Would like Mourinho, but there are a few issues - he doesn't stay at clubs very long and doesn't normally develop young players (with the exception of his time at Porto). I'd be surprised if Sir Alex doesn't have a say in who should replace him. Oh and I hope to God that we don't sign an ex player out of sentiment. I can't understand fans who want an ex-player to be manager purely because they are an ex-player. If they lack experience at the top level of management then I don't want them.
Funnily enough, Keane is just like Fergie, sure there was a clash of personas in the end, no surprise. Keane is every bit as blunt and outspoken as Fergie, maybe in a few years he'll have the experience. His mentality is a little shakey goes off hte deep end a bit too much though, like his mentor Maureen for me, you won't like the football but you will like the trohpies. that sums that guy up
Arsenal are the club for people who prefer pretty football over their team achieving, progressing and showing ambition. Seeing the club achieve results is what's most important (bound to invite a few clever gloryhunter comments from someone).
To be fair I can't see any value in disagreeing with your second statement. Liverpool have been accused of being successful whilst not being pretty to watch. Arsenal themselves were succesful whilst being boring - even their fans gloried in singing 1-0 to the Arsenal. As for United, I believe that it is a case of time, tide and seasons. You won't really notice that they have changed until they have already done so - by which time it is too late. Now don't tell me I don't know what I am talking about - all the Reds on this board have been through that experience and we know how it goes.
The difference between Liverpool's period of dominance and Man Utd's is that Man Utd are more prepared for the future. Man Utd are a money making machine (despite the debt) with a huge following (probably more than any other club) and so they are very well set up for the future. Obviously Liverpool are still a big club but not as big as Man Utd in terms of number of fans, TV revenue, merchandise etc, and football was different back when Liverpool's dominance came to an end as football wasn't televised around the World as much as it is now. Obviously whoever comes in after Sir Alex will have a huge task of emenating him but the foundations for continued success are at the club. Even if his predecessor isn't as successful I still think we will be up there challenging for titles.
The euro ban was the beginning of the end for our spell for me. and I reckon it cost us more euro titles. that also had a devastating effect on Liverpool's image globally.
True. That also put back the England game as a whole, one of the reasons why Sir Alex took so long to win the Champions League with Man Utd in my opinion.
As this thread has now changed into discussing United I feel free to put the counter argument to your second paragraph. If you look at United's merchandising income you will note that the revenue from it is still growing but at a slower rate than previously. The TV revenues are no greater for United than they are for the rest of the major Premiership clubs (except that we have no CL income this season). It should also be noted that the TV income stream is under threat across Europe and is likely to fall significantly in the next few seasons. Additionally, you also have to consider that, without raising ticket prices significantly, you have little way of increasing match day income. With the income streams reducing in real terms then the ability of the club to continue to service the debt and grow comes more under threat. Though it is the same for all clubs the global financial situation is probably more precarious now than it was in 2007/8. Now please note I am not drawing comparisons with Liverpool (direct or implied - though I can do if you wish). The above is as an impartial overview of United's present position as would give to the revue of any corporation. United are not poor by any means but there are some serious strategic questions to be answered. To merely look at today's reports and rely upon United being more prepared and a "money making machine" is strategically very short sighted.
Man Utd are more televised than any other team (I'd prefer if we had more Saturday 3 o'clock kickoffs to be honest) so surely they recieve more TV income? Real Madrid and Barcelona are able to sell their own TV rights which gives them a greater income, I believe that in a few years time Man Utd will be able to do the same if they wish? There are rumours that Man Utd want to expand Old Trafford up to a 90,000+ capacity but there are some issues with houses and a railway line being very close to the ground.
I believe that the Premiership contract with the TV/Radio providers and then allocate the money to the clubs. As far as I am aware there is no greater income from the number of screenings. As you say it will be possible in the future for clubs to sell their own tv rights - it is a question of when and not if. All of the major UK clubs already have their own embrionic tv stations. However, there is a big question as to how the clubs can maximise their income - we all know just how easy it is to get feeds from various sources for free. As for expanding to 90,000 then you fall into the same problems that FSG are having presently - which option is the most cost-effective. Whatever route they chose then you just know that its going to be very expensive and that probably means even higher ticket prices
