Money earned from winning trophies can't sustain a squads wages at Utd, so that's were owners, PR, sponsors etc come into play, are you crediting Fergie with the full monty or with football only?
Well no he didn't but they all think he was one of their best managers! Tobes - did you read the other thread to see what it was Souness actually oversaw re the boot room?
And who exactly were those other managers? How many stood the test of time or susteained any success? Wenger perhaps? My point made. Don't get me wrong, Ferguson was great but it's relative imho. And you don't need an MBA to see that Fungas benefited vastly from the visionary genius and business acumen of Martin Edwards. For sure, LFC tried to compete financially at the time with a string of much weaker managers but with no real global strategy......In fact, had LFC had that coming off the back of the 70's and 80's success, it stands to reason that we'd be a bigger club now!
Without the on pitch success none of the rest happens - that's the top, middle & bottom of it. The fact that they maximised the marketing potential from their on pitch success, is a job well done by those concerned, but without the success that Ferguson delivered they've got nothing to sell.....
And without the off pitch stuff, the on pitch stuff is much harder and less likely to have happened. You can't credit either with it fully, each side needed each other. Basically, its was a well oiled machine.
Edwards had been Chairman for 13 years before they lifted their first title. Edwards 'genius' saw him try to flog the club to Robert Maxwell & that clown Michael Knighton during that period btw. Once the wheels of success started turning then he oversaw their off field growth, but it was Ferguson that was catalyst, not the other way round.....
But at Utd it does and did happen pre Fergie as has already been pointed out, they had the biggest attendance's at the time and also purchased big name high earning players. The Glazers never took control at OT due to Fergie they did it because it was and is a cash cow.
No, as the success on the field was what kick started their growth & eventual dominance. You can trace it all back to that first FA Cup win in '92, followed by the league win in the following year.
No question he had his hand in it but he is a long way from being the man that built utd alone. Who bank-rolled his first 6 empty years? How did he manage that and how many were given that chance during his entire tenure? Not bloody many. You didn't answer my question. When he began to win, at the beginning of the EPL era, who was his competition? George Graham? lol Seriously, he's good, actually he is definitely one of the greatest of all time but his greatness is relative.
United were a big club, but a big club that hadn't lifted the title for 26 years until he lead them to victory in '93. As for the Glazers, the club wouldn't have been something they'd have looked at twice if it wasn't for what Ferguson had been the architect of. As United were one of the few clubs capable of returning a decent financial return & the reason for that was???? Moyes has already knocked £220m (& counting) off the value of the business. If they fail to make the CL that will rapidly increase, their sponsors will become somewhat anxious & their revenue streams will drop off by 10's of £m's.........& within a relatively short span of time, that 'cash cow' could potentially become loss making.......it's all about what happens on the grass mate.
Thanks smart arse, my bad. They of course won the League cup in '92, their first FA cup under Ferguson was '90
tobes you are obviously playing devil's advocate and showing loyalty to Everton's sister club but to credit Fergie with the full kit and caboodle at OT and diss the work of the non footballing side of the franchise is quite frankly burying your head in the retired old ****s rectum.
What the same George Graham who delivered the title to Arsenal for the first time in nearly 2 decades with that last minute winner at ........where was it again? You can't say the competition was gash, so therefore he somehow won by default, haha, kopite logic right there. Your opinion on the merits of the other managers is subjective & the same subjective opinion could be applied to Paisleys competitors in the 70's, or Shankly's in the 60's, it's a nonsense argument. You can only beat what's in front of you & he did that for 2 decades mate.
I think the point tobes is trying to make is that without fungus, Man United wouldn't be what it is today as its Man Uniteds success coupled with Sky and Edwards that has made Man United what it is today. As much as we don't want to like it i think we have to agree with this. I'm not sure you could argue otherwise
They weren't listed on LSE until around 1991. Until then (during his first 4 years) he was totally bank-rolled by the largest attendance and the growing marketing revenues. At which point, he had his jigsaw pieces in place and the rest is history and their growth then definitely came from success on the field....
Hillsborough played a massive part in us not winning the title and losing it that night, can't diss Graham's achievements even if it was assisted by massive amounts of money in brown envelopes.
That day is etched into my memory for eternity....the beginning of the end of an era He certainly did beat the shower of ****e in front of him. Agreed
Errmm no mate. It's really not complicated, on pitch success = opportunity to build the brand & increase revenues. lack of on pitch success = fall in revenues. You can do what City did & Chelsea did & buy the success & hope that everything then falls into place & you end up with a club that's books balance (not looking a great business model so far) Or you do what United did & maximise the opportunity that on pitch success has provided you with. You could say that the timing of their success i.e the start of the Sky era & then the CL gravy train, assisted them in doing so, but it will always come back to the same starting point.
Alternatively Fergie wouldn't have achieved what he did in the end without the financial backing he received at the beginning of his tenure, if they were skint as you are trying to assert where did the dosh come from? I'd guess it was from the attendance money that they have always been guaranteed pre or post Fergie.
