Are PSG a failed project? | No.

They were failed, until they killed the galactico 2 project and the owners started to pull the plug.

They're actually a team now. If they'd kept mbappe, doubt they'd do CL this year.

I don't believe large portions of their revenue are real... Ligue 1 barely has a TV deal. A lot of it'll be circular.
 
That debt is brought by the gazers, leveraged to buy out the shareholders in a hostile takeover.

A part of it. An other part is simply revolving credits that finance day to day business and transfer debts.
 
since 2015 Man Utd have spent more than PSG on transfers, both gross & net.
And what about wages and signing on fees for players like Messi Mbappe Ramos and Neymar ?

I’d like to know the financial outlay for that. Wasn’t Mbappes psg salary 1 mill a week ?
 
One of those rare situations where losing your best player actually made them a better/stronger team. Well, losing Mbappe and making quality additions elsewhere, of course.
 
The thing people fail to grasp is that football would get disgustingly stale if only traditional clubs with "earned" money were capable of competing. That would completely kill it.

With their incomes, clubs like Real, Bayern, Barcelona, United etc would absolutely dominate forever without having any capable rivals on continental level.

If anybody is concerned about wellbeing of football, than spending caps should be involved, but not based on income. Because that would cement things as they are at the moment those changes are introduced.

Has there been any story recently of a smaller club building up to become a powerhouse, through good, clever work exclusively? Absolutely not.

Leicester won Premier League in 2016, but they are back to being Leicester of older times.

Sevilla were European powerhouse for almost 20 years, in second grade European competition yes, but they never challenged Barcelona and Real Madrid. A few wrong moves and they sunk to mediocrity.

Atalanta have had some nice success, maybe they are the best example of a side growing from their usual level to the next one, but they too have been absolutely limited by their financial constraints, and one wrong appointment this summer after Gasperini leaves, and they are back to square one.

It was never in history of football more difficult than now to reach the top, and clubs like PSG are more of a symptom than cause of problems.

To me, this is all just is sour grapes, because big, traditional clubs, who ravaged Ajax and mid-leagues close to top in 90s, after the introduction of Bosman, did not cry back then about how football is getting eaten alive. And it was getting eaten alive for a big chunk of European clubs and leagues, making sure they will never be competitive again.

So solution is not to "kill" even more competition by cutting out PSG, City and similar clubs, solution is to cut all the heavy spenders out at the same time. So naturally, when bigger number of clubs can spend the same, or when their spending is at least approximately closer to each other than it is now, then the competition grows.

Otherwise, every league will eventually turn into two horse race at maximum. That is a natural progression, with or without state-funded clubs.

Trainwreck of a post, imo, completely neglecting the overall negative consequences. Ligue1 is a disaster of a league, PSG has won 11 out of the 15 last league titles. TV deal is a complete shitshow. Sure, Spain is less than ideal with Barcelona and Real Madrid but that's a direct result of the way their TV deals are, where nothing is fair.

In England, Manchester City has set a new record of 4 league titles in a row. They’ve won 6 out of the last 10 league titles. They’ve won 24 major titles since the Abu Dhabi takeover. Chelsea with 21 major titles during the ownership of Abramovic. 8 out of the last 10 league titles have been won by clubs with funding miles beyond their own capability (Manchester City, Chelsea and Leicester). Since 2003, we're talking 41 major trophies between Chelsea and Manchester City. Since being purchased by the Saudi’s and becoming a state funded club, Newcastle have almost instantly challenged for top 4. The Premier League is fecked and It should be rather obvious that for "traditional clubs with earned money" it's completely impossible to challenge over time with clubs that aren't operated based on their actual revenue. Normally operated clubs experience cycles where the competition is very much an open one. If the competition that existed in the late 90's and early 00's was problematic on the basis of traditional clubs, the situation now is 10x worse. Give it a few years and it's likely that 3 out of 4 clubs that consistently finish in the top 4 will consist of clubs that are state backed.
 
How do you explain Bayern then, absolutely dominating Bundesliga on a scale absolutely incomparable to anything seen before in the very same era PSG and Manchester City became important?

Bayern was always richer than rivals, but never this richer. Bundesliga is the most boring league in Europe, and it hasn't got its own PSG.

Financial behemoths are the problem, whether they got there "organically" or "artificially" is far less important.
 
How do you explain Bayern then, absolutely dominating Bundesliga on a scale absolutely incomparable to anything seen before in the very same era PSG and Manchester City became important?

Bayern was always richer than rivals, but never this richer. Bundesliga is the most boring league in Europe, and it hasn't got its own PSG.

Financial behemoths are the problem, whether they got there "organically" or "artificially" is far less important.
Bayern isnt in the same league as PSG or Manchester City. Hopes this helps
 
Most impressive CL win since well Barca in 2015 imo.

Clean sheets at Anfield and Emirates in knock out ties.
The beatings they gave out to Brest, Stuttgart and obviously the final which was the most complete performance I’ve ever seen in a final.

I’d rank them second to Barca 2009-2011 in terms of level of football/entertainment value.

I think their owner for years wanted them to be Barca 2.0 and they have basically done that.

Only took 14 years and a bazillion euros but got there in the end….

I don't know why people tend to forget that 5 years ago Bayern won a UCL with 11 wins in 11 games, scoring 4 goals per game on average and thrashing Chelsea (7-1 on aggregate) and Messi's Barcelona (8-2 on a single match) in the process. While also playing a very entertaining style of football. That's pretty impressive to me.
 
Bayern isnt in the same league as PSG or Manchester City. Hopes this helps
What difference does it make to Bundesliga? It is dominated by one club which grew into position it currently occupies naturally, in the period in which club revenues exploded (first two decades of 21st century). If Bayern isn't curbed in some way, it will win Bundesliga 18 out of 20 times, and it was never like that before.

The point being, they are not less damaging to competitiveness of football than City or PSG, in their particular country.
 
Bayern isnt in the same league as PSG or Manchester City. Hopes this helps
That is irrelevant.. Having a team way richer than its competitors is problematic. If you consider it to be detrimental when City and PSG do it, then it can’t be alright with Bayern doing it…
 
Man Utd have wasted their own money, not the wealth of a nation state.
Much of Man Utd signings over the last 1-3 seasons have come from credit facility or instalment plans. So we’re moving away from the “well it’s our money” argument. We are now using the credit card which is maxed out out and currently using Klarna.
 
Much of Man Utd signings over the last 1-3 seasons have come from credit facility or instalment plans. So we’re moving away from the “well it’s our money” argument. We are now using the credit card which is maxed out out and currently using Klarna.
But it's a symptom of parasitic owners who have drained the club and ran it poorly.
The money that was made by being successful was never earned under their tenure, they just used debt to buy the club and then ran it so badly the money the club did make was squandered.
 
One of those rare situations where losing your best player actually made them a better/stronger team. Well, losing Mbappe and making quality additions elsewhere, of course.

Teams selling their outstanding players and rebuilding to raise the floor as a team isn’t even that rare. Liverpool did it with Coutinho. You could argue the Arteta did similar at Arsenal. Napoli just did it (and won the league) etc
 
Bayern isnt in the same league as PSG or Manchester City. Hopes this helps
Depends on what you mean. They have dominated German football more than PSG dominated French football and certainly more than City in English football. But I guess such dominance is OK since it's organic, but it's just as damaging to the league if that is what you are concerned about.
 
And what about wages and signing on fees for players like Messi Mbappe Ramos and Neymar ?

I’d like to know the financial outlay for that. Wasn’t Mbappes psg salary 1 mill a week ?

There’s always a “but what about” I suppose the most important but and beautiful lesson is that they won until CL and hearts of formal purist with a team without Mbappe, Neymar , etc.
 
It's not a failed project as obviously they eventually won the champions league.
However, they have ruined the French league on the way and are cheating regarding fair play etc. Coincidence only that Qatari royal family and business men paying over the market prices for sponsors deals and VIP boxes. Not to mentioned that they are whitewashing a terror supporting country with no civil rights, slavery and more
 
It's not a failed project as obviously they eventually won the champions league.
However, they have ruined the French league on the way and are cheating regarding fair play etc. Coincidence only that Qatari royal family and business men paying over the market prices for sponsors deals and VIP boxes. Not to mentioned that they are whitewashing a terror supporting country with no civil rights, slavery and more

PSG ruined nothing when it comes to the French league.
 
Teams selling their outstanding players and rebuilding to raise the floor as a team isn’t even that rare. Liverpool did it with Coutinho. You could argue the Arteta did similar at Arsenal. Napoli just did it (and won the league) etc
Yeah, I'm sure I remember reading a few years ago that teams improved more often than not after selling their best player. It was something about the big player taking on too much responsbility and his team-mates acting too submissively rather than making the objectively best choice.
 
I don't know why people tend to forget that 5 years ago Bayern won a UCL with 11 wins in 11 games, scoring 4 goals per game on average and thrashing Chelsea (7-1 on aggregate) and Messi's Barcelona (8-2 on a single match) in the process. While also playing a very entertaining style of football. That's pretty impressive to me.
I didn’t forget at all tbh. But it was covid season which meant there were no two legs beyond quarters and that Chelsea team were the Lampard Chelsea team.

I just think Psgs wins away at Anfield and emirates with clean sheets was just so impressive and then the final performance yesterday.
I also think individually this PSG team excites more. As good as that Bayern were, players like Thiago, Goretzka, Muller, Coman etc don’t really get you off your seat.
There’s always a “but what about” I suppose the most important but and beautiful lesson is that they won until CL and hearts of formal purist with a team without Mbappe, Neymar , etc.
True. But it was still a tunnel they had to get through and spent a fecking shit load to get through. Spending Man Utd could never dream of pulling off.
 
Teams selling their outstanding players and rebuilding to raise the floor as a team isn’t even that rare. Liverpool did it with Coutinho. You could argue the Arteta did similar at Arsenal. Napoli just did it (and won the league) etc.
I'd argue Arteta didn't, but that would just be semantics/opinions but i agree with the overall sentiment - it's been done before. Noting what those teams had in common though, was they all had exceptional managers whilst doing so (Conte, Klopp, now Enrique).

Napoli's a bit of a weird one. I can't claim to watch a lot of Serie A, but i don't think they're a better side then they one who had Kvicha and Osimhen in it, but they were consistent, and arguably the competition in Serie A was only really Inter (after Atalanta dropped off), who also took their eye off the ball a bit due to the UCL. But like I said, no real argument from my side - they still won the league.
 
I don't know why people tend to forget that 5 years ago Bayern won a UCL with 11 wins in 11 games, scoring 4 goals per game on average and thrashing Chelsea (7-1 on aggregate) and Messi's Barcelona (8-2 on a single match) in the process. While also playing a very entertaining style of football. That's pretty impressive to me.

One legged COVID ties all in the same stadium probably have something to do with it. It's like the Lebron's title with the Lakers. Yeah they won but it's respected a little less due to the circumstances
 
People who say PSG has ruined the french league must have never really followed it. I've followed the league for 40 years and when I was a kid it was St Etienne dominating, then in my teenage years it was Marseille, then in the 2000s it was Lyon, now it's PSG. St Etienne and Lyon's dynasties are certainly more organic but in the end it doesnt change the fact that the french league has, for some weird reasons, mostly been a one-team league. The difference with PSG is that they are able to compete every single year in the CL, even if they failed many times before, they are always contender on paper, the same thing couldnt be said for Lyon (St Etienne and Marseille were before football business so you can't really compare).

Personally it doesnt bother me that PSG is widely dominating the league as long as they're showing up in CL. I'm a lot more bothered by good clubs like Strasbourg being turned into feeder club without its own project or identity than I am by PSG.
 
PSG ruined nothing when it comes to the French league.
Of course it did. No other team has the financial ability to compete with PSG, there is no interest, the tv rights are generating less income so the other teams are getting even weaker and the cycle continues
 
Of course it did. No other team has the financial ability to compete with PSG, there is no interest, the tv rights are generating less income so the other teams are getting even weaker and the cycle continues

No, it didn't. It has nothing to do with PSG, the TV rights are generating less income due to terrible decisions from the LFP who in 2019 picked a company(Mediapro) that wasn't able to actually fulfill the contract, from that point the LFP has been scrambling to find a broadcaster and everyone lowballed the league since they know that it has zero bargain power, that's for the most recent issues. And the LFP has always been terrible when it comes to marketing.

But there are other structural issues, french Football has historically been built around patrons while also having a hurdle that only exists in France, the DNCG, and the introduction of FFP made it nearly impossible for the traditional patrons, the the timing of the FFP was also particularly bad for Ligue 1 since it was introduced in the middle of one of the worst period in terms of quality and finances.

Also PSG aren't more dominant than Bayern in the Germany and Ligue has had the similar amount of champions then the PL since 2014-15, 4 clubs have won the PL with City winning it 6 times while Ligue 1 has 3 clubs winning it with PSG winning it 8 times. In reality the PL isn't that competitive but has far better marketing both historically and recently which means far more money and a far better international audiences.
 
No, it didn't. It has nothing to do with PSG, the TV rights are generating less income due to terrible decisions from the LFP who in 2019 picked a company(Mediapro) that wasn't able to actually fulfill the contract, from that point the LFP has been scrambling to find a broadcaster and everyone lowballed the league since they know that it has zero bargain power, that's for the most recent issues. And the LFP has always been terrible when it comes to marketing.

But there are other structural issues, french Football has historically been built around patrons while also having a hurdle that only exists in France, the DNCG, and the introduction of FFP made it nearly impossible for the traditional patrons, the the timing of the FFP was also particularly bad for Ligue 1 since it was introduced in the middle of one of the worst period in terms of quality and finances.

Also PSG aren't more dominant than Bayern in the Germany and Ligue has had the similar amount of champions then the PL since 2014-15, 4 clubs have won the PL with City winning it 6 times while Ligue 1 has 3 clubs winning it with PSG winning it 8 times. In reality the PL isn't that competitive but has far better marketing both historically and recently which means far more money and a far better international audiences.
Won’t pretend to be an expert on the tv deal but yeah from what I’ve read and heard it isn’t necessarily cos of Psgs dominance. After all Lyon did similar not so long ago..

However the bolded. I get the basics of your point but I don’t think it’s comparable Psgs title wins/dominance in France to that of Man City or even put it near the same benchmark as far as competitiveness.
Man City get taken to the final day on a regular basis whilst psg have won three of their recent titles by 9, 15 and 19 points.

psg have also won 8 of the last 11 cups.

And then you take their biggest competitor Marseille. Who’ve basically beaten them once since 2011. And that’s the biggest game in France..
 
Won’t pretend to be an expert on the tv deal but yeah from what I’ve read and heard it isn’t necessarily cos of Psgs dominance. After all Lyon did similar not so long ago..

However the bolded. I get the basics of your point but I don’t think it’s comparable Psgs title wins/dominance in France to that of Man City or even put it near the same benchmark as far as competitiveness.
Man City get taken to the final day on a regular basis whilst psg have won three of their recent titles by 9, 15 and 19 points.

psg have also won 8 of the last 11 cups.

And then you take their biggest competitor Marseille. Who’ve basically beaten them once since 2011. And that’s the biggest game in France..

The point about the bolded part is that interest and marketing isn't built on actual competitivity if it was the case Ligue 1 would have been a lot more popular than the PL in the 90s and the PL wouldn't have continued it's commercial growth while City was dominating the league through several broadcasting rights negotiations.

And Marseille aren't PSG biggest competitor. That's actually an interesting example of marketing, from Canal Plus, these two clubs have rarely been good at the same time, the historic rivals of Marseille are Bordeaux. OM vs PSG became a thing because they are the two largest cities and it was an easy sell for Canal Plus.
 
Won’t pretend to be an expert on the tv deal but yeah from what I’ve read and heard it isn’t necessarily cos of Psgs dominance. After all Lyon did similar not so long ago..

However the bolded. I get the basics of your point but I don’t think it’s comparable Psgs title wins/dominance in France to that of Man City or even put it near the same benchmark as far as competitiveness.
Man City get taken to the final day on a regular basis whilst psg have won three of their recent titles by 9, 15 and 19 points.

psg have also won 8 of the last 11 cups.

And then you take their biggest competitor Marseille. Who’ve basically beaten them once since 2011. And that’s the biggest game in France..
Exactly. The dominance of City (with same fair play issues), Bayern, Juventus, Real/Barcelona is the bottom line, but in most seasons they were taken to the wire.
There isn't really any suspense if PSG will be champions or not
 
Exactly. The dominance of City (with same fair play issues), Bayern, Juventus, Real/Barcelona is the bottom line, but in most seasons they were taken to the wire.
There isn't really any suspense if PSG will be champions or not
Bayern have won it by 25 points, and most of the times it has been won in double digits. Only in two seasons has Dortmund been close, once when they ended on equal points and should have won it, and once when they were 2 points behind. But literally most of the time, it is 10-13 points of difference, with it going over 13 points more times than going to anything resembling competitiveness.
 
Lille and Monaco have won the league in the last decade. Only Leverkusen managed to win it other than Bayern in the Bundesliga.

Monaco could have been a competitor if the owner didn't go through a divorce.

Anyway Paris FC might soon be a competitor too and we finally will get a local derby in ligue 1
 
Lille and Monaco have won the league in the last decade. Only Leverkusen managed to win it other than Bayern in the Bundesliga.

Monaco could have been a competitor if the owner didn't go through a divorce.

Anyway Paris FC might soon be a competitor too and we finally will get a local derby in ligue 1

You mean in Paris? Because there are several local derbies.
 
You mean in Paris? Because there are several local derbies.

Oh I must be mistaken. I saw a weird fact recently that the league rarely has local derbies. I guess it was wrong
 
Oh I must be mistaken. I saw a weird fact recently that the league rarely has local derbies. I guess it was wrong

To be fair, it depends on what they understood as a local derby. In france there is a lot of regional derbies, Monaco-Nice, ASSE-Lyon, Lens-LOSC, Rennes-Brest/Nantes, Montpellier-Nimes, Bordeaux-Toulouse(Derby de la Garonne).
 
The point about the bolded part is that interest and marketing isn't built on actual competitivity if it was the case Ligue 1 would have been a lot more popular than the PL in the 90s and the PL wouldn't have continued it's commercial growth while City was dominating the league through several broadcasting rights negotiations.

And Marseille aren't PSG biggest competitor. That's actually an interesting example of marketing, from Canal Plus, these two clubs have rarely been good at the same time, the historic rivals of Marseille are Bordeaux. OM vs PSG became a thing because they are the two largest cities and it was an easy sell for Canal Plus.
I’m aware of where the PSG/Marseille thing stems from and it’s “plastic” beginnings, but it’s the biggest game in France now without question and the two sets of fans absolutely loathe each other and everything they and their cities stand for.
In present day PSG are the number one enemy in Marseille and vice versa.
Bordeaux have been a total non entity for a while now.

They may not necessarily have always gone neck and neck for championships but then you look at the history of ligue 1 (and certainly since PSG came into existance ) there’s not really one stand out era of two teams going neck and neck for years. As you saw with Arsenal/United city/Liverpool etc.

Either way the point stands. Marseille are the second biggest club in France. From the second biggest city with the second biggest budget who are also PSG’s most hated rivals. If that isn’t who’s supposed to be their “competitor”. Than I’m not sure who is…