Is this the death knell for competition in football?

[MikeyM]

We've been seeing transfer fees rise and rise, and now we have a new player on the block who seemingly is going to try and cherry pick the best players from every club around the world.

I'm not saying this as a United fan, but I'm speaking as a fan of football. The money levels that are in the game now are going to result in many clubs going out of business and the competition will be destroyed.

We've seen rich clubs before, I know I support one - but the threat posed by Manchester City's takeover needs to be considered by every single fan on the planet. Make no mistake about this, if this guy is serious then there will be no way to compete. We are talking about UNLIMITED funds here. City could conceivably bid double or even treble a player's value.

I feel FIFA need to treat this with the utmost seriousness - I for one will stop watching football if this future happens, because even with Abramovich, you knew there were limits. City have none - they don't need to budget.

It is time to put a curb on this - not only the Premiership will be affected, the Champions League could go the same way.

Not often I agree with Wenger, but in a climate that has allowed the richest club in the world (self made - money made on success) to be £800M in debt, Liverpool and Arsenal also in the red - and Chelsea who before Abramovich were £70M in the clarts. It is obcene that clubs are paying higher fees than ever before. And yes it's rediculous that United can find £30M when they are effectively £800M in debt. (Again FIFA allowing this to happen - surely FIFA's job is to safeguard clubs against this)

Perhaps it's time to finally accept the yanks have the right system in the NFL. Merchandise sales and revenue filters down to every team and the level of competition is constant. Young players get their breaks and become stars. Salaries are capped, roster sizes are regulated to ensure some kind of parity.


Picture the scene - it's 2020 and Man City are closing in on their fourth double in a row - sooner or later people are going to get bored (look at the SPL situation in Scotland) Every young player is snapped up and left to rot on the bench and no-one can compete.

That my friends is how football will die.

 

[1966+2006]

Great post Mike. I completely agree.
I also really don't like the fact that people can just buy clubs and then sell them off again. It's ridiculous. I mean how could it have been allowed for Thaskin(sp?) to just buy City.
Bring back the days when a player like Roy Keane used to cost 3.75mil.
Over the years you've seen countless players being bought by big clubs only to be left on the bench without the chance to prove himself and develop.

 

[MikeyM]

Posted in the "City Thread"

If it wasn't for one man, Arsene Wenger, United would have destroyed football years ago.

I'm sick of people saying United are to blame for this! And that we alone are responsible for the sick amounts of money in todays' game.

To start with this siuation is entirely different. Manchester United generated revenue due to their success on the field and business - We did not have some moneybags guy come in and give us millions!

Of course we pay overinflated transfer fees - that's the price of success, and also the price that you must pay to get top players. However United still must budget (and as fans gleefully remind us we are in £800M debt) Am I happy about it? Hell no!

What is happening here is a transfer fund without limits, without the regard to work like a business - City can write off hundreds of millions without regard, and whether you support Manchester United or even Real Nintendo, this has to be viewed as a bad thing.

If City do succeed in "destroying" Man Utd, it will also mean they have destroyed Real Madrid, Barcelona, Liverpool, Inter, Milan - everyone.

They will destroy football if some kind of control isn't in place. That is a fact. City fans are rightly over the moon at this change in fortune - who wouldn't be.

But a bottomless pit of money for a single team is the single biggest threat to our game - FIFA simply can't allow this to happen.

 

[Bobby]

United ARE to blame for this, they started it. The only reason the United fans are outraged is because it's City who got some money, if it was Auxerre you wouldn't give two ****s.

 

[Help?]

That, my friend, is the one of the problems you get with democracy, so we can't really complain much. I think you are a bit too cynical in what might happen with City and the rest of the football clubs out there. They can't drive out the rest of the competition with their money, simply because the game is too complex to have the team with best players in the world winning everything. There are many factors that need to be considered.

1) If Manchester City buys top 20 players from the FIFA shortlist for player of the year award, then you are going to have a whole lot of egos playing different styles bunched up in 1 place and i don't even think Mourinho's ego capacity is big enough to handle that.

2) If you just buy ALL the best players in the world, period (100+ of them) then i don't even need to explain what will happen with that club, their loyalty and the ~80-90 superstars that will get nice checks but never get to play. While, all the other teams will grow their own talents and sell them for ridiculous price tags and that will actually benefit football, because teams will be able to erase their debts with one sale!

3) Wealthy people are investors, opportunists, if something doesn't turn out the way they want it to, then they take their money elsewhere. Trust me, these guys didn't buy Manchester City to pump a few billions of dollars into it and make a bunch of Brits happy. We have seen this with Roman and it's the same with Abu Dhabi Group. People that are that weathly are smart enough not to waste cash like that without seeing any returns.

4) City won't be able to dominate everything every year due to human side of football. Ronaldo wants to leave currently the best club in the world for the one with the best history and a wage paycut. He never even thought about Chelsea, the richest club in the world until this week. This tells you something.


Manchester City might be able to buy some of the best players out there and win most cups they play in for a number of years, but it won't last long, as we found out with Chelsea (who never even bought top 5 best players in the world) showing what you have is never a good idea. Matter of fact, i could argue that its actually good for the others clubs that these guys are taking over Manchester City. Bad for Manchester United because City fans will rip us to shreads if they overtake us at the top and bad for football because it will become even more about being a business and money-making rather than just simply playing the game. But for the clubs, its potentially life-saving. If they have train one guy into a superstar and City owners become interested, they will overspend without a doubt, meaning more money for that club and what club couldn't use a bit of extra cash?


So, let's not be so gloomy about it, sure it sucks that its City they chose and not somebody like Everton, Newcastle or even Tottenham whatever, but hey, that's life.

 

[MikeyM]

United ARE to blame for this, they started it. The only reason the United fans are outraged is because it's City who got some money, if it was Auxerre you wouldn't give two ****s.

Yeah I forgot, Manchester United are also to blame for the influx of foreigners, transfer prices, corporate fans, diving, spitting, cheating, corruption and the dismal falure of the England team. Hell we're probably responsible for all the disasters that have killed football fans and even the recession.

I really wish people could put this seething hatred of United aside and try and focus on the real issues. And I'd say the same thing regardless of whether it was City, United, Auxerre or Aldershot - there has to be some kind of responsibility shown.

You sir are supporting a club that has put themselves £240M in debt over a stadium, and are still spending money you don't have (regardless of how many players you've sold + you'll be winging like f*ck when your God Fabregas is first to join City.

You know several times I have considered leaving these forums - I'm sick of the unnecessary hatred levelled against my club and it's fans.

 

[Tiago_10]

But you know teams like Real Madrid or Barcelona can say NO even to an enormous offer for one their players. They don't need the money. And if it's a ridiculous amount even for those clubs, what makes you think that club won't go buy other quality players with the money they received?

Until today the only "superstar" to join City was Robinho, and in very specific conditions. He wanted to leave and even threatened not to play for them again, the fans at Madrid didn't want him and he then begged Calderon to leave on the last day when City's offer was made.

Let's not get carried away here, City would have to win A LOT and MANY times to even be considered in the same level as Real Madrid, for example.

But of course there is a serious question here those amounts of money just for a football player are clearly way too much and one day it will stop, eventually.

 

[Bobby]

you'll be winging like f*ck when your God Fabregas is first to join City.

That can't happen because Robinho was the first to join City.

 

[rony31]

Well said Tiago. Mikey, you have to realize, a lot of players aren't simply whores who leave for large amounts of money. A ****load of players will not want to join City. CRonaldo, I can guarantee, even if we offer him $10M a week, will not join City. This isn't the end of football as you say it, tons of players are still interested in the game rather than the business. Robinho's transfer, as mentioned above, happened in a very specific way. He would've gone to St. Johnstone given the situation and the cash.

 

[Bobby]

Be serious, Rony. He'd have the dignity to join Arbroath instead.

 

[KingPaulV]

All superstars in one team is only good for Playstation, and Xbox...if you dont believe me there are multiple examples thru history of teams that were tailor made with many names and superstars and at the end they leave the shelves empty....ie. Real Madrid in the early 2000's after initial success it was a disaster; Barcelona the last two seasons, after initial success it also was a dissaster...just to name two very prominent teams....Chelsea for all their signings have yet to win the CL........so really, the owners of city can try as they may to buy the world, but they wont be able to....I read they want to pay 170M for Ronaldo, I very much doubt Ronaldo would agree to go there regardless of what they pay him, there is only three places for him IMO, Manchester United, Real Madrid or Sporting...and he's not the only player who feels/thinks like that about where he should play

 

[Mandieta6]

Wasn't everyone complaining whyen Abramovic took over? And how did that hurt football? You now have 4 top tier teams in England, and 3/4 teams competing for UEFA places, making the Premiership one of the most interesting in the world.

And you can't blaim Chelsea for i8nflating prices, because prices were inflating before they arrived. Madrid and ManU were breaking transfer records every year, and if it weren't for City, they'd have done it again.

City won't be the end of football because business men who managed to create 'unlimited' funds will also know how to profit, and buying every good player won't be the way to go, and they know that. Hey, people said Chelsea would do it, and their spending flux has dramatically decreased.

Just enjoy the game.

 

[Zlatan]

Man. City first will have to prove something before big players will even consider going there. It's not by chance that Berbatov rejected them for Man Utd. And it will take a long time before they have the reputation and history that clubs like Real have gathered over a few decades of football.

 

[Sevillista]

Awww, how adorable. The teams that have been oppressing mid-to-lower level clubs for decades suddenly don't think it's fair when other teams have more money.


I hope you don't have to resort to forming a cohesive team and raising home-grown talent and making intelligent transfers....

 

[Help?]

Thanks to everyone for basically summarizing my post

 

[Gunnersgoal22]

Robinho probably thinks he's playing for Man United. He'll be pretty confused when he puts on the blue uniform for his first game.

Seriously though, only the big whores will go to City and they won't stick around for long. They and the owners will realize that buying the best players doesn't necessarily equal a good team.

 

[pede54]

Mikey mate. What a load of bollocks. This IS sour grapes and nothing else. You don't like the competition huh? United fans hated it when Chelsea became a threat, and now you hate it because now Man City are too.

You club and Liverpool financially dominated football in England for decades, leading to both clubs gaining what you like to call "history". Without the money, United would have been on a par with the rest of us. The rest of us might of had more chance of winning something over the last 50 years.

You know United history, so to say that United's money is "self made" is crap and you know it. Perhaps it is right now, but it was not always like that. Your club and Liverpool have always had investment from outside the club, but you were crafty by putting your benefactors in the boardroom so as to be able to claim that their money was Uniteds money.

Nobody believes the BS fairytale about your finances any more man, and the more United fans go on about it, the more laughable you become.

Good luck to City because they are gonna need it. I hope it all works out for them, because then we will have even more competition in the EPL, and NOT less competition as you imply.

Sour grapes.

 

[pede54]

Robinho probably thinks he's playing for Man United. He'll be pretty confused when he puts on the blue uniform for his first game.

Seriously though, only the big whores will go to City and they won't stick around for long. They and the owners will realize that buying the best players doesn't necessarily equal a good team.

Now where have I heard all that bollocks before. Oh yeah Chelsea. Arsenal mug.

 

[thetrooper37]

Thanks to everyone for basically summarizing my post

hahah yeah I was gonna say...



With what's been in the news, it seems that this new City owner will put some ridiculous offers for a number of top players and maybe even get a couple of them. He will soon realize though that sheer money and superstars don't always equal the best team in the world. As someone already mentioned, Real Madrid failed like this in the early 2000's. Yes, City will probably become a major Champions League team within the next few years but does that mean they'll just brush the other teams off the page? Hell no.

You also have to remember, certain players play at certain clubs because they were brought up to love them. For example, Maldini played his whole career at Milan. Do you think he would've ever transferred to Man City if they offered him some ridiculous wages?

 

[pede54]

You won't find many players with that attitude much longer man. The next generation of players will be playing for money and success, and only the richest clubs will interest them.

When you talk about loyal players you are talking about the old men of the game. Players from the last generation. In the future loyalty will be a very very rare thing.