Im not sure I have ever even heard any of the Glazers speak
European Super League
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
I’ll he honest, I haven’t fully understood the new CL proposal other than a general “it looks shit”. If it significantly reduces the risk of failure to qualify for the big clubs then that pisses me off almost as much as the ESL.
It's better than not addressing fans at all BUT this is a load of shite.
'The past year has been tough for all of us'. Is this guy having a laugh? Him and his cronies were literally just about to make it way worse for the other clubs and their supporters for the next 25 years.
No gush PR should fix this. Sell and feck off and I hope the scousers don't let him off the hook.
La liga teams are still there.
I am very disappointed in Barcelona, I thought they would fight for the leadership with perez. Not let real madrid take the leadership of ESL.
Would be funny seeing laporta and perez fight for leadership of this shambolic plan
Instead they hid in the background.
I am very disappointed in Barcelona, I thought they would fight for the leadership with perez. Not let real madrid take the leadership of ESL.
Would be funny seeing laporta and perez fight for leadership of this shambolic plan
Instead they hid in the background.
Read that FIFA / Infantino are behind the idea in some way. The idea is very similar, 20/24 permanent members and big payouts every year. Not surprised, but it's funny that he could be behind an African version but against the European one.
Sure only last week one of them was talking about setting up a FIFA world league.
But there are consequences already. Players sign 5yr deals on big money which relies on CL revenue.
And technically you are qualifying through performance on the field in prior years which is already how it works.
Question, what happens with Real Madrid now as they havent backed out of the ESL and are scheduled to play Chelsea in the CL semi final. Surely if Madrid dont pull out by friday of the ESL then chelsea should get a bye into the final?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Tough shit. If the need to consistently win football matches is a problem for the owners, then don’t buy football clubs.
Not to mention that every club retaining their place after a “blip” is taking the place of a smaller club who have had an exceptional season. Feck that.
So they'll be no punishments
When the dust settles, it'll be interesting what remains the main issue people had with this, and what could have been done differently to garner a different response.
Obviously, those behind it completely messed up from a PR stand-point and went rogue in their announcement - they needed to get major news networks/broadcasters on side from the off.
Had there not been a rigid, glass ceiling for those looking up/glass floor in terms of how far the "elite" clubs could fall, that may have been another thing that would have lead to people being more receptive. Although I expect this was the crux of the issue. The big clubs wanted to create a footballing paradigm that would have seen them requiring to put in minimal effort/expenses in order to be guaranteed a seat at the top of world football.
These owners know the world they bought into is changing fast, and they've probably missed the boat in regards to seeing the optimal return on their investments. If the Glazers could, they would go back to 2017 and sell up.
Obviously, those behind it completely messed up from a PR stand-point and went rogue in their announcement - they needed to get major news networks/broadcasters on side from the off.
Had there not been a rigid, glass ceiling for those looking up/glass floor in terms of how far the "elite" clubs could fall, that may have been another thing that would have lead to people being more receptive. Although I expect this was the crux of the issue. The big clubs wanted to create a footballing paradigm that would have seen them requiring to put in minimal effort/expenses in order to be guaranteed a seat at the top of world football.
These owners know the world they bought into is changing fast, and they've probably missed the boat in regards to seeing the optimal return on their investments. If the Glazers could, they would go back to 2017 and sell up.
Agnelli on why the Super League is still needed:
Football is no longer a game, it’s a business sector and what it needs most is stability.
"On the domestic side as well. In Europe, the most valuable match is no longer the Champions final but the English first division football playoffs to be admitted to the Premier League: 150 million. That isn’t stability.
"We need ironbound economic and financial regulations like those established in the Super League.
“The Super League will go forward regardless. If [UEFA] put forward proposals, we will take them under consideration. We’ve written to the presidents of FIFA and UEFA to begin a conversation”.
So, one of the key reasons is that Spanish and Italian clubs do not like the finances in English football.
Football is no longer a game, it’s a business sector and what it needs most is stability.
"On the domestic side as well. In Europe, the most valuable match is no longer the Champions final but the English first division football playoffs to be admitted to the Premier League: 150 million. That isn’t stability.
"We need ironbound economic and financial regulations like those established in the Super League.
“The Super League will go forward regardless. If [UEFA] put forward proposals, we will take them under consideration. We’ve written to the presidents of FIFA and UEFA to begin a conversation”.
So, one of the key reasons is that Spanish and Italian clubs do not like the finances in English football.
Bruno couldn't have been a better signing even if we dreamt it
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/62702379/backpack_kid_snl.0.jpg)
Nothing funny about this he actually has a point. There are less young people following football than twenty years ago. Football is yet to enter digital age. Watching a game is the same as 30 years ago.
Hilarious given most people I know absolutely love taking their local league 2 team to champions league winners on FIFA & Football Manager
Yes and the cost of all three of those players combined is less than that of Ronaldo. That's the point.
The Glazers, it was all ruse to sell some t-shirts
Surely the biggest problem with getting young people interested is the expense associated with watching it on tv and in the ground. Removing the champions league from free to air was stupid, chasing short to gain at the harm of the long term popularity of the game
Hitler didn't like the idea, and is a United fan it seemsFully expect a version of the Hitler meltdown clip in 1-2 days
Interesting to listen the the Transfer Window podcast. Was recorded on monday night. In hindsight its eye opening to see how ESL had all the leverage and completely and utterly fecked it up.
Feck off scumbag and get out. Where is the video from Joel?
I'm still feeling absolutely disgusted this morning. The club won't feel right until they're gone.
Thank you to all the Chelsea fans that could demonstrate yesterday evening, I hope there is bigger supporter demonstrations to come.
Thank you to all the Chelsea fans that could demonstrate yesterday evening, I hope there is bigger supporter demonstrations to come.
Of course there are less young people watching, football traditionally starts with kids being taken to games. How is a working class parent supposed to afford to take 2 kids to each home match when its going to cost half a weeks wages? Or pay for 2 TV subscriptions so they can watch from home?
I agree it would be better if the fans could play a bigger part in how the clubs are run, all I'm questioning is how effective it would be.
The SL was just about the biggest PR disaster they could have managed and I think the way it was stopped was well done and clearly a voice from the fans and people involved in football in general clearly disapproved of the idea and the message got through.
What I didn't want is the PL/FA/UEFA expelling the clubs or the players and managers being forced to be confronted by the media when they had no say in what their employers were planning to do.
Although it leaves a bad smell in the way the idea was planned at least everyone didn't get entrenched and the whole football system wasn't torn apart.
I feel the same, our club cannot truly heal with these bastards at the helm. They've got to go.
That is the essence of the sport. 22 men/women, 2 goals and 1 ball. Watching the NBA now and 30 years ago is the same as well.
Nobody says anything about implementing changes and modernising if it makes sense, but the Super League isn't the answer. Young people have now more opportunities and the internet changed a lot, top games alone wont make them tune in. The Super League is not modern, more top games doesn't make it modern.
It's mind-boggling that football has been gatekept via costs that are prohibitive to young people yet the solution is...more gatekeeping behind additional paywalls?
No they are not, and even if they are, that's not the point at all. For city, if those three players fail, no problem, buy another three and that's it. It doesn't work like that for the majority of the clubs. For whatever reason you are in denial about that, so carry on.
4.2 + 4.1 + 4 + 3.2 + 2.8 + 2.3 = $20.5bn without all the other clubs but I don't seriously believe the government will do anything about it, never mind the cost, the legal arguments forever more, they won't want to get involved. Boris just thought it was a good horse to back to become more popular with the disgruntled fans.
Yes they are:
Ruben Dias - €68m transfer fee, €6m salary per year
Joao Cancelo - €65m transfer fee, €4.5m salary per year
Rodri - €62.7m transfer fee, €10.8m salary per year
Total in annualised wages over 3 years + transfer fees: €259.6m
Ronaldo transfer fee + 3 years of wages: €280m
And the point is that risk is mitigated by spreading it out across multiple players at multiple positions. Obviously City have the financial muscle to do this but that's immaterial to the point, which is that signing Ronaldo was fecking stupid.
Exactly. There was never a problem getting young fans interested when they could actually afford to go to games with their mates - and open tickets were available on the day. Get the standing sections open at budget rates and give them priority.
What was the Super League going to do attract kids that just want to play fortnite? Write into the contracts of every player that they must do a dance from the game when they score?
Best thing that came out of this for us is the resignation of one Ed Woodward. 
Waiting for Joel Glazer to do the same. Oh wait - it’s not going to happen.
It was a joke mate.
Removing domestic football from free to air was the real feckup. Its where you build the fans. They should learn lessons from Free to Play gaming. Get people involved for free and THEN monetize from your huge fanbase.
We've all been bamboozled by the door-in-the-face technique.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date