarantees fairness and equality though
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by rosso - can’t waste a day when the night brings a hearse (U17054)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 47 seconds ago
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And the owners of which clubs are bothered about the long term?
Our owners just paid themselves £20m in dividends during a global pandemic in which the club posted record Q losses and the debt against the club has risen something like £200m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure they'll like to see the value of their assets go downwards. Will be an awful commercial decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They aren’t in this long term.
comment by Dwight K Schrute (U22590)
posted 1 second ago
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 21 seconds ago
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Given how much the Americans seem to be in on this, can only assume they think they're creating the 'soccer' version of the NFL
same teams, competing every year for the super bowl.
I do wonder if their proposal has some of the things in that league that guarantees fairness and equality though
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"same teams, competing every year for the super bowl."
.......
"I do wonder if their proposal has some of the things in that league that guarantees fairness and equality though"
Read those back separately.
comment by Ace (U22467)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Glazers_Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 2 seconds ago
No doubt greed and profits are behind this too. It's not just about City.
However but for the Sheikh buying City we'd have a minimum of 4 more titles and we'd not be pushing for a change would we?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what, it’s ok for Utd to have the most money and hoover up the trophies, but when someone else wants in on the action you’re ok to pick up your bat and ball and go elsewhere?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can you compare the two? We spent decades building our club. It didn't happen over night due to oil money. We went 26 years without being league champions despite being a huge club. The club had to rebuild and rebuild.
First English club to win a European cup. Only club to win The treble. All achieved without a Sheikh.
Do you think City would be happy if they were the traditional big club in Manchester and Utd came from nowhere 12years ago with some oil cash rich Sheikh. Of course they wouldn't.
comment by Danny Mullen (U1734)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Dwight K Schrute (U22590)
posted 1 second ago
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 21 seconds ago
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Given how much the Americans seem to be in on this, can only assume they think they're creating the 'soccer' version of the NFL
same teams, competing every year for the super bowl.
I do wonder if their proposal has some of the things in that league that guarantees fairness and equality though
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"same teams, competing every year for the super bowl."
.......
"I do wonder if their proposal has some of the things in that league that guarantees fairness and equality though"
Read those back separately.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Was the point not more that they have the same teams competing every year but a different model which prevents sustained success for any single team? I've not gone back and read everything but my assumption of what they meant was in response to the notion that not having promotion and relegation etc would lead to the doom of all football but that this is the model they have in the NFL and it remains a much watched, competitive league.
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
correct - same teams meant the same teams in total
but the draft, salary cap, free agency means it is very very hard for any one team to have real sustained success. usually get a Super Bowl win then a very good shot the following year provided you have planned to handle salary cap and free agency properly but then quickly you have to restart the "5 year Super Bowl clock"
erm so now Man City and Man Utd have stepped back from this?
GNev was right
Could be interesting, as a spectacle, but not as a sport.
Sky would be creaming themselves over the annual auction for players - just like the money men who have brought that to the Indian Premier League cricket fiasco.
comment by Ace (U22467)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Glazers_Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Ace (U22467)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Glazers_Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 2 seconds ago
No doubt greed and profits are behind this too. It's not just about City.
However but for the Sheikh buying City we'd have a minimum of 4 more titles and we'd not be pushing for a change would we?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what, it’s ok for Utd to have the most money and hoover up the trophies, but when someone else wants in on the action you’re ok to pick up your bat and ball and go elsewhere?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can you compare the two? We spent decades building our club. It didn't happen over night due to oil money. We went 26 years without being league champions despite being a huge club. The club had to rebuild and rebuild.
First English club to win a European cup. Only club to win The treble. All achieved without a Sheikh.
Do you think City would be happy if they were the traditional big club in Manchester and Utd came from nowhere 12years ago with some oil cash rich Sheikh. Of course they wouldn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But what you are saying there effectively justifies the attitude of those that are making this breakaway thing their intent - old money wants to protect itself from upstarts, keep the rich rich and everyone else poor. That’s what this thing is about, and that’s what you are moaning about with City. They as a club have every right to invest and try to grow their club for their community and their fans, what’s wrong with a little healthy competition? Your posts reek of sour grapes and self entitlement.
And also, Spurs were the first English club to win a European cup - Cup Winners Cup 1963
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was clearly referring to THE European cup. That was us. But yeah fair enough you won the first trophy albeit not the big one.
Why do you think United are going to be happy about seeing a club who are our ovals potentially taking over our trophy haul long term simply because their owner has deeper pockets?
How would you feel as a Spurs fan if it was Arsenal in City's position? Would you be okay with it then?
Sign in if you want to comment
Gary Neville furious
Page 5 of 7
6 | 7
posted on 18/4/21
comment by Dwight K Schrute (U22590)
posted 15 seconds ago
how is that a threat to City tho?
their owners will create their own TV Channel and buy the rights for 1bn pounds a season.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Probably because they won't be able to. They will have to sell to as many fans as they can and their global reach has grown with their 'success' in fairness.
But it's not on the level of Madrid, Barca n United.
posted on 18/4/21
Time to get ready for Line of Duty.
I assume 'H' is a member of the Abu Dhabi Royal Family.
posted on 18/4/21
comment by Boris 'Inky’ Gibson (U5901)
posted 2 minutes ago
Or just wait to see when we can sell our TV rights cutting out SKY and BT and all you bottom feeder clubs and see how you like it then. If you can take the pee then so can we.
You like that one don't you.
Do you honestly think the other clubs would let you televise games from their stadiums if they didn't get an equal share.
Welcome to MUTV where you can watch all 19 of United's home games and nothing else.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Given that most of the teams have massive fanbases and their own TV channels why should they worry.
It's only Tinpot clubs with small fanbases like you lot who'd be in trouble.
posted on 18/4/21
comment by moreinjuredthanowen (U9641)
posted 2 minutes ago
I took a look at the revenues of the prem and uefa
The prem made 5mil just in revenue in 2019 and uefa less.
I recokn these clubs see an opportunity to run two leagues side by side with a far more "attractive" super league bringing in at least another 5million annually all for them.
I reckonw they would want the prem cut to 8 clubs to stay in as well. No league cup and a severely curtailed FA cup (for them) (say the 6 want to enter at 5th round level lol)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I don't even know why the Prem teams would even be interested. They have a financial advantage with the Premier League over La Liga and Serie A.
If they want a competitive advantage they should let the financial struggles of Madrid, Barca, Juve play out. They are doing these clubs a favour with this Super League.
posted on 18/4/21
comment by _Viva_Vida (U6044)
posted 10 minutes ago
SAF not keen on the idea either
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The only people who are are money men, children amd plastics.
Everybody else recognises and appreciates the damage it’d do to the sport.
posted on 18/4/21
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
posted on 18/4/21
i am with Neville absolutely
posted on 18/4/21
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 47 seconds ago
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And the owners of which clubs are bothered about the long term?
Our owners just paid themselves £20m in dividends during a global pandemic in which the club posted record Q losses and the debt against the club has risen something like £200m.
posted on 18/4/21
comment by rosso - can’t waste a day when the night brings a hearse (U17054)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 47 seconds ago
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And the owners of which clubs are bothered about the long term?
Our owners just paid themselves £20m in dividends during a global pandemic in which the club posted record Q losses and the debt against the club has risen something like £200m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure they'll like to see the value of their assets go downwards. Will be an awful commercial decision.
posted on 18/4/21
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 21 seconds ago
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They don’t care about long term, m buying a club is an investment that pays handsomely, they’ll treat it like a longer term stock and move it into a position in medium term that will see the best return by manipulating , which is what they are doing, Reap it and fack off on to the next venture.
Gordon gecko would wholeheartedly approve of this plan.
posted on 18/4/21
No doubt greed and profits are behind this too. It's not just about City.
However but for the Sheikh buying City we'd have a minimum of 4 more titles and we'd not be pushing for a change would we?
posted on 18/4/21
Just watched Gary Nev and agree with everything he said.
posted on 18/4/21
‘It’s nothing personal, just business’...
posted on 18/4/21
No doubt greed and profits are behind this too. It's not just about City.
—
Let it go dude. We look worse than them in this. From an article I read a few days back city weren’t believed to even board to start with.
posted on 18/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 18/4/21
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 21 seconds ago
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Given how much the Americans seem to be in on this, can only assume they think they're creating the 'soccer' version of the NFL
same teams, competing every year for the super bowl.
I do wonder if their proposal has some of the things in that league that guarantees fairness and equality though
posted on 18/4/21
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by rosso - can’t waste a day when the night brings a hearse (U17054)
posted 23 seconds ago
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 47 seconds ago
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And the owners of which clubs are bothered about the long term?
Our owners just paid themselves £20m in dividends during a global pandemic in which the club posted record Q losses and the debt against the club has risen something like £200m.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure they'll like to see the value of their assets go downwards. Will be an awful commercial decision.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They aren’t in this long term.
posted on 18/4/21
comment by Dwight K Schrute (U22590)
posted 1 second ago
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 21 seconds ago
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Given how much the Americans seem to be in on this, can only assume they think they're creating the 'soccer' version of the NFL
same teams, competing every year for the super bowl.
I do wonder if their proposal has some of the things in that league that guarantees fairness and equality though
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"same teams, competing every year for the super bowl."
.......
"I do wonder if their proposal has some of the things in that league that guarantees fairness and equality though"
Read those back separately.
posted on 18/4/21
comment by Ace (U22467)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Glazers_Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 2 seconds ago
No doubt greed and profits are behind this too. It's not just about City.
However but for the Sheikh buying City we'd have a minimum of 4 more titles and we'd not be pushing for a change would we?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what, it’s ok for Utd to have the most money and hoover up the trophies, but when someone else wants in on the action you’re ok to pick up your bat and ball and go elsewhere?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can you compare the two? We spent decades building our club. It didn't happen over night due to oil money. We went 26 years without being league champions despite being a huge club. The club had to rebuild and rebuild.
First English club to win a European cup. Only club to win The treble. All achieved without a Sheikh.
Do you think City would be happy if they were the traditional big club in Manchester and Utd came from nowhere 12years ago with some oil cash rich Sheikh. Of course they wouldn't.
posted on 18/4/21
comment by Danny Mullen (U1734)
posted 13 minutes ago
comment by Dwight K Schrute (U22590)
posted 1 second ago
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by {honestlivpool~six~times} 1️⃣9️⃣ 👽 🐎 #worldpeace (U1661)
posted 21 seconds ago
Literally doesn't make sense. Over a long period this will most likely have a detrimental effect on football and lead to reduction in value of football clubs. Not sure what the logic is here..
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Given how much the Americans seem to be in on this, can only assume they think they're creating the 'soccer' version of the NFL
same teams, competing every year for the super bowl.
I do wonder if their proposal has some of the things in that league that guarantees fairness and equality though
----------------------------------------------------------------------
"same teams, competing every year for the super bowl."
.......
"I do wonder if their proposal has some of the things in that league that guarantees fairness and equality though"
Read those back separately.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Was the point not more that they have the same teams competing every year but a different model which prevents sustained success for any single team? I've not gone back and read everything but my assumption of what they meant was in response to the notion that not having promotion and relegation etc would lead to the doom of all football but that this is the model they have in the NFL and it remains a much watched, competitive league.
posted on 18/4/21
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 18/4/21
correct - same teams meant the same teams in total
but the draft, salary cap, free agency means it is very very hard for any one team to have real sustained success. usually get a Super Bowl win then a very good shot the following year provided you have planned to handle salary cap and free agency properly but then quickly you have to restart the "5 year Super Bowl clock"
posted on 18/4/21
erm so now Man City and Man Utd have stepped back from this?
GNev was right
posted on 18/4/21
Could be interesting, as a spectacle, but not as a sport.
Sky would be creaming themselves over the annual auction for players - just like the money men who have brought that to the Indian Premier League cricket fiasco.
posted on 18/4/21
comment by Ace (U22467)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Glazers_Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Ace (U22467)
posted 14 minutes ago
comment by Glazers_Out (SE85) (U21241)
posted 2 seconds ago
No doubt greed and profits are behind this too. It's not just about City.
However but for the Sheikh buying City we'd have a minimum of 4 more titles and we'd not be pushing for a change would we?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So what, it’s ok for Utd to have the most money and hoover up the trophies, but when someone else wants in on the action you’re ok to pick up your bat and ball and go elsewhere?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
How can you compare the two? We spent decades building our club. It didn't happen over night due to oil money. We went 26 years without being league champions despite being a huge club. The club had to rebuild and rebuild.
First English club to win a European cup. Only club to win The treble. All achieved without a Sheikh.
Do you think City would be happy if they were the traditional big club in Manchester and Utd came from nowhere 12years ago with some oil cash rich Sheikh. Of course they wouldn't.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
But what you are saying there effectively justifies the attitude of those that are making this breakaway thing their intent - old money wants to protect itself from upstarts, keep the rich rich and everyone else poor. That’s what this thing is about, and that’s what you are moaning about with City. They as a club have every right to invest and try to grow their club for their community and their fans, what’s wrong with a little healthy competition? Your posts reek of sour grapes and self entitlement.
And also, Spurs were the first English club to win a European cup - Cup Winners Cup 1963
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I was clearly referring to THE European cup. That was us. But yeah fair enough you won the first trophy albeit not the big one.
Why do you think United are going to be happy about seeing a club who are our ovals potentially taking over our trophy haul long term simply because their owner has deeper pockets?
How would you feel as a Spurs fan if it was Arsenal in City's position? Would you be okay with it then?
Page 5 of 7
6 | 7