norbac
Legend
I think 3rd, but there is still time in the transfer window. This will be a one and done for Liverpool in the Champions League, don't see them making top 4 next year.
The TT Football Club
- Thread starter Ross K
- Start date
I think 3rd, but there is still time in the transfer window. This will be a one and done for Liverpool in the Champions League, don't see them making top 4 next year.
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
Giroud is a really good back up striker imo, he'll do a great job and thrive in that role. He's not quite good enough to be the main man in a title winning side though. Balotelli is a wild card
he could be incredible, he could fail miserably and bring all kinds on unwanted drama, who knows!Yeah Khedira is slightly over priced, considering his contract situation. He's a great player though, my only concern is that he wants £200,000+ a week. He's not on that level.
kiki
Banned
easy to explain.
It is a team artificially backed up by banks, who still make money with the President´s company and the government, who has blinded their eyes in front of their debt.
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
Pretty much! Kroos and Rodriguez will probably set them back close to £100 Million, they also seem to want Falcao, so could well be £150 Million.
Not bad going
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Yeah, expect Rogers to blame the owners.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Manchester United are not just going to be playing Champions League football next year, they will be contenders for the trophy. This is probably why top players will sign for them in this transfer window regardless of last year's finish.
Liverpool is going to be the polar opposite. Participants without hope to progress who will most likely not feature next year. Really going to struggle with this transfer policy. I won't be surprised if Brendan Rogers has a falling out with the owners.
Manchester City - going to be really interesting to see how they cope with the FFP restrictions imposed on them and what they do to balance the books for the 2015-16 season. People like Nasri and Yaya are on way too much money for what they contribute.
Chelsea will also have FFP problems if they don't do very well on the pitch. They basically avoided City's fate by winning the Champions League. This one-time financial injection is not a solution, however, and I can see Roman pulling all the stops to secure approval for a Stamford Bridge expansion. Without that, they'd be left behind the Manchester Clubs, and possibly, Arsenal in the not-so-distant future.
Tottenham. Do we have to say anything about them? They charge almost 2k pounds for season tickets. Complete shambles of a club, if you ask me. Ridiculous chairman (Levy) that can't let his managers do their work and seemingly insists to be the one that shapes the team. Yeah Roman bought Sheva, but he had the cash to splash. Tottenham Hotspur are not exactly in the same position. An exciting young coach this season, but he won't call the shots, will he?
Liverpool is going to be the polar opposite. Participants without hope to progress who will most likely not feature next year. Really going to struggle with this transfer policy. I won't be surprised if Brendan Rogers has a falling out with the owners.
Manchester City - going to be really interesting to see how they cope with the FFP restrictions imposed on them and what they do to balance the books for the 2015-16 season. People like Nasri and Yaya are on way too much money for what they contribute.
Chelsea will also have FFP problems if they don't do very well on the pitch. They basically avoided City's fate by winning the Champions League. This one-time financial injection is not a solution, however, and I can see Roman pulling all the stops to secure approval for a Stamford Bridge expansion. Without that, they'd be left behind the Manchester Clubs, and possibly, Arsenal in the not-so-distant future.
Tottenham. Do we have to say anything about them? They charge almost 2k pounds for season tickets. Complete shambles of a club, if you ask me. Ridiculous chairman (Levy) that can't let his managers do their work and seemingly insists to be the one that shapes the team. Yeah Roman bought Sheva, but he had the cash to splash. Tottenham Hotspur are not exactly in the same position. An exciting young coach this season, but he won't call the shots, will he?
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
For the last few seasons, players have been sold for pretty decent money (Mata, De Bruyne, Luiz etc..). The transfer spending has pretty much been even in terms of ins and out, so that's not really a problem. The wages could be, but there was a bit Samsung deal after the Champions League, the kit sponsor is in the top 5 richest deals (way behind Real Madrid and Man Utd, but still good compared to everyone else). The Gasprom sponsorship is worth big money.
Others may well do better, it seems likely, but Chelsea are doing enough to not be left behind.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Like I said, after winning the Champions League, Chelsea posted a profit of just over 1 m for the first time during Abramovich's reign. Wages and players bought this year will not improve Chelsea's prospects of handling the FFP rules. Especially with an investigation, which I think is still going on, concerning abuse of the player ownership by 3rd parties.
norbac
Legend
As it stands I've got Chelsea winning the league with City and Arsenal behind. United grab fourth and Everton fifth. Liverpool miss out at sixth.
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
Average? Between £40 and £50.
SempreSami
Hall of Fame
I saw Schalke for €31 last year B^)
kiki
Banned
and the seasonal? or just Champions league bonus?
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
Can only speak for the ones i'm aware of.
Chelsea is £595, Liverpool is £710 and Arsenal £995.
Different clubs do different things in terms of Champions League, FA Cup and away games.
kiki
Banned
Ok, I think those prices are average.of course, depending on what they include.How comes Chelsea is the cheapest? maybe they don´t need ticket money because of Abramovich?
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
Money means alot
with FFP you have to show your spending isn't totally reckless compared to the income. You can still operate at a loss, but if there's a big gap between the two figures, you've got problems. A rich owner doesn't mean alot these days, he can't dip into his own pockets and bail the club out anymore.Chelsea is the cheapest for three main reasons. The first reason is that Abramovich has always said that he won't raise the prices for fans as they're the heartbeat of the club. The second is that Arsenal have an amazing new stadium which needs paying for. The third is that Chelsea don't really have that many supporters compared to the other big teams. Chelsea is still a club supported in England by the fans who've been there since the bad times, Liverpool and Arsenal have been gaining fans over the last 50 years with all their success. Chelsea aren't really a popular team, most neutrals have a real dislike for the club, for various reasons (John Terry is a nasty man, Mourinho speaks the truth and that's bad, Chelsea was the name of a girl who rejected them in high school etc..
).BlackSilver
Semi-Pro
These values are for what? Tickets for national championship matches? If yes for what places?
Dunga is again Brazil's coach.
Dunga is again Brazil's coach.
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
Tickets to single games range from around £40-£50.
Season tickets are the ones where you get your own seat at every single home Premier League game.
Getting a season ticket at Chelsea for instance (£595) works out at £31 per game. Liverpool £37 per game, Arsenal £52.
BlackSilver
Semi-Pro
So, no price differentiation for different places?
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
Ahh, you mean do better seats cost more? Yeah, the ones closer to the pitch generally cost more. Like if you were going to the theatre or something like that.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
United to win it by a landslide again. Arsenal or Liverpool to miss out.
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
You seem to of made your mind up about Liverpool, I'm still undecided. The players they've signed are all very similar and are just adding to the strength that was already there, Markovic, Lallana when they already have Sterling and Coutinho doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. The squad was lacking balance last year, even more so now. There's still time for them to address the defence, but at the moment I'm with you, they could struggle.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
That's just it, they are missing out on the opportunity to build on last season. It was all Suarez. Now they are going to buy a bunch of players - Tottenham Hotspur style - and will find these players lacking. I don't rate Brendan Rogers so highly. It will be very hard for them to qualify inside the top 4 again, unless they get lucky on the transfer market. I just don't see it happening. Only Arsenal's mediocrity can help them. And when I say mediocrity, I mean the caliber of players being signed by the club with the most expensive tickets in the country.
Going to be a thrilling season, once again.
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
The Spurs from last year comparison could be a good one, having so much money to spend is often seen as a good thing, but it's actually tough to make it work at times.
The season is set up nicely yeah. Chelsea, Man Utd and Arsenal are better. Man City haven't done anything, and then there's Liverpool, oh and Spurs with their new manager. Last season was tight and interesting from start to finish, next year looks like it could be turned up a notch again.
For those of you who did the fantasy football on the official Premier League site, it's open again for this season. Hopefully we'll get enough for a TT sub league again
kiki
Banned
Money means alot
Chelsea is the cheapest for three main reasons. The first reason is that Abramovich has always said that he won't raise the prices for fans as they're the heartbeat of the club. The second is that Arsenal have an amazing new stadium which needs paying for. The third is that Chelsea don't really have that many supporters compared to the other big teams. Chelsea is still a club supported in England by the fans who've been there since the bad times, Liverpool and Arsenal have been gaining fans over the last 50 years with all their success. Chelsea aren't really a popular team, most neutrals have a real dislike for the club, for various reasons (John Terry is a nasty man, Mourinho speaks the truth and that's bad, Chelsea was the name of a girl who rejected them in high school etc..
NOt being british but always keen on your sporting and social mixed culture, which I find very interesting, may I ask if I am correct in this overlook?
It used to be common groove before, and I don´t know if STILL now and that is why I am asking, that Spurs and Arsenal, the two Northern London big clubs were basically supported by middle, middle to upper class people even if those neighbourhoods were not the most expensive in town...while Chelsea, which is a luxury district ( or it was) has a broad lower class fan base
2/ Is still true that Liverpool and Utd are still more proletarian ( in the modern sense, of course) in relation to Everton and City which were traditionally the clubs supported by the local born middle class people of Liverpool and Manchester?
and...the biggest one... is STILL, in 2014, true that Celtic are the Catholic team and Rangers are the Protestant/Anglican team, I mean, hasn´t there been a progressive crossover of both communities in Glasgow that tends to reduce that assertion?
Thanks beforehanded for your comments
Last edited:
kiki
Banned
One more question for you british people...as a kid and teen I was always fascinated by your tribal culture which mixed up fun and leisure with real social groove.In both music and football...what is next after the glorious old days of Mods vs Rockers ( 60´s) and Skin vs Punks ( early 80´s)??
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
Liverpool and Man Utd do have alot of fans from all over the Country, just like Juventus in Italy who often have more demand for tickets to away games than they do home ones
There's a saying that Man Utd fans are like rats as you're never more than a few feet away from one! Not the nicest way of putting it, but it gives you the kind of idea. Whenever i've been going to Liverpool or Man Utd away, travelling up north on the motorway you probably see more cars with Man Utd or Liverpool scarves in the back window than you do Chelsea fans travelling up to the game.Everton and Man City are generally the teams that the people local to the area support, but it depends on which part of the city people are from really.
As for the London teams, Chelsea fans are mostly working class. The people who sell the fanzine at games are a group of market traders, everyone at the games know them from the local area as much as they do from the games themselves. The richer people from the area seem to support Fulham. As for Arsenal and Spurs, hard to say really as it's best to avoid those sorts
Spurs have a big Jewish fan base, which generally would suggest they have a fairly wealthy fan base.
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
The two Glasgow teams are based on religion yeah, not so much on the strong beliefs people have today, but families have been one side or the other for generations, so you're born into a team really.
Villa and West Brom, my partner is a West Brom fan unfortunately!
Villa fans mostly come from Sutton Coldfield, which is a large, and traditionally quite nice area. They also have a larger fan base as they're a more of an established side who have had success. West Brom fans are usually just outside Birmingham, it's actually classed as Staffordshire. Places like Oldbury, Tipton, Smethwick, Walsall and Wednesbury (where the other half is from orignially).
SempreSami
Hall of Fame
We had loutish *****s of Britpop.
On ticketing, I can only really comment on Arsenal.
Fixtures split into three categories:
A (home matches vs top opposition - United, City, Chelsea, Liverpool, Tottenham as NL derby);
B (home matches vs established PL teams and other London derbies)
C (home matches vs newly promoted teams, or 'unfashionable' recently promoted teams)
Category C games are quite affordable when compared to most other PL clubs and other entertainment events in London. For example, I watched us play Southampton last season for £29. The cheapest seats in the stadium for an adult would have been around £25, and the most expensive regular seats (non-Club level) around £50.
Category B games are more expensive, with the cheapest seats being around £35, and the costliest being around £75. Within this category last season you could have watched any of the Champions' League group games, fantastic league matches like the one versus Everton, or FA Cup games (excluding the 3rd round North London derby which was Cat A).
Category A is the tier where it gets really expensive, and which leads to Arsenal being labelled as the club with crazy ticket prices. To watch these games, the cheapest seat in the stadium becomes £63, and a regular seat on the half-way line £125.
League Cup matches are £10 for lower tier tickets, and £20 for the upper tier. Last season I watched our terrible match versus Chelsea for £10, which you can't really complain about! These games are not included within season tickets, so it's quite easy to get access to areas that usually wouldn't be accessible (i.e the loud blocks in the corners by the pitch in the North Bank).
As for season tickets, I believe the cheapest at Arsenal is around £1000 (for 19 home league games + 7 cup credits which usually comprise all three CL group games, and the first four FA Cup rounds). I've had an offer the last three seasons, but prefer to just buy tickets to the games I want to go to seeing as the mates I go with aren't near the top of the waiting list, and I can't make it to all the games anyway; the offer this summer was for season tickets ranging from £1195 - £2039.
With regard to how ticket prices align with position in the stadium, the bottom tier (by the pitch) comprises the cheapest tickets in the stadium; the upper tier is more expensive, with seats behind the goals cheaper, and seats on the sides of the pitch more expensive.
On background of the fans, there's still the 'traditional,' working class Arsenal fan from North London, but compared to the Highbury days you see far more tourists and a wider range of Londoners. At the start of the PL, the average price of a ticket to watch the Arsenal was £10, which was about 8.5% of the average UK weekly wage; the average ticket price is now nearly £46 (335% increase, while average wages only increased 106%), which constitutes 18% of the average weekly wage. So clearly, a lot of the 'traditional' fans are being priced out of the stadium, and that's the reason for increasing protests at the board in recent years.
Overall, I think the club does a reasonable job in making seats accessible in such an expensive city. If you can't afford £70+ for Category A games, then you can still see the team play a few times a year for under £30 a match. But yeah - football definitely sold its soul.
Fixtures split into three categories:
A (home matches vs top opposition - United, City, Chelsea, Liverpool, Tottenham as NL derby);
B (home matches vs established PL teams and other London derbies)
C (home matches vs newly promoted teams, or 'unfashionable' recently promoted teams)
Category C games are quite affordable when compared to most other PL clubs and other entertainment events in London. For example, I watched us play Southampton last season for £29. The cheapest seats in the stadium for an adult would have been around £25, and the most expensive regular seats (non-Club level) around £50.
Category B games are more expensive, with the cheapest seats being around £35, and the costliest being around £75. Within this category last season you could have watched any of the Champions' League group games, fantastic league matches like the one versus Everton, or FA Cup games (excluding the 3rd round North London derby which was Cat A).
Category A is the tier where it gets really expensive, and which leads to Arsenal being labelled as the club with crazy ticket prices. To watch these games, the cheapest seat in the stadium becomes £63, and a regular seat on the half-way line £125.
League Cup matches are £10 for lower tier tickets, and £20 for the upper tier. Last season I watched our terrible match versus Chelsea for £10, which you can't really complain about! These games are not included within season tickets, so it's quite easy to get access to areas that usually wouldn't be accessible (i.e the loud blocks in the corners by the pitch in the North Bank).
As for season tickets, I believe the cheapest at Arsenal is around £1000 (for 19 home league games + 7 cup credits which usually comprise all three CL group games, and the first four FA Cup rounds). I've had an offer the last three seasons, but prefer to just buy tickets to the games I want to go to seeing as the mates I go with aren't near the top of the waiting list, and I can't make it to all the games anyway; the offer this summer was for season tickets ranging from £1195 - £2039.
With regard to how ticket prices align with position in the stadium, the bottom tier (by the pitch) comprises the cheapest tickets in the stadium; the upper tier is more expensive, with seats behind the goals cheaper, and seats on the sides of the pitch more expensive.
On background of the fans, there's still the 'traditional,' working class Arsenal fan from North London, but compared to the Highbury days you see far more tourists and a wider range of Londoners. At the start of the PL, the average price of a ticket to watch the Arsenal was £10, which was about 8.5% of the average UK weekly wage; the average ticket price is now nearly £46 (335% increase, while average wages only increased 106%), which constitutes 18% of the average weekly wage. So clearly, a lot of the 'traditional' fans are being priced out of the stadium, and that's the reason for increasing protests at the board in recent years.
Overall, I think the club does a reasonable job in making seats accessible in such an expensive city. If you can't afford £70+ for Category A games, then you can still see the team play a few times a year for under £30 a match. But yeah - football definitely sold its soul.
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
Nice information, always interesting to see how other teams go about it.
When i've been to away games and talked to the away fans it seems common for the lower teams to hike the prices for the away fans, but keep the home fans tickets at the regular price.
They were shocked to hear we had to pay £55 and get stuck up in the stands, whilst the home fans payed their usual £35.
You can't really blame these sides, they never know how long they'll be in the Premier League so they're making money whilst they can.
The other thing that annoys me about away games? When they get the sponsors to name the man of the match and it's always a home player I remember beating Wigan 5-0 away and Titus Bramble was the one they gave it too. Funny!
When i've been to away games and talked to the away fans it seems common for the lower teams to hike the prices for the away fans, but keep the home fans tickets at the regular price.
They were shocked to hear we had to pay £55 and get stuck up in the stands, whilst the home fans payed their usual £35.
You can't really blame these sides, they never know how long they'll be in the Premier League so they're making money whilst they can.
The other thing that annoys me about away games? When they get the sponsors to name the man of the match and it's always a home player
I remember beating Wigan 5-0 away and Titus Bramble was the one they gave it too. Funny!
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Nice information, always interesting to see how other teams go about it.
When i've been to away games and talked to the away fans it seems common for the lower teams to hike the prices for the away fans, but keep the home fans tickets at the regular price.
They were shocked to hear we had to pay £55 and get stuck up in the stands, whilst the home fans payed their usual £35.
You can't really blame these sides, they never know how long they'll be in the Premier League so they're making money whilst they can.
The other thing that annoys me about away games? When they get the sponsors to name the man of the match and it's always a home player
Maybe he made the difference between 0-5 and 0-11
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Why don't you comment then?
The Remy transfer is further proof of my words that LFC are doing a Tottenham.
James went to RM for top money, despite his club not wanting to sell. Nothing new there. Will this put financial pressure on Real? Not really. If I remember correctly, Real recouped their expenses on the Ronaldo/Kaka transfers within two years from shirt sales alone. James has the perfect profile to appeal to their fan base.
Pellegrini is in a little bit of a bother because Negredo is injured and they need to retain "own" players to comply with the FFP restrictions placed on them this season. They will have to sell if they want to buy and I won't be surprised if Pellegrini is sent packing if they don't impress in the Champions League group stage.
Lukhas
Legend
Because it seemed not to be the matter at hand for several pages maybe? I maybe eventually bite the bullet, but you hardly can argue most people didn't seem care so far, wouldn't you?
Don't think James went for the money; there's plenty money at Monaco. The fame and prestige of the club alone were IMO more important. And I believe Monaco would've sold regardless. He's from Portugal (figuratively speaking), a country that has a good history of selling their players for big bucks. He did a alright L1 season and a good WC. You don't know if he'll be the next Forlan in this regard. Given the steep loss in money Rybololev faced due to his divorce that may have forced him to rethink his strategy, 80+M€ minus bonuses (and maybe 90M€+ given that Real understates the transfer value a lot) is good money for a promising player you don't know if he will confirm or not.
Doing a Tottenham? tottenham doesn't have a defence to begin with, that's a steep comparison. Well I believe they didn't take Rémy to actually replace Suarez in any way. My guess being that Sturridge will have this role. Me thinks that Rémy despite favouring the axis will be once more exiled to the wing and used for sprinting. I actually doubt LFC has the bucks, Suarez's transfer or not, to attract a big star either. So, go a tier lower and fill for PL.
Pellegrini? Mangala. 40€M is overkill though, but that's Protugal for you.
SempreSami
Hall of Fame
Pfft who cares, Barcelona have signed PES6 legend Jeremy Mathieu.
Lukhas
Legend
We shall see. Seems they want to make a "Abidal" of him as he was formed as a LB but will most likely play CB. Still, 20M is a bit expensive considering he's 30. Wish him the best of luck.
Ha, PES6... Playing the new ones is torture. :| EDIT: All hail Football Manager!
Last edited:
What does the future hold for the French clubs that the rest of Europe got used to seeing over the past 15 years in the CL now that PSG and Monaco have completely changed the playing field?
Lyon and Marseille, as well as Bordeaux, have been dominant forces in Ligue 1 in the recent past, but have now been left behind. They all have impressive new, or completely refurbished, stadiums opening over the next year in preparation for Euro 2016 in France. Will these new stadiums help them compete again, or does the new money in Paris and Monaco mean they can only pray for a miracle season (like a Montpellier)?
Lyon and Marseille, as well as Bordeaux, have been dominant forces in Ligue 1 in the recent past, but have now been left behind. They all have impressive new, or completely refurbished, stadiums opening over the next year in preparation for Euro 2016 in France. Will these new stadiums help them compete again, or does the new money in Paris and Monaco mean they can only pray for a miracle season (like a Montpellier)?
Lukhas
Legend
Lyon is doing it, but not before a few years. Their formation centre keeps them afloat; I think they have the most players in big championships coming out of their centre just behind Barcelona. So they may stay competitive by virtue of this. We shall see when the stadium is finished and will belong to them at 100%; common place in several other championships but a rarity in France.
Marseille is trying it; they've eventually put Anigo on the bus (more or less fictive job) and throwing all their hopes into Bielsa. Margarita Louis-Dreyfus has made clear however that her financial input will be limited AND that the club will need to address their financial situation quickly. The fortune left by Robert belongs to her children and while she ain't poor, she hasn't that much personal fortune to invest into football despite assuring the club's funds in case it was needed. As a result, the club recorded its first beneficial yearly result in years and probably a decade or more. The number is miserable, but while the club is still run down by "supporters" trying to make as much money out of it as possible, the funds are more healthy so far. However they've threatened not to play in Velodrome as the rent asked by the city of Marseille is incredibly high and out of any considerate proportions.
EDIT: BTW, if any Europe playing club is interested, Valbuena sells for... 5 to 7M€. :lol:
Bordeaux is dead. After Blanc left, the previous L1 champions players had their pay raised, but couldn't produce the game needed to stay on top. Which made the funds of the club suffer since you can't even sell them with the salary they ask compared to their actual performances. The previous coach (Francis Gillot) gave up despite winning French Cup in 2013 -understandably so IMO. The club belongs to the TV Group M6, and they don't put a single coin into it. All the decent players are sold (last example is Obraniak), nothing but goats with a (nice) Puma jersey eating the grass there. I can't see what (besides being sold to rich investors) would save the club. The owners have absolutely no ambition whatsoever. I am curious to see what Willy Sagnol (ex-coach of the "Espoirs") will bring to the table and if he will be able to change anything.
That aside, French football has little ambition. The club culture isn't as strong as in other countries, the league in itself is fairly balanced which can lead to some surprises from one year to another. The league standings in themselves aren't always uninteresting because of the very balanced championship, but the lack of stability -or rather "untouchable clubs" like you have in Spain (maybe not up to this point but you get the idea) kind of hurt the league. Which also means that a team strong one year may not have the solidity to carry on to the following year as players may ask for extra pocket money or want to leave while they still shine. That's why you have so many players burying themselves in the likes of Newcastle, West Bromwich Albions, previously QPR and the likes. I still don't know why Lloris extended his contract at Tottenham...
The teams do not always search glory of trophies or simply don't want to put up with the added matches sit would cause. Bar Lyon and the new-riches, little of them are trying to go far in European competitions. Most owners are satisfied with taking the extra money and concentrate on the league to qualify again and get out the same way -but with their pockets full. Still ditto for Marseille who tried last year but eventually felt short too often to gather even a single point.
Last edited:
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
United put 7 past LA Galaxy.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
I think if something interests you and you think others may find it interesting, it's normal to write about it. The fact that it hasn't been discussed could be down to any number of reasons.
Monaco wanted the money. They won't get an offer that good any time soon.
Obviously the parallel between the two clubs is in the sale of a highly valued footballer to use the proceeds to buy a lot of average players.
Not sure it's that simple. I think they paid it to deny another Premier League club. You figure out which
Lyon is doing it, but not before a few years. Their formation centre keeps them afloat; I think they have the most players in big championships coming out of their centre just behind Barcelona. So they may stay competitive by virtue of this. We shall see when the stadium is finished and will belong to them at 100%; common place in several other championships but a rarity in France.
Marseille is trying it; they've eventually put Anigo on the bus (more or less fictive job) and throwing all their hopes into Bielsa. Margarita Louis-Dreyfus has made clear however that her financial input will be limited AND that the club will need to address their financial situation quickly. The fortune left by Robert belongs to her children and while she ain't poor, she hasn't that much personal fortune to invest into football despite assuring the club's funds in case it was needed. As a result, the club recorded its first beneficial yearly result in years and probably a decade or more. The number is miserable, but while the club is still run down by "supporters" trying to make as much money out of it as possible, the funds are more healthy so far. However they've threatened not to play in Velodrome as the rent asked by the city of Marseille is incredibly high and out of any considerate proportions.
EDIT: BTW, if any Europe playing club is interested, Valbuena sells for... 5 to 7M€. :lol:
Bordeaux is dead. After Blanc left, the previous L1 champions players had their pay raised, but couldn't produce the game needed to stay on top. Which made the funds of the club suffer since you can't even sell them with the salary they ask compared to their actual performances. The previous coach (Francis Gillot) gave up despite winning French Cup in 2013 -understandably so IMO. The club belongs to the TV Group M6, and they don't put a single coin into it. All the decent players are sold (last example is Obraniak), nothing but goats with a (nice) Puma jersey eating the grass there. I can't see what (besides being sold to rich investors) would save the club. The owners have absolutely no ambition whatsoever. I am curious to see what Willy Sagnol (ex-coach of the "Espoirs") will bring to the table and if he will be able to change anything.
That aside, French football has little ambition. The club culture isn't as strong as in other countries, the league in itself is fairly balanced which can lead to some surprises from one year to another. The league standings in themselves aren't always uninteresting because of the very balanced championship, but the lack of stability -or rather "untouchable clubs" like you have in Spain (maybe not up to this point but you get the idea) kind of hurt the league. Which also means that a team strong one year may not have the solidity to carry on to the following year as players may ask for extra pocket money or want to leave while they still shine. That's why you have so many players burying themselves in the likes of Newcastle, West Bromwich Albions, previously QPR and the likes. I still don't know why Lloris extended his contract at Tottenham...
The teams do not always search glory of trophies or simply don't want to put up with the added matches sit would cause. Bar Lyon and the new-riches, little of them are trying to go far in European competitions. Most owners are satisfied with taking the extra money and concentrate on the league to qualify again and get out the same way -but with their pockets full. Still ditto for Marseille who tried last year but eventually felt short too often to gather even a single point.
Thanks for the summary.
It's interesting how French club football seems to lack ambition, despite producing so many fantastic players, especially when compared to what the Top 14 has managed to achieve in European club rugby. I always found it odd that one of the big economic powers of Europe, with a strong national team, great youth production system, and decent stadiums, can end up being an exporter of its best talent. As you say, maybe it's because French club culture has not been attractive enough to build the league into a global product over the past 20 years.
I totally agree about more players now being happy to 'bury themselves' at clubs where they will earn more money, but where they will not progress. In England the same thing has happened with a lot of talented young guys who were establishing themselves, then chose to move to bigger clubs where they would never play and their career progression would be killed (Jack Rodwell, Scott Sinclair etc). This summer many clubs would have wanted to sign Bacary Sagna (on a Bosman), but he chose one of the few clubs in the world where he won't be first choice, and so won't play much (Zabaleta is probably the best RB in the PL, and Sagna is perhaps 2nd best).
As for Lloris, I never understood why Wenger didn't go for him when he was available for EUR 10m, and at a time where we had great instability at the position.
Lukhas
Legend
As a further addition to that already lengthy and plenty edited post, I also must mention that the lack of ambition also has sources not only in the beliefs but also in the very existence of the DNCG. I already talked about them before, but let's say you don't know. Basically, they are the people who look at your funds and decide whether you're in or out. FFP? Not even close. FFP only cares about your balance; they don't look at your debts, they only care about if you waste more money than you win: that's why it has fair-play in its name. DNCG doesn't care where the money (legally of course) comes from, they only care about the health of the club. that's why you have the R.C. Lens, that earned its comeback in L1 that may stay in L2 regardless because the DNCG doesn't believe in their economics in any way. Not to mention the catastrophic communication and handling the case had by Lens' president who outright lied about receiving 10 more millions to validate the budget from his main
You also have the story of Luzenac, a very small village that earned on the pitch the right to play in L2 but may still not because DNCG.
It really sounds disgusting given that the players earned the promotion, but it's not really ill thinking: the DNCG doesn't want clubs not paying their employees or crashing down financially speaking because these clubs saw themselves bigger than they are. Le Mans was sent straight 4 divisions down when it happened after they couldn't come back to L1 due to their new stadium -and especially the abusive rent that came with it. Which means that even if you had a satisfying season, you have to be very careful about how you invest that money next season because "they" are watching you.
On the flip side, it also means that you're not going to see catastrophic situations like in few Spain clubs either. I do believe that if there was such an organization in Spain, the BBVA barely would have enough clubs to be launched by August. Barça and RMFC simply sucks all the money made through TV. On the contrary, the money income is extremely balanced between clubs in England.
And actually there was a point in the 90's where France was on the top if not near the top of the UEFA rankings. As you may have noticed, few clubs possess their stadiums either. The problem isn't reaching the top per say, but sustaining it and little to no clubs have/had what it takes and especially the luck to do so. Also, not only Marseille is going to be abused by excessive rents, they also were refused the right to even attempt to buy the stadium to begin with... :lol:
Thanks for basically saying what I've said.
I highly doubt it's that simple as "wanting the money". Rybolovlev may not be as rich as before, he's still sitting on several billions. Monaco doesn't need money. The offer is indeed good, but the money isn't the real reason IMO.
I believe Liverpool doesn't have the attractiveness nor the funds yet to buy the player they really want. It's that simple. However I do believe the team is more balanced than Tottenham. Well Remy isn't awful either. At least, not as awful as the Spurs' defence line...
If they did, that's uselessly poisoning the well for little reasons whatsover. Even if footballers tend to be stupid, you wouldn't sign in any club for 40M€ just for the paycheck and Premier League logo. It's nothing but Porto's buyout clause after all, so they complied but did not put that much money on the top either. That said, and even if it's overpaid, the number of young talented defenders isn't exactly very, very high either. I do believe Mangala happens to be in this category. We'll see if he signs to begin with.Not sure it's that simple. I think they paid it to deny another Premier League club. You figure out which
Last edited:
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
Watching that wasn't a good start to my birthday
The countdown to the season is kicking into gear now, there are some interesting games coming up over the next week!
PED
Legend
Watching that wasn't a good start to my birthday
The countdown to the season is kicking into gear now, there are some interesting games coming up over the next week!
Time to get the thread pumped back up.
What type of impact do you think LvG will have this year on Utd? Hard to tell against Galaxy
Feña14
G.O.A.T.
Time to get the thread pumped back up.
What type of impact do you think LvG will have this year on Utd? Hard to tell against Galaxy
The formation makes sense imo, Holland were pretty weak at centre back, but it worked for them. Man Utd are weak in that area with Jones, Smalling and Evans, so it looks good on that front.
What's interesting for me is if it'll get figured out over the course of a season, it's hard to pick it apart in knockout football like the World Cup, but easier over 38 games.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
I am sure they will revert to 451. United doesn't have the players for 3 at the back. Smalling is a liability, Evans to a lesser extent, as well. Jones is an enigma for me. That away leg Real match was probably the most impressive showing from him in a Man Utd shirt. I want him to go on a streak of solid matches. Right now he looks like he is getting injured in every match.
Russeljones
Talk Tennis Guru
Real Madrid sell 345,000 James Rodriguez replica shirts in 48 hours
Real Madrid have so far sold approximately £20million worth of 'James' replica shirts since the Colombian forward was unveiled at the Bernabeu
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...mes-Rodriguez-replica-shirts-in-48-hours.html
Real Madrid have so far sold approximately £20million worth of 'James' replica shirts since the Colombian forward was unveiled at the Bernabeu
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...mes-Rodriguez-replica-shirts-in-48-hours.html
