Definitely. Fan of plastic club defending plastic clubs, nothing new to see here.
RB Leipzig
- Thread starter Gandalf Greyhame
- 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.
Leverkusen also bypassed 50+1 rule? Didnt know that.
Maybe. Thing is, I'm not a traditional guy at all. Clubs like the HSV, Stuttgart, Köln, 1860 etc. think they've got some right to play in the Bundesliga because they've been there for so long and now scapegoat Leipzig, Hoffenheim etc. for "taking their spots" when in reality, they've done an atrocious job for years. Leipzig has done more good for German football in a short span of years than what they've done in decades in terms of youth development etc. There's a reason most promising coaches in Germany are somehow connected to RB. They are excellent at what they're doing and I just give them credit for it.
As I said, to me Leipzig is the equivalent of a startup backed by a corporation. Being there for a longer time shouldn't be an excuse for poor management and being new shouldn't prevent you from the possibility of success.
Is it really that different? They advertise a company, no difference to other clubs. Look at Bayern and the influence adidas/Dreyfuß had there and still have. I think most people criticizing Leipzig have no clue how strongly sponsors are involved in many of the top clubs.
And especially regarding all the "oil money" thing. All those top functionaries are so closely connected, every top club and every football association is part of the problem - and that's the really condemnable stuff, not projects like Leipzig.
Leverkusen and Wolfsburg were around since long before the inception of 50+1 so they had to be made exceptions from the rule when they introduced it.
I am obviously not wholly clued up on the situation and their "history" - other than from a very high level, knowing they are owned by RB. But what's the "plastic" bit referring to when reference is made to RB? I look at their squad, and I don't get the send that they've spent 100's of millions of euros in buying the best players/talent?
I could be wrong though as I am not too clued up.
I could be wrong though as I am not too clued up.
Sponsors are generally not the same as investors.
Sponsors expect (marketing) value by sponsoring a club. Therefore only clubs that already are successful and well-known are attractive for sponsors.
Your comparison isn't accurate, because investors mostly make small/medium sized teams to big teams, whereas the clubs with really good sponsor deals got to the top on their own.
@Zehner
I don't know all the facts so forgive my ignorance: doesn't the 50+1 rule exist to "protect" the fans? Ticket prices in Germany are very reasonable adjusted for median income and it seems like the clubs care much more about the fans than in many other countries. I thought this was an indirect result of the 50+1 rule, and thus it is important to protect it.The moment one club starts breaking this rule, it paves the way for other clubs. Before you know it, Germany is as shite as the rest of the footballing world.
I don't know all the facts so forgive my ignorance: doesn't the 50+1 rule exist to "protect" the fans? Ticket prices in Germany are very reasonable adjusted for median income and it seems like the clubs care much more about the fans than in many other countries. I thought this was an indirect result of the 50+1 rule, and thus it is important to protect it.The moment one club starts breaking this rule, it paves the way for other clubs. Before you know it, Germany is as shite as the rest of the footballing world.
It's obviously not about the same amount of money that for example Chelsea, City or PSG investors invested in their clubs.
But RB was bought from the 5th league into a CL semifinal in 11 years. This club was created 11 years ago by a multi-billion dollar company with the clear goal to become one of the best clubs in Germany as fast as possible. It doesn't get way more plastic than that.
Of course money isn't everything and RB is really a competent and well run club. But without the Red Bull money all the infrastructure they built and all the players they bought wouldn't have been possible.
It was the same with Leverkusen (Bayer), Wolfsburg (VW) and Hoffenheim (Dietmar Hopp)...lower league clubs that were bought into and to the top of the Bundesliga by companies/investors.
Today all of these clubs seem to rely on their own revenue, so they are not comparable to the likes of the oil clubs. But they bought their way to the top and no one can't deny that.
Thanks for the insight, bud. Appreciated.
I have a "little" more respect for the likes of these clubs, then the oil clubs, in fairness.
I have seen so many threads around this please (usually in the CE/General) about challenging the status quo and changing the established order - the way things are/or have worked - why should we accept it for what it is? There's obviously "organic" ways to do it, but if we're honest, how many honest/hard working clubs are going to be doing this (move up from the 5th division to the BL within 11 years?) without an initial investment/kick start, of sorts? You'll get the odd fairytale, but those are exceptions and usually their squad gets cherry picked off one by one from the elite.
Mega clubs have this safety net of massive revenues, so their feck ups and inefficiencies are just papered over by higher wages and more transfers. It's almost impossible for any new club to break into the established order of Europes elite. And this goes for most industries, in fairness.
Disruptors in a market is not always a bad thing, especially if it brings more competition to that market (and in an ideal world, those benefits are passed down to the consumer).
That's nitpicking in my eyes. In both cases, the club receives money for advertising another company. It's essentially the same business model. The club gathers attention and sells this attention to an advertising partner.
Also, Bayern is an AG so technically, your sponsors are investors, too. And they're sitting in the directorate and made extremely shady deals with your officials in the past. I'm sorry, but I struggle to see your morale high ground over Leipzig.
As far as I know, the 50+1 rule has nothing to do with the fans. It shall protect the autonomy of the clubs. The goal is to prevent a situation in which you have to get an investor to stay competitive who then takes over the decision making authority by holding the absolute majority. Maybe this is what you mean since investors would probably take higher ticket prices etc.
It's a double edged sword if you ask me. 50+1 plays it's part in German clubs being hopelessly in disadvantage in international comparisons. It's very hard for a German club to develop the financial muscle to go toe by toe with their English, Spanish or Italian counterparts.
Exactly my thoughts.
I think German clubs tend to do just fine in Europe. Bayern is as strong as anyone and you often see at least one more German team in the quarter finals of the CL. Dortmund has been great. Leverkusen has done good things. So has Schalke.
You have a very good thing in Germany. Don't ruin it.
As I said, it has advantages and disadvantages. Throughout the last 20 years, we're probably the third best club in Germany and the only one besides the BVB that has constantly qualified for CL/EL. Regardless, our spending power is probably around the level of a mid table EPL club. I don't think people in here really realize how big the gap actually is. This has almost nothing to do with competitiveness. Our league is boring as hell when it comes to determining the champion while there's much fluctuation among the positions 6 to 3. Sounds nice on paper but realistically makes it hard for clubs to establish themselves at the top since they can't realistically plan with CL incomes.
Just for comparison, until last season our most expensive transfer was below 20m €. Now it's around 30m €. Yes, the atmosphere in German stadiums is great and we should preserve that but on the other hand, we'll have to accept that no club outside Bayern, BVB and maybe Leipzig will ever be more than an underdog in an international tournament and we'll probably never have the opportunity to hold on to a star player for more than one or two seasons. I don't think an EPL fan can really relate to that. I mean, what's the purpose? It's completely unrealistic to play for the title since Bayern is almost impossible to overcome. And international tournaments are hopeless, too. That's why it was so refreshing to watch the BVB win two titles in a row and go to the CL final. And although they've done incredible work since then, they never came close to achieving similar things every again. That tells you something about the chances of the clubs outside those two. So actually, the only purpose is to develop new, exciting talents and hope they don't go to Bayern.
This is true for pretty much all leagues. The 4th best team from Spain, England and Italy will generally also be an underdog. If you are not among the top 8(at least) teams in the world, then you are per definition an underdog in the CL, as that would suggest that even making the quarter finals would be considered an achievement.
While it's boring to see the same winner almost every year, it's not that different elsewhere. Italy and France also have one club leagues. Spain has a two team league, which is only marginally better. England is the exception, but it comes at a price(insane prices and teams with unethical financial backing).
You always act, like a club can't get bigger without a lot of money. Or like a big amount of money would guarantee it.
Look at where Dortmund was in 2005. The club was close to getting dissolved. But with a very good scouting, excellent youth players, very good coaches and very good management and marketing they managed to transform into the 2nd best club in germany and scratch at the Top-10 in europe. Having a competitive squad is also only one part of a successful club. Besides Bayern only Dortmund seems to take international marketing serious.
On the other side you have clubs like Bremen or Wolfsburg that show that even success for a few years and much money means nothing, if your management is incompetent.
Gladbach is yet another example in germany that shows, that the status quo isn't as set in stone as you suggest. A smaller club can become a big club without an investor if they have a good management. Not in only 2 or 3 years, but over the course of 5 to 10 years, it is perfectly possible. Dortmund showed that and Gladbach is on a very good way to show that too.
You're describing it as a little bit too easy. Bayern's spending power is up there with the best EPL teams. Ours (third/fourth/fifth best team in Germany) is on par with maybe position 9 or 10 of the EPL at best.
And yes, in France, Italy and Germany we're witnessing an unprecedented run of one single team. Surely that should have you thinking if the current model is really the one to go with. Bayern isn't far away from winning the league 10 years in a row. That's alarming.
A club can't get bigger without a lot of money. Dortmund is one of the biggest clubs in Europe and has excellent economic conditions for their success and although they did a great job in the last probably 15 years, they are still not in a position to really challenge you. You can allow yourself a season or two with Kovac and still come out on top. Meanwhile Favre has the best points average of every Dortmund manager including Klopp and Tuchel and still hasn't come close to stealing one single championship from you.
Truth is, you can have an outlier if you're lucky but you can't establish yourself as a real competitor without money. And growing organically is only possible for very few clubs with perfect economic conditions - and even then that's a project spanning across 10+ years (!). Meanwhile, you guys grow simultaneously.
What we're observing is a natural monopoly and it's distancing itself from the rest year by year. You're mentioning Gladbach as an example. I'll tell you that Gladbach will never challenge you through organic growth since you're growing on a faster scale than they're. And even if you screw up a few times it would take them at least 20 years to get in punching distance.
They haven't done PSG style of signings but they've spent a lot - especially in relative terms compared to their opponents. Poulsen (their striker and captain last night) for example already played for them in the 3rd division as a Danish international. Up until they reached the first division their squad budget outweighed by far every other team and even now they're just behind Bayern and Dortmund I think.
Also, people like @Zehner might romanticize their "investment" into the local community but another side of the medal is that their youth academy has basically destroyed the youth academies of other weaker east German clubs (so much for the "they're doing good things for east German football" claim). They aggressively poach teenagers from other teams.
Regarding Red Bulls involvement enough has been said, their dodgy dealings with RB Salzburg (evading certain transfer regulations) is another questionable aspect.
RB Leipzigs existence does not excuse shitty club management by the likes of Schalke or Hamburg but they're definitely not some sort of "role model" club.
Oh god how could i forget Schalke and Hamburg in my list of failed clubs with enough money but incompetent management along Bremen and Wolfsburg?
Indeed, I don't understand how or why anyone would want to defend them.
50+1 ensures that the clubs themselves retain the voting rights, no matter who actualy owns their capital. Now think one step further: Who controls the clubs themselves? Who votes in a club's president and its various boards? It's the club members, the fans. Last time I checked Leipzig had 17 members who were allowed to vote, all of them RB employees. In regard to the second paragraph: does Leipzig have the financial muscle to go toe to toe with the European elite? Are Leverkusen, Wolfsburg or Hoffenheim our shining hope for CL glory?
Hell.. Leverkusen are about two or three good years for Gladbach away from being kicked out of top four for good. You better hope Bayer doesn't pull an Uerdingen on them if that does happen.
What is your proposed solution then? The only strong league that don't suffer the same problems as the Bundesliga, is the PL. Do want filthy money from filthy new owners like with City and Chelsea? A massive global campaign to make the Bundesliga as popular as the PL so that every club gets more TV money? A bunch of soulless "startups"?
Seems there's a balancing act to be had, as is the case most of the time.
Thanks for the information and differing perspective bud. Like I said, I can understand the resentment (especially by clubs who have struggled and tried hard for decades to do it organically). I'm just not sure providing more competition and a stronger league is something to be wholly frowned upon.
I know your post isn't directed at me (I don't really understand them well enough to either promote or defend them anyway
, but just from a different perspective, it seems that there's more that meets the eye than just a simple good/bad. Say they end up pushing Bayern in the next couple of years and they manage to snatch a league title. Is that a good thing, or a bad thing (for the league and for football?)? Of course their level of investment, as mentioned before and by @Kasper 's informative post above, exceeded the smaller leagues they played in. I can understand the resentment. But looking at it from a footballing perspective, without an influx of investment, how many "smaller" clubs, or no name clubs have managed to get close to the European elite on a sustainable manner? Not just a 1 season wonder.Because the alternative is grim. Bayern are already too rich to fail, and the gap is only getting bigger.
There is no easy solution: advertising vehicles will never be given the annual budgets to challenge Bayern, it just doesn't make sense to sink hundreds of millions per year into proper title challenges when you can get vastly more cost efficient exposure by maintining top 4. At the same time they have no natural growth, because they are fecking plastic and most people prefer to support the real thing. Sponsors don't really care for them either, because their parent company soaks up all their advertising value:Leverkusen, for all their coninued success reportedly bank a whooping €6m annually for their shirt sponsorship. That's less than for example newly promoted Cologne.
What he's really talking about is the hope that maybe Saudi Arabia create another PSG/Man City in Germany, while in the process the league gets flooded with plastic waste that accomplishes little other than smothering actual proper football clubs, killing the culture that made it (a bit) special among top leagues.
What most people also forget in their desire to praise RB is that they create a network of feeder colonies. Wouldn't it be truly amazing if everyone was a well run as them and we could watch RB Salzburg battle it out with Bayern Vienna and Innsbruck United in Austria? Or if RB Bragantino fight for the Brasilienpokal with Bayern Fortaleza and Borussia Bahia.
Last edited:
I think that's bottling football down to it having to be about getting close to the European elite/winning the top competitions. Some people in football value supporting a side that is sustainable, moral and ticking along because they enjoy the club and what it means to them. I don't mean this as a dig but supporting a club like United or Arsenal makes you think that football is all about winning trophies/being in the elite competitions because that is absolutely what you're used to seeing and doing but it isn't really...football is about way more than that. I'm not saying club owners or fans wouldn't want to achieve that level, of course they would, but there are many fans who would rather wait and never see their club win a competition than win one by splashing the cash through the guzzling owners. I moaned a lot while we were under Moyes and Martinez but our 4th and 5th place finishes with them two have been far more satisfying than our big money buys etc.I know your post isn't directed at me (I don't really understand them well enough to either promote or defend them anyway
It boils down for me to morals > 'success' or 'success' > morals.
If the gap to Bayern is getting bigger then the solution to that isn't just having another club that can invest heavily and sweep up all of the talent - then you just have a Barca/Madrid situation...the solution is figuring a way out of spreading money more evenly through the league to help all clubs achieve the level of Bayern or at least allow them to hold onto their talents for a bit more money than they currently can.
They are a cancer that is attacking the very core of German football culture. This is highly anecdotally of course, but people I talk to would rather see Bayern win their 15th title in a row than have Leipzig win their first. People talk about what great things RB supposedly does for East German football, but the truth is they only landed there, because every established club they asked turned down their money, even if it meant staying in the 2nd division.I know your post isn't directed at me (I don't really understand them well enough to either promote or defend them anyway
What you also have to consider that every plastic club who spends just enough to maintain a cushy seat in the top 4 blocks a proper football club with actual growth potential from getting there. Of course it's perfectly reasonable to say that clubs like Hamburg and Schalke have only themselves to blame, but for example Gladbach have been doing consistently good work for about a decade now and would probably be a stable CL team by now if they weren't constantly cockblocked by the likes of Leverkusen and Leipzig.
That's a good post, and there's not a lot to disagree with - even though the angle I was coming from wasn't really about success. It was about the latter part of your post - stimulating competition in the league/environment. And most certainly, I am less emotive about RB, then I am about, say, Man City or Chelsea, because they directly/indirectly impact United. And you are correct, there's more than 1 way to stimulate competition.
The crux for me is, there is a difference between a "start up" investment and an investment done at the scale of the one that happened at Man City/Chelsea. Maybe I am wrong on that count as well. Like I said, from my limited perspective, I look at RBL and I see a club with very little superstars, but a very good system (scouting etc) in place and some good management options to continue their progress, as opposed to splashing 50m on class players to bolster their team.
I guess looking at it from a consumer perspective, and not really from an emotional perspective, I am all for competition and disruptors in a market, that challenges the status quo. Maybe I am biased because it's part and part what I do for a career. There's absolutely nothing wrong with "supporting" your team (in your words, because you put it much better than I could
: Some people in football value supporting a side that is sustainable, moral and ticking along because they enjoy the club and what it means to them), but i just don't see the connection of then frowning upon those trying to disrupt the status quo. Maybe I am wrong. After all, I don't know how much they spent, who they trampled on, on their way to the top. I see them a little bit differently then I do, oil money.
Insightful view
Fair enough bud, thanks for the exchanges and the information/perspective btw. It's always good to see all perspectives.
I guess (and this isn't aimed at any club or league), I find it difficult to argue moral high grounds within football these days. But again, I am maybe looking at it from too much of a commercial perspective, and not really the cultural/emotive perspective as summed up well by yourself and @SilentWitness as well.
Damn, that speaks volumes. I respect the integrity. In England, most neutrals would probably rather see City or Chelsea win than United and Liverpool.
Then again the PL has been all about money since the 90's. It's become a bit "meh, I guess it can't helped". That's why I find the Bundesliga so refreshing. It's like the one "pure" thing left in top football.
Last edited:
I wouldn't necessarily make this about morals. Aside from PSG and City, who represent certain regimes, these are all more or less businessmen, I don't think the guys in Leipzig are bad persons or that people at the big clubs are morally in the clear (Kallle, or Tönnies *cough*). I think it's more about the 50+1 rule that is perhaps the last anchor of the whole "the people's game" idea in Bundesliga and the fact that Leipzig, Hoffenheim, etc are using loopholes to get around it. Hollowing out the concept one club at a time until it will finally be obsolete at one point.
I don't want to romanticize anything. My opinion is just that Leipzig deserve to be where they are. They had a plan, pitched it, got approval and executed it. Most traditional clubs in Germany don't even have plan to begin with. They appoint some washed up ex players as officials since they "know the club" and wonder why everything goes downhill. Honestly, it's mind blowing how clubs in Germany - companies with millions of revenue and profit - appoint people in the most important positions who aren't even qualified for Junior levels in the actual job market. Leipzig in contrast acts with the professionalism you expect from a professional club and are also very innovative. And German football has profited from it if you ask me. See Werner as an example.
We'll see about Gladbach
I still have us ahead of them, both short and long term. And no, obviously neither Leverkusen, Wolfsburg nor Hoffenheim are our shining hope for CL glory. But Wolfsburg aside, those clubs are significantly more professional than 99% of traditional clubs. They deserve to be where they are because the spent (and are spending) their money much more purposefully and insightful than their competitors in the league. Honestly, all this talk about the financially infused "plastic clubs" is so annoying when you see how well managed Leverkusen exemplarily is. Just accept some responsibility for your own mistakes ffs. I can guarantee you the HSV, Schalke, Bremen etc. weren't where they currently are if they were managed like Leverkusen has been in the last 20 years.
I don't know but something has to happen sooner or later. People don't feel the absolute urgency as of now but it's definitely been recognized that the league is becoming boring. Give it a few more years and we'll see.
Clubs definitely have to find ways to earn more money. Also, you don't necessarily need to "found" a new club like RB did. Such a project can also happen at a traditional club if they're willing to see it through with all associated consequences. But most of these clubs are very traditional and have a small horizon.
Why exactly are they cancer that is attacking the very core of German football culture? I still struggle to see where they harm it.
Because they attack and circumvent the very rule that gives fans a true voice and they swamp out the clubs who abide by it.
Because 15 Red Bull employees make all the decisions. The club belongs to a company. Not to the fans/members.
Stuff like this also doesn‘t make the company more appealing: https://www.forbes.com/sites/dougla...ives-as-it-wrestles-with-racism/#418bb4ad3e0d
Pretty much the situation in all other countries.
Precisely Germany's reluctance to accept non-fan ownership is the reason they fell behind.
Till the early 80s Germany was the absolute best league in the world. Then the Italians came with sugar daddies and later the English and the Spanish with foreign investors.
Also if Germany were to allow just one PSG/City/Chelsea they'd have someone to compete with Bayern. Sure, they'll be the bad guys and Bayern the good guys, but whatever. You'll always have people support the bad guys too.
Couldn't have said it any better, bravo
What kind of example is that? He was developed by Stuttgart and seen as one of the best German talents by the time he was transfered to RB. He was a proven Bundesliga player at the time and his development wasn't exactly surprising. It just shows everything that is wrong with RB because no other promoted side would have been able to buy such a player for that kind of money (and I don't even speak about his wages).
Alright, then let's see the voice fans at the FC Bayern have. In their supervisory board we have the chairmen of VW and Telekom as well as employees of Allianz and the UniCredit Bank. Adidas used to be there, too, and was involved in all the stuff that brought Hoeneß into jail for tax evasion. But well, they also have their annual general meeting where fans can voice their opinion. Two years ago, there was a movement that wanted to dethrone Hoeneß after some terrible decisions and nightmarish public appearances. Many members wanted him gone, the only problem was that only a very small percentage of members was allowed to vote - those who actually attained the AGM in Bavaria. The SPIEGEL reported about the AGM in the previous year: "Anyone who then belonged to the few who dared voting against Hoeneß was threatened and insulted by other members". Yes, it is indeed an open election that only takes place in the little echo chamber.
If that's the fan culture Leipzig is ruining, go ahead, have my blessing.