Football: (Sky-)blue raindrops over a Red parade?

[Heartofice]

15 minutes ago, baxus said:

Do we generally see that as a good thing?

Sure it worked in our favour this time but what happens if politicians at some point down the line start dictating how sports work by special case legislation such as this? I mean, if they can do that for sports, what's to stop them from imposing some type of special tax, luxury or not, on other type of organisations?

Well generally someone like Boris isn’t a very interventionist kind of guy, but he is a ‘see which way the wind is blowing’ politician as well. 
 

I would be surprised if Boris really ever would have done any of the things he’d threatened to do, or if he actually could have done it. Any move against the football club would have been subject to endless court cases. 
 

But it’s another vote winner for Boris, this and the vaccines and everyone is loving Brexit!

[baxus]

25 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

Unequivocally, yes. These people had to be stopped. And he used means available to him to do so. Let's be clear. The Americans knew the fans were not going to like it, but they went ahead anyway. Because the past year has shown them that they do not need to consider the feelings of 'legacy fans'. The only thing they care about is money, and Johnson made it clear to them he was going to fuck their shit up.

I fucking hate Johnson, but I would shake him by the hand and thank him for his support in this matter.

And taxes are good. They pay for stuff that society needs.

I wasn't talking about giving clubs tax breaks or anything like that but deciding to specifically target a small number of organisations in retribution does not seem good to me. Today it was directed at those we feel deserve it, but tomorrow that could be aimed at, for example, media who is opposed to government at the time.

Would these complications in the process of getting temporary residential permits be directed at players of these specific six clubs or would they apply for players of all clubs? If it was only for these six clubs, then it's discrimination. If it's for everyone, then why is everyone punished for actions of the few? Hell, even players of these six clubs had nothing to do with making the decision to join Super League, so why would they be punished?

As I said, it worked out well this time but it's a slippery slope.

P.S. It must be nice to live in a country where you have such confidence that taxpayers' money is being well spent. I wish I could experience that, at least for a while.

[Spockydog]

I simply don't give a shit about any of those arguments. Sorry. Football is one of the most important things in my life. These cunts were going to wreck it, and I'm just glad Johnson helped.

and p.s. You're having a fucking laugh. 

 

 

[Consigliere]

Alasdair Gold reporting that ten Hag and Graham Potter are on Spurs' shortlist.

[Raja]

Think Graham Potter would be a good shout for Spurs

[Spockydog]

Potter is so overrated. His teams are thuggish, and his football is shit.

My Spurs supporting mate has got his heart set on Nagelsmann. LMFAO. 

[Consigliere]

4 minutes ago, Raja said:

Think Graham Potter would be a good shout for Spurs

Potter with Kane and Son instead of Welbeck and Maupay could be something. He's got Brighton playing some really good football. If not for their forwards underperforming to such a massive degree in front of goal, Brighton would be sat comfortably in the top 10.

Gold also says that Nagelsmann and Rodgers are on the shortlist as well but those two don't seem like realistic possibilities for Spurs.

[Spockydog]

He won't have Kane, though. He definitely wants to leave this summer, and I doubt Levy will be able to hang on to him.

 

[Consigliere]

Maybe. But it also depends how much Levy demands for Kane. I don't see Kane trying to force a transfer either.

eta. It might be difficult for clubs to spend the kind of money Levy would demand this year so Kane could remain for one more season but I don't think it's likely that he stays beyond that.

[Heartofice]

Kane is on a long contract, is expensive and is almost guaranteed a long term injury every season. I think many teams will look elsewhere. 
 

Id be excited to see Potter with a quality set of players. The issue is that as good as Brighton look, their results are pretty rubbish. Maybe it’s just that their strikers are crap, or maybe it’s something more.

[Consigliere]

Kane picks up injuries every season but it's not like he actually misses huge portions of a season on a regular basis. Just looking at recent seasons, he played 40 games in 2018/2019 (28 in the league), 34 in 2019/2020 (29 in the league) and is currently on 43 games this season (30 in the league).

Clubs might look at a younger Haaland as a first priority but only one club can win that race and top class CF's are in very short supply. Every club that wants to sign Haaland will have Kane on their list as well.

 

ETA. Reports that Zlatan has agreed an extension with AC Milan until the end of next season. Romano says an official announcement will be made today.

[Spockydog]

38 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

The issue is that as good as Brighton look, their results are pretty rubbish. Maybe it’s just that their strikers are crap, or maybe it’s something more.

As I said, his football is shit. There is definitely some Emperors new clothes type thing going on with this guy.

[The Sunland Lord]

Their fans would have Parker just a few weeks ago, and guy is getting relegated. Mourinho really drove them into despair.

They'll struggle to be top 4 for at least few years to come, I predict. Mourinho's appointment was a costly mistake, and they were on a downward trajectory with Pochettino early last season to begin with. Even their 2018/2019 campaign wasn't great, but was overshadowed by the jammiest drive to a CL final ever.

[Spockydog]

49 minutes ago, Consigliere said:

Clubs might look at a younger Haaland as a first priority but only one club can win that race and top class CF's are in very short supply. Every club that wants to sign Haaland will have Kane on their list as well.

Much like the way in which some pretty bizarre transfer deals totally inflated the market a few years ago, Haaland and Mbappe's future transfers are going to compress it.

Without the pandemic, these two would probably be going for around 200m this summer. If they were to move this summer, that figure can realistically be halved because NOBODY can pay 200m in this post-Covid landscape. 

So let's say the Haaland deal is struck at 100m. He's 20 years old. 100m for the best young player in the world. Kane will be 28 at the start of next season. And as you say, he's a bit of a mini-crock.

So how much will he be worth in the new transfer market? About 60m?

 

 

[Spockydog]

4 minutes ago, The Sunland Lord said:

Their fans would have Parker just a few weeks ago, and guy is getting relegated. Mourinho really drove them into despair.

They'll struggle to be top 4 for at least few years to come, I predict. Mourinho's appointment was a costly mistake, and they were on a downward trajectory with Pochettino early last season to begin with. Even their 2018/2019 campaign wasn't great, but was overshadowed by the jammiest drive to a CL final ever.

I think Mourinho's appointment was Daniel Levy's final throw of the dice in his efforts to retain the services of Harry Kane. 

Lol. Lol. Lol. Lol. Lol. 

[Soylent Brown]

Haaland won't be going anywhere for 100m, even next year. Dormund might get 100m, but his agent and dad will be getting at least half that again, and by all accounts he wants 30m net a year wages.

Kane is older and does get the odd injury, but he's a better player all round and he isn't a greedy dickhead.

[Spockydog]

16 minutes ago, Soylent Brown said:

Haaland won't be going anywhere for 100m, even next year. Dormund might get 100m, but his agent and dad will be getting at least half that again, and by all accounts he wants 30m net a year wages.

 

If he waits a year, he can go for 70m euros, as per a release clause in his contract. Allegedly.

ETA: Actually, just checked and it's only 68m euros. 

And look, this isn't my idea. Take it up with Michael Cox and some football economist whose name I can't remember. It was on a podcast I heard the other week. Fascinating stuff, I'll try to find the link.

[baxus]

2 hours ago, Spockydog said:

and p.s. You're having a fucking laugh. 

You're the one who started it with the whole "taxes buy nice things" thing, didn't you?  

[Soylent Brown]

2 hours ago, Spockydog said:

If he waits a year, he can go for 70m euros, as per a release clause in his contract. Allegedly.

ETA: Actually, just checked and it's only 68m euros. 

And look, this isn't my idea. Take it up with Michael Cox and some football economist whose name I can't remember. It was on a podcast I heard the other week. Fascinating stuff, I'll try to find the link.

The release clause figure has been claimed, and denied, to be any number of figures, so it's not clear exactly what it is.

Whatever it is though, there will still be huge additional costs because of the greed of Haaland and those he surrounds himself with.

[Mr. Chatywin et al.]

10 hours ago, baxus said:

Because stakes are higher in matches between the big clubs. I don't know how many times I have to point out that stakes make things fun. That's why American teams raise their level during play-offs (and right before) and games are more entertaining. That's why knockout stages in CL are more fun.

You deal realize we agree, and that I've made the same point in prior posts? And correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't part of the point of the ESL to create a less watered down version of the CL? I think most people would be here for that absent the closed process for the big clubs.

Quote

Revenue models are so "bad" that a club like Stoke was able to buy players from Bayern Munich and AC Milan. Revenue models are just fine, it's just that there is no GUARANTEED revenue, and there shouldn't be. There's no revenue sharing like in, for example, NHL and there shouldn't be. You get better, you get paid more. It's a simple equation.

I should have been more clear since there are five leagues involved The PL is in good shape at the top, but as their model stands right now their ability to increase revenues is kind of limited. The ESL was going to be a cash explosion, but unfortunately it would have just meant the rich got richer. LL and Serie A are not in as good of a place. The report I was checking out didn't discuss SA as much, but LL is in a bit of trouble. 

The lack of guaranteed money is what is hurting the lower clubs. I know everyone loves the rags to riches narrative, but it's becoming increasingly outdated as it becomes an increasingly risky venture to buy in at the lower levels unless you're some crazy rich person who is willing to set a ton of money on fire to slowly crawl up the ranks.

Quote

They could've pulled it off if they made this league quite different and used it as a replacement for CL, with clubs from top leagues qualifying through their domestic competitions. There's no doubt about that. And no one (or next to no one) would have a problem with that.

It seems like their big mistake was not trying to work with FIFA and UEFA. That could have smooth over a lot. But they didn't and they demanded too much too soon and it blew up in their faces. 

Quote

A quick question - those who call BS on tradition, are they by any chance American?

They're from American media sources, but they aren't all Americans and the same networks have Americans who talk up the tradition. But the general narrative of those who down play it is that it's a romanization of the past that's not entirely accurate of today's game. Doesn't mean it doesn't happen, but it's less common.

Now here's something I may be ignorant of. Would it be correct to say the support among the smaller clubs on each level stronger than the big clubs? It's not really something I've considered until this all kicked off.

Quote

It's unfair to call pick the youngest of the major American sports? Ok, shall we go with another? Let's take NHL. In 1942 there were 6 teams, and now there are 31. 25 teams popped out of thin air, many of whom were moved from traditional hockey environments like Canada to places like Florida where arenas were usually half-full at best (I don't know if things changed with Tampa's success in recent years, but that was the case while I was following NHL a bit). Baseball? All I can say is - fuck any sport in which you can play two full matches in a single day without a drop in quality. NFL I really don't know much about, so I would not get into that.

Well I disagree on your baseball take, but that's a conversation that could get really sidetracked. Stick with American football. The game is 150 years old or so, being an evolution of rugby. It started at the university level and slowly over time evolved into the NFL. The NFL and NCCA football are the two biggest sports in this country and are soaked in tradition. My point was it's wrong to simply dismiss that we don't have the same kind of old sporting traditions here.

I think a more accurate statement would be that the proportions of the fan bases of European football that are die hard supporters is larger than that of American sports, and that the level of die hard support is stronger. I think that probably reflects the situation more accurately. 

Quote

I don't know how impossible it is to move teams in the US these days, but weren't Rams moved to LA recently? And there is always talk about moving Raiders from Oakland, I don't know what happened there. Moving teams in Europe is blasphemous.

It's pretty easy to move sports teams here, and it's funny you mentioned the Rams. Their owner is Stan Kroenke, the same fuck who made a play at the ESL, and doubt for a second he gives two shits about any European traditions where there are dollar signs in his eyes.

The Raiders have already relocated to Las Vegas, and my Wolves will probably get moved to there as well if that greedy fuck A-Rod has his way.

Quote

Don't get me wrong, I love the NBA and NHL system. Their play-offs are probably the best way of ensuring that the best team goes through. I love the system where you help weaker teams improve so that there is more competition next seasons, I love the salary cap and the fact it's difficult to have dynasties anymore. There's a lot of good parts in that system. It works great! For North America, where sports culture has been formed in a different way than in Europe.

I'm just of the opinion these things don't have to stuck in one place. Leagues of all kinds of different sports from across the world should look to copy other aspects of leagues they think could improve their overall product, and I don't think that should be rejected simply because of tradition. Weren't people making a similar fuss thirty years ago when the PL came along? Look where it is now. Change isn't a bad thing.