Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Mar 20, 2014 5:12 am  

Dita's Slot Meter wrote:

:lol: ..... That's hilarious coming from a Chelsea fan, the club who would truly collapse like a pack of cards, if their owner ever decided to walk away.

I am under no illusions that the success we've had since Roman took over is totally down to him. We might have had a few cups, but that would probably be it. We certainly wouldn't have been players like Hazard, Drogba and Oscar at our club without Roman. The purchase of players would have been significantly lower quality and lower profile. We'd have probably had an Everton-like decade rather than been slightly behind United in collecting trophies.

However, it is simply nonsense to say we're any more liable than all the other billionaire owned clubs to collapse. We're all in the same boat if our owners chose to walk away. If you think we'd "truly collapse" while others wouldn't then I'd be interested to read why that's so, but I doubt you'd be able to back the claim up at all.

As for Moyes, I don't think he is under any threat at the moment, simply because Sir Alex will not let it happen because it will make him look a prick - I think he's got the summer transfer window to try and build his own side and then he gets until Christmas to make it work.

Even the most ardent Moyes critic would concede he was dealt a raw deal with that squad that Fergie left him - The worst thing that could have happened for Moyes was RVP single-handedly dragging a mediocre United side to the title last year, beause it made it look like he was taking over a champion side, when, in reality, they were not much better than the rest of the top 6 or 7 .... Unfortunately for Moyes, that top 6 or 7 has stayed exactly the same but in a different order and United happen to be at the bottom of that group of clubs, who, if truth be told, don't have very much between them, bar the odd very good individual, like Suarez, Hazard and Aguero.

So you're arguing that Fergie looks like a prick because he shafted Moyes by having him take over his mediocre squad and left him with an impossible job, but he won't sack Moyes because he won't want to look like a prick.

IMO Fergie is probably the greatest British manager of all time. His period of success at Man United will probably never be matched. But by appointing Moyes he made a huge mistake, he looks like a massive prick because of it. By sticking with Moyes even though he's proved to have close to no competence in running a huge club he looks like a stubborn prick.

But I'm glad they are doing it. I hope they get badly burned by it and have to deal with the consequences for a long time.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Mar 20, 2014 12:10 pm  

Never thought I would see Manchester United celebrating winning a CL 2nd round tie like they've actually won the competition.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Mar 20, 2014 7:48 pm  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

However, it is simply nonsense to say we're any more liable than all the other billionaire owned clubs to collapse. We're all in the same boat if our owners chose to walk away. If you think we'd "truly collapse" while others wouldn't then I'd be interested to read why that's so, but I doubt you'd be able to back the claim up at all.

I agree with you that any side who have a billionaire owner and find themselves in a relatively false position, simply because of their investment, would definitely struggle (Look at how Blackburn quickly went from champions to nowhere once Jack Walker's influence waned).

However, I think there is a very small number of English clubs (Man Utd, Liverpool and, to a lesser extent, Arsenal) who would survive and still be able to attract a decent quality of player, because of their reputation in the football world - No disrespect, but take the financial factor from clubs like Chelsea and Man City, and you are left in the same boat as the Newcastle's and Everton's of this world in trying to tempt second and third tier players to your club, knowing that if any of these players show any potential they will be snapped up by the richer and supposedly bigger clubs.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Mar 20, 2014 8:07 pm  

Dita's Slot Meter wrote:

I agree with you that any side who have a billionaire owner and find themselves in a relatively false position, simply because of their investment, would definitely struggle (Look at how Blackburn quickly went from champions to nowhere once Jack Walker's influence waned).

If the Glazer's "walk away" from Man United they are still going to want to take as much money out of the club as possible. So whoever buys Man United is probably going to have to shell out around one and a half billion quid just to buy the club. Then spend another couple of hundred million buying better players.

It's not just Chelsea and Man City who are in this situation, it's every club.

However, I think there is a very small number of English clubs (Man Utd, Liverpool and, to a lesser extent, Arsenal) who would survive and still be able to attract a decent quality of player, because of their reputation in the football world - No disrespect, but take the financial factor from clubs like Chelsea and Man City, and you are left in the same boat as the Newcastle's and Everton's of this world in trying to tempt second and third tier players to your club, knowing that if any of these players show any potential they will be snapped up by the richer and supposedly bigger clubs.

Before Roman bought the club, Chelsea had just qualified for the Champions League ahead of Liverpool. In that squad was Gianfranco Zola, Marcel Desailly, Jimmy Floyd Hasselbaink.

The year before Roman bought the club Chelsea earned revenues of 134m Euros, compared to Liverpool's 149m. Those figures are with Liverpool in the CL and Chelsea in the UEFA Cup and our players not giving a toss and getting knocked out in the first round.

In the 2003/4 season, when CFC had CL football, our revenues shot up to to 217m, while Liverpool in the UEFA fell to 140m.

So all this nonsense about the value of Liverpool's great history is clearly BS. If you like to own LFC BS then keep buying it, but if you buy it because you actually believe in it then you need to go back to school to get your brain working.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Mar 20, 2014 8:12 pm  

Just had another look at Liverpool's 2002/03 season. Not only did Liverpool benefit from CL group money, they also had 3 rounds of UEFA Cup football too, until they lost to Celtic.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Mar 20, 2014 8:56 pm  

I think any debate where a Chelsea fan insinuates that they are on a par, as a worldwide name, with Liverpool, isn't really worth debating any more....

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Mar 20, 2014 9:46 pm  

Dita's Slot Meter wrote:

I think any debate where a Chelsea fan insinuates that they are on a par, as a worldwide name, with Liverpool, isn't really worth debating any more....

When did I insinuate that we were on a par, as a worldwide name, with them? I didn't.

I just question the value of having that worldwide name when there's clearly little benefit for them in their accounts.

There might be five million people around the world who claim that they are LFC fans, and they will get spin off benefits from extra advertising and commercial deals, but the value clearly isn't that high or you'd see it in their earnings.

And while Liverpool have historically been a European powerhouse and the most successful league team in England, they've only challenged once properly for the PL title (twice if they keep it up this season.) In that time we've won three league titles and been challenging almost every year under Roman. We'll have been hoovering up most of the new worldwide supporters while Liverpool will have been lagging.

And I do question the nature of foreign supporters. I've written before that I saw a guy in Louisville in a CFC shirt back in 2007 in the week after Jose had left the first time. I said, "I can't believe they've gone and done it" and wanted to talk about the game we'd just had with Man United. The guy didn't have a clue what I was talking about. So I said "Jose's sacking" and then he said that he wasn't an actual supporter, he just liked the shirt and it was a choice between a Chelsea or Liverpool shirt for him. I wasn't interested in talking to him after that.

Having a big worldwide support might earn your respect for Liverpool, but there's not much money in it. There might be some LFC supporters who will let you pay them to kiss their ass, but I don't think they'll be passing on that money to LFC. And I don't think you want to pay to do it, you want a willing partner with no fees either way.

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Thu Mar 20, 2014 10:58 pm  

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ritic.html Roman Abramovich should face sanctions, says Vladimir Putin critic

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ritic.html Roman Abramovich should face sanctions, says Vladimir Putin critic

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Fri Mar 21, 2014 7:29 am  

Lord God Jose Mourinho wrote:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/10713040/Roman-Abramovich-should-face-sanctions-says-Vladimir-Putin-critic.html

Roman Abramovich should face sanctions, says Vladimir Putin critic

Never going to happen. The London economy, particularly the property market, is too dependent on wealthy foreigners, many with links to dubious governments, for Cameron to go down the route of seizing assets.

[TimperleySaint]

Re: Football Chat Thread PART II : Fri Mar 21, 2014 2:40 pm  

Interesting draw in the Champions League. Tough for both English teams I would say - more so for United. Barca v Atletico will be a great game, and you'd have to say Real are faves to go thru v Dortmund.