City hasn't officially won yet.
Besides the last 2 years we had chelsea and leicester. So it's too early to say anything about domination. A great season for city. Let's see if they can replicate it next year
Arsene Wenger - “The huge financial power of some clubs is basically destroying the competition."
- Thread starter Fluctuation0161
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
City hasn't officially won yet.
Besides the last 2 years we had chelsea and leicester. So it's too early to say anything about domination. A great season for city. Let's see if they can replicate it next year
Hahaha kudos to accepting itIndeed, I'm very predictable
I dislike the money available in Football. I also dislike the oil clubs - more specifically because they have money they barely deserve and they’re distorting the market.
On the flip side though, the oil clubs have added an element of unpredictability and a challenge to the established order. Otherwise it would have been infinitely more difficult for anyone to challenge United/Madrid/Barca etc. because growing organically or “the right way” is all good and well but it takes a lot of time. And theres no guarantee of success because you keep losing your best players and managers. Rinse repeat. Pros and cons.
Obviously, as a united fan, way more cons than pros
Hahaha kudos to accepting it
I dislike the money available in Football. I also dislike the oil clubs - more specifically because they have money they barely deserve and they’re distorting the market.
On the flip side though, the oil clubs have added an element of unpredictability and a challenge to the established order. Otherwise it would have been infinitely more difficult for anyone to challenge United/Madrid/Barca etc. because growing organically or “the right way” is all good and well but it takes a lot of time. And theres no guarantee of success because you keep losing your best players and managers. Rinse repeat. Pros and cons.
Obviously, as a united fan, way more cons than pros
Sure, each paradigm has its pros and cons.
I just want Barcelona-Real Madrid-Bayern-Atletico Madrid-Juventus-Chelsea not to reach the final of the Champions League this season.
Nothing more, nothing less
Hahaha kudos to accepting it
I dislike the money available in Football. I also dislike the oil clubs - more specifically because they have money they barely deserve and they’re distorting the market.
On the flip side though, the oil clubs have added an element of unpredictability and a challenge to the established order. Otherwise it would have been infinitely more difficult for anyone to challenge United/Madrid/Barca etc. because growing organically or “the right way” is all good and well but it takes a lot of time. And theres no guarantee of success because you keep losing your best players and managers. Rinse repeat. Pros and cons.
Obviously, as a united fan, way more cons than pros
The money available in football is function of its popularity, broadcasters are eager to broadcast because they can sell ad space and companies are eager to buy the space because it gives them incredible visibility. As long as games are on TV money will be big and if for example you ban ads, you will have far less games on TV or TV packs will be far more expensive.
Edit: All these posters complaining about money in professional football make me think of vegans asking for a vegan option at the butcher.
How would that help?
Allows more clubs from the continent to share the wealth the tournament generates. Instead of staying in 1-3 leagues.
Yeah, keep up.
Funny thing is, my tagline alludes to me being a closet gunner. Maybe there's an award once I get a scouse tag to complete the trifecta.
That’s true, but they will just get battered by the bigger league clubs.
Not sure that’s the kind of wealth Arsene has issue with anyway, more the artificial money from outside.
Would be great to have days again where teams from Belgrade and Bucharest etc can be amongst the strongest in Europe. I guess last season’s Monaco was the modern day equivalent.
i think leeds would complete the trifecta. Actually, are you a closet leeds supporter too?
and who owns Monaco?
Wenger's right. Although it's a bit rich considering his Arsenal have benefited from the Premier League destroying the competition for TV revenues amongst other leagues.
Exactly.
i think leeds would complete the trifecta. Actually, are you a closet leeds supporter too?
State. Doesn’t matter, the point is they are a club that cannot compete with the elite financially (they could for a couple years when hey decided to dope of course), but still performed at elite level with cheaper purchases and local talent.
Having an owner doesn’t matter. I doubt many would say a West Ham CL Son was because they are owned by Sullivan and Gold. They don’t spend what the biggest clubs spend.
He's clearly correct, whether you agree with the basic point or not, the bugger picture that money is ruining football is absolutely 100 percent accurate
I think this is his issue. The spending of the sugar daddy clubs has been silly for a good few years but the last 2 seasons it seems to have gone into overdrive, adding to already strong squads. With Guardiola spending £400m+ with City (on top of the £1bn+ spent since 2008) and PSG recently signing Neymar and Mbappe.
FFP was supposed to level the playing field but these clubs now know how to work around that.
Luckily for United we currently have the potential to compete with the spending due to our income. But even then looking at the total spend of state backed clubs is ridiculous.
No wonder Arsène is calling this out, it has impacted him and Arsenal a lot. Pushing them down at least 2 positions with Chelsea and City moving into top 4 over recent years.
He's right but you are never gonna close the pandora's box on money in the game unless something truly seismic happens. Until then everyone will moan until they adapt or become loaded themselves.
Hmmm.......I question the weathervane comments of many on here.
I doubt you'd be agreeing with Wenger if Utd were 15 points clear at the top.
I doubt you'd be agreeing with Wenger if Utd were 15 points clear at the top.
FFP was never to level the playing field. The initial motivation was the fate of clubs like Zaragoza and Portsmouth who ended in huge troubles because their owners tide the clubs with incredible amount of money, mainly on personnel without putting enough reserve in the clubs accounts, which by the way isn't the case for PSG, the money is in the clubs possession.
Then sugar daddies on steroids appeared namely City and later PSG, some clubs lobbied for a sanction of a control of these clubs in order to preserve the status quo.
People should really remember that the field isn't leveled, the worst PL team get more money out of BT-Sky than the best Italian or French clubs.
There’s a 15 point gap to City so not sure where these 5/6 clubs are you speak of? No club has spent as much as City not only this season but over the last 10 years. It’s a similar story with state backed PSG.
In terms of City not winning the champions league they’ve had to gradually “increase” sponsorships over the years in order to bypass FFP limitations to buy more players. The Etihad sponsorship was £400m way back in 2011 for example, very high for 7 years ago. Now those limitations are long gone and UEFA has been ineffective in managing this. Even if they change FFP next season City and PSG have already done the damage and built their squads.
Many fans were unhappy with sugar daddy spending even during the Fergie era, so you're quite wrong about that.
Hahaha yeah. Add City to that list for me. Maybe even PSGSure, each paradigm has its pros and cons.
I just want Barcelona-Real Madrid-Bayern-Atletico Madrid-Juventus-Chelsea not to reach the final of the Champions League this season.
Nothing more, nothing less
Nah absolutely JP. I understand the commercial argument. Also, Football would probably be a lot less interesting/exciting without the added add ons like post match analysis & all that other niceties the money brings with it.
Hard to argue with him really. FIFA/UEFA just needed to bother enforcing the FFP rules they spent months and millions coming up with.
United and City are far and away the biggest spenders in the league. I get your point but for me trying to outspend a petro-state is gonna see us losing out the longer it goes on. For long term stability I would like to see something done. Again you can argue that because someone can now outspend us United fans want to see something done about it but its not like we just rocked up and declared us the biggest spenders and therefore the best club in the league. We built our current position after many years. The PSGs and Citehs of this world have had relatively less time but have reached our current position in that short time.
Tbf to City and PSG this was a long time coming since they allowed clubs to be owned by one person but in their case they are skewing the whole thing with their state backed funds.
Does that really matter in terms of a competition. The issue has become that the massive clubs now get most of their wealth in sponsorships foreign shirt sales and or sugar daddies. The rest get left behind
It's now impossible to compete with Utd (amongst others) and it's impossible for them to fail
Good points.
That said, City is owned by the UAE since 2008: so much money wasted and what came out of this? In 10 years, 2 Premier League titles and 0 Champions League.
City will be champions this year but will have to face new challenges in the next years. A club like United is gradually on the rise since Mourinho took over the club. Other clubs have great talents. A club like Arsenal can recruit Aubam for example. As regards England, the competition will be more open in the next years: just my opinion.
Also, City and PSG have to overpay, which makes other clubs more rich...and consequently more competitive...
France is another story but the good news are the country can dream of a victory at the European level. PSG make the other clubs better in a certain sense.
I like the definition of long-term investment: you spend a lot of money in the first years of your business plan in order to create value in the long long run.
As far as I'm concerned, I'm just a football fan who dislikes monotony and like the idea of seeing an established order challenged by new forces
Surely the problem isn't how many challenges to the title at the beginning of the season but that season in and season out it's exactly the same teams in every league in Europe. The door has been shut on everyone else.
Everton are the 4th most successful club in English football. Relatively rich. Top half team. New ground coming. I doubt I'll live to see a title challenge. Thats surely not healthy. That so many have next to no hope. Leicester was a miracle and even then they couldn't hold onto their stars and have slipped back into the pack
Neither of these are happening.
1) You would need to get a consensus from all the top leagues for a salary cap to implement a salary cap. For instance, La Liga wouldn't agree to a salary cap unless Premier League, Serie A, Ligue 1, and Bundesliga did so as well. How is this soft cap calculated? In North American sports, its a function of the revenue of the league (for example, in the NBA the cap is a percentage of basketball related income). If this is the case, the other big leagues wouldn't accept the Premier League having a much a higher cap ceiling than the rest (and they would).
2) Restricting the number of teams to 2 per league in the CL would be the death of the competition. Whether we like it or not, fans want to see the Big 6 English teams in the CL. They want to see the top 3 Spanish teams in the CL. These teams have large followings and create so much commercial windfall that this idea would never be implemented (and rightfully so) for purely financial reasons.
P.S. - Most will probably disagree but I believe CL spots should be based on the popularity of a league. I think it may push leagues like La Liga to adopt the Premier league approach of sharing TV revenue in an attempt to make their leagues more competitive. The 5th and 6th placed teams in the Premier league is usually better than the 4th placed teams in all of the other major leagues. Teams shouldn't get punished in Europe for playing in a more competitive league /rant
Last edited by a moderator:
Life is unfair after all.
Does the city of Sheffield (relatively big city in the UK) has a good team nowadays? You know the answer.
In Scotland, I have the feeling it's always the same clubs that won the big trophies since a long time.
It's true the competition is limited when it comes to winning titles, raising the following question: is it a new phenomenon only explained by money? Not fully sure. Each era has its winners.
Regarding Everton, if your top management is excellent, you can at least dream of seeing your club playing the Champions League. My consolation prize
Maybe, should we make transfers on the basis of a lottery to ensure an allocation of talented players all over the country?
Wenger is right, although in Spain and Germany Madrid / Barcelona / Bayern are usually winners, even before the boom of money in football.
It is good that there are new teams challenging,they get an investor, injects money, makes it grow and reach a new dimension but within limits.
However spending 300 million on defenses is too much. Not even the richest teams, like Madrid, United or Barcelona could consider doing that, and then next summer renew their best players, not be forced to sell and still sign someone better.
It seems that during some years they were hold by a leash that they no longer need because they know that nothing is going to happen.
It is good that there are new teams challenging,they get an investor, injects money, makes it grow and reach a new dimension but within limits.
However spending 300 million on defenses is too much. Not even the richest teams, like Madrid, United or Barcelona could consider doing that, and then next summer renew their best players, not be forced to sell and still sign someone better.
It seems that during some years they were hold by a leash that they no longer need because they know that nothing is going to happen.
Arsenal are feeling pinch because they are not quite as big as the clubs you referenced. In the long run even those teams who you quoted will suffer, because they do not have the resources to compete with state-backed clubs. An extreme and depressing version of the future is PSG and City competing for all the riches (and whoever the next dictatorship decides to buy from La Liga). Spending 100s of millions per window is not sustainable in the long run, in my opinion.
Wenger is purely trying to hide from the fact his team are a distant 6th despite being richer than at least 2 of the clubs above him in the league. Last year Chelsea won the league by tons of points and before that Leicester. The argument has no value as it has no substance. Even this season Barca in Spain may be far clear but have hardly spent any money in real terms. Just a freak Year really. If we want true fairness let's go back to the old days of shared gate receipts. But it will never happen. In England City,Utd,Leicester,Liverpool,Spurs,Arsenal and Chelsea (7 teams) have all finished in the top 2 in the past half a dozen years. That's pretty good competition
Its a nice idea but think its basically illegal as it discriminates. EU countries cant limit the opportunities of EU citizens.
So i guess you could implement it in England but I dont think it'd be straightforward there either.
Weak argument. Arsenal and Spurs generate their own money, same goes with United. The bigger clubs, essentially a bigger brand will always dominate even if there are periods of no success. Same applies to any market, Nike over New Balance, BMW over Alfa Romeo, iPhone over LG.
What he is arguing about, although not said specifically is that some clubs are backed by unlimited resources, essentially they are owned by states or even countries. Manchester City/PSG/Real Madrid come to mind here. Although the latter have been failing this season, it doesn't erase the fact that there is a huge gap here. So long as they are backed, they are likely to dominate - bad management aside.
He is right, the game is already ruined, but a few years like this, and the passion of the sport will diminish. People will get bored simply put.
You wouldn't need a consensus at all. UEFA just institutes a Wage Cap on the CL and EL. That would basically force all leagues to comply whether they like it or not.
Of course it does have several problems: enforcement, performance based contracts and you're right that the richer PL would still have an advantage over most other teams but it still could work much better than the current system or proposed FFP rules.
I predict in the next 20 years a wage cap will be instituted at CL and EL level.
Clubs should be allowed to spend the money they make. It'd be unfair to stop United spending their own money. What needs to be stopped is City and PSG throwing oil money around for fun. I mean when you get to the point where City are willing to spend £55m to buy a player just to fill in for a player who is injured for 2 months, you know things have gone too far.
Maybe the solution will come if we reach that apocalyptic situation that you say, when there is a very clear and resounding public reaction, but it is complicated.
It is difficult to stop the influence of money, besides many clubs will be accomplices, hoping to be the lucky ones who receive more than expected for a player.
Also, seeing that the World Cup is going to be held in Qatar, I doubt that the institutions will solve anything.
There will always be legal tricks to justify the income, and when they can not they´ll use a satellite club.
It is not sustainable for the clubs that invest and need a few years to amortize those signings, hoping that the project goes well.
What is he talking about?
City are walking it because of Pep and the Prem had 4 different champions in the past 4 seasons.
Barca is walking it because of its golden generation still, competing against an even richer club.
Juve are a traditional club and have risen from the second division not that long ago with very shrewd businesses (getting Pirlo and Pogba for free then selling him back for 100 million).
Bayern are the most well-run club in the world and aren't throwing money around at all, rest of Bundesliga is just incompetent.
Only PSG is destroying the French league but no one cares about the French league anyway.
City are walking it because of Pep and the Prem had 4 different champions in the past 4 seasons.
Barca is walking it because of its golden generation still, competing against an even richer club.
Juve are a traditional club and have risen from the second division not that long ago with very shrewd businesses (getting Pirlo and Pogba for free then selling him back for 100 million).
Bayern are the most well-run club in the world and aren't throwing money around at all, rest of Bundesliga is just incompetent.
Only PSG is destroying the French league but no one cares about the French league anyway.
Always thought this made sense - the winner and runner up only. Put the rest into the Europa League.
Many biological groups, if not all, tend to form hierarchies. We humans and football, as a human sport, is no exception. We can't have have equality of opportunity unless the whole thing is totally regulated. I'm bias a feck but i don't see anything wrong in a club being smart and successful, resulting in more money to spend and improve. The question marks, to me, come from outside money and the agents who hold clubs hostage.
Southampton, for example, might feel more competitive if they could keep their best players. Would all stay? No. Would some remain at the club without the pressure of the agents promising them fat paychecks? Maybe.
If a club spends 20+ years building a brand and then is able to pay well, so be it. However, when outside money pour in the shock quick and hits hard. Teams who rely on their academies to build players over the course of 10+ years suddenly lose all of them to the newly rich. They can't replace them fast enough and slip further down.
On the other hand, aging players don't remain in the same competition as the smaller clubs can't pay their salaries. These players go to the US and China.
So, starved by the rich and unable to get veterans, they are pushed to buy foreigners in bulk who are represented by the same few agents.
This cycle kills otherwise sustainable clubs, hampers competition and is dangerous for the newly rich too. What happens if the money stops coming?
Southampton, for example, might feel more competitive if they could keep their best players. Would all stay? No. Would some remain at the club without the pressure of the agents promising them fat paychecks? Maybe.
If a club spends 20+ years building a brand and then is able to pay well, so be it. However, when outside money pour in the shock quick and hits hard. Teams who rely on their academies to build players over the course of 10+ years suddenly lose all of them to the newly rich. They can't replace them fast enough and slip further down.
On the other hand, aging players don't remain in the same competition as the smaller clubs can't pay their salaries. These players go to the US and China.
So, starved by the rich and unable to get veterans, they are pushed to buy foreigners in bulk who are represented by the same few agents.
This cycle kills otherwise sustainable clubs, hampers competition and is dangerous for the newly rich too. What happens if the money stops coming?
in all fairness that was one season.He is wrong.
All my opinions on this subject are summarized by this picture
_____________________________________2015/16 Season
occasionally you will get teams you manage to put together a team on the cheap, but they will always be at a huge disadvantage to those who can spend a £150+ every summer like us and City do