Fair comments Vimhawk, and perhaps in part an answer to Helder's question. There would have been resistance to such a takeover at Spurs, whereas with City they were pushing at an open door. The only significant question was 'how much' not 'are we interested'. Fans that decry the City and Chelsea route to success should surely hold to their principles and decry us going that road too. For me, it's a no-brainer, I want the success that Chelsea have had and City are on the cusp of, if it takes a 'sugar daddy' to deliver it, then bring me the spoon and I'll start pouring it in
Perhaps we should change the OP's question to: " Would you like a spoonful of sugar to help the medicine go down?" I for one vote NO. Teams like Spurs are leaders amongst a rapidly dwindling pack of (decent) teams around the world who are helping football retain its dignity and spirit. We are honestly a pride of the modern game. Daniel Levy take a bow my son...
Aye but there's the rub. It all depends on how you define "best team", as does a "best team" really exist. What every team does do, Spurs included, is buy to the best of their ability given their funds. Question is how you acquire said funds? I think we can all see that the real days of measured progress over time, success breeding success, are pretty much over given the change in the way the game is financed. Totally different from how it was 20 years ago. If the modern trend continues, then continual foreign investment will increase the gulf (no pun intended) between the "have" and "have nots". Utd fans may argue that they have built a team without this kind of financial influence and maybe this is the case; but they were advantaged in that as a club they were in European competition at the highest level before this trend started, with all the inherent benefits that had (more money, better world wide recognition, kudos as regards attracting players). For clubs like ours those days are pretty much gone. Imagine you were a fan of another top 5-7 club from the last couple of seasons. Whereas the last European places were routinely competed for, the number of places will diminish as more clubs buy into the top spots resulting is less time "other clubs" in European competition and therefore less funds and so on. As Spurs fans we were lucky enough to play CL footy before the Man City changes really kicked in, coinciding with Liverpool failing to achieve to "their expectations" and this allowed us to hold our own better than some others in the EPL, but over time that will change and the result will see a backward step not due to our desire or quality on the pitch, but the comparative quality of our squad and the simply inability to hold on to those players we value and buy those that can improve us. I think we have already seen this over the last couple of years with the eternal striker search. If we want to return English football to proper competition then I believe that the only way is Ensil's prophesy of the new "Europe League" the EPL of Europe and a return to a consolidated FA league structure. However of course then the problem is that one of the factors that has made the EPL so successful will be lost in the same way that many see the Europa / Champions Leagues or League / FA Cups. As for me, I don't know which I'd prefer.
Yep Vimhawk, I think it just depends upon one's views/principles, etc. I thoroughly respect those like you and Helder, who don't want the City/Chelsea route to success.
Excellent stuff again, HS. Don't forget also that Utd have been a 'national/global brand' for years, arguably since the Busby Babes, and the Munich air crash. Also their Catholic/Celtic affiliations has helped them greatly to transcend their Manchester/Salford roots. Even before Fergie, I'd known loads of 'Cockney Reds' and their fanbase has always been bigger than ours, certainly since the days of Best and their European cup win in 68. Clubs like Everton and Villa have arguably suffered more than us at the hands of Chelsea and City, although as a Londoner I probably feel the 'Chelsea pain' more than those two clubs' fans. Especially when I remember just how far we were ahead of them, on and off the pitch, a mere 30 years ago.
Yeah, GH10 you're right about Utd's global branding and also the religion aspect affecting clubs popularity. Interestingly though I bet that non-localised fans are now less likely to be religiously motivated as they are player or marketing motivated. I remember another thread on here about SE Asia and "global fans bases" and the interesting thing being that it's all about buying the right players as much as anything. A pair of friends recently were on holiday in South Korea and who did they all support .... Man U and why .... Park Ji-Sung, although a couple had taken interest in Arsenal because of Park Chu-Young. Now this will sound cynical and I don't watch Man U enough to be able to accurately comment; but whenever I have seen Park I have thought he was ok, but not what I would have expected from a Utd purchase. This started me wondering if this was one of the Fergie's "flop" purchases or simply a win-win, where even if he wasn't the greatest player the overall club benefit in terms of marketing outweighed any player related costs.
The one big problem is that ManC have bought so many players they have monopolised the market,i read today that W.Bridge was wanted on loan by Brighton,but then Poyet saw his wages were 90k a week and said we couldn't even pay a 10th of that.I have lost count of the amount of players they have out on loan and paying the majority of there wages(Ade for 1).This just seems a sad way for football to be run.I for one wouldn't want the sugar daddy and i can remember us winning the league.I know it was inevitable this would happen after Chelsea started it all but Manc have taken it to a whole new and frightening level.
A quick once-over of the BBC rumours page... ...implies there's one way it could end - a team with plenty of cash proves too tempting for various members of their squad. In other words, death by irony.
Yep HS, global branding and marketing takes many courses these days. I was well happy the other day, when I saw a Chinese guy in a Spurs shirt. Now he may have been Spurs born and bred, but I like to think of him as the first Asian 'glory-hunter' I've spotted over here. That would be a great sign of our relative success in recent years, and the imposing global power of the Prem and CL.
Hi Pat, it's a mark of City's incredible rise to power and their current ascendancy over us, that they were able to loan to us (who used to be a rival, and a few years ago a superior, team) Adebayor. A player, we grasped with open arms as a step up on some of our strikers, and yet for them, a 'cast off'.
Yep Ensil, it's coming up to crunch time. I was pleased when UEFA announced the new FFP rules, whether they will bite, and how hard will that bite be ..... mmmmmmmm
Just hope the FFP rules help somewhat Ensil.G10 it is rather sad that we are no longer looked on as a threat by ManC,once they let us have their 5th striker the writing was on the wall i'm affraid.
hu·bris noun excessive pride or self-confidence; arrogance. If they have Aguero or Dzeko injured for a length of time, coupled with the Tevez business, it's not unfeasible that they'd have to rely on Balotelli to stay sane long enough to complete a couple of back-to-back games.
I'd agree with your implication L18. For me, Leeds were the last team you could realistically argue hadn't bought the title. Crucially (?), it was the last pre-Prem title.
Like the time we bought that Toda bloke? Maybe his smashing performance(s) (did he actually play more than a single game for us?!) inspired your Chinese friend (despite the fact that Toda was Japanese- I know- I'm a narrow-minded bigot )? All jokes aside though, a lot of people have been making the point about global marketing and worldwide appeal, and they are certainly aims of the Mansours at City. However, the idea that this appeal is generated by exporting the 'brand' to the investor's home country is probably redundant, for two reasons: 1.David 2.Beckham I'd bet my house that he is BY FAR the most famous face in all of Asia major and Minor, AND the Middle East, AND whichever other oil wells these loaded sugababes crawl out of. He was neither native to those countries (although hearing him speak english you wouldn't have known it, nor was his 'icon' purposefully exported by the owners of United. Goldenballs just spread. Like an epedemic. Everywhere. Entirely by accident (good looks and good free kicks). Global stardom- both at the level of player and club- cannot be bought so easily. The points made about Man United on this topic prove this:- their global stardom was achieved DECADES ago, over a period of time far longer than the Sheiks' reign at City, with FAR less money than any of the current tenants of the EPL. Liverpool and Spurs are also good example of this: without meaning to sound cruel, we're still living off borrowed fame from the golden era which- according to all historians- ended 1991 at the latest. Again- global stardom achieved before money controlled the game. Thought, gents?
Ha! PNP! I just got a mature response to this thread's sister over on the City board. I'm not sure he's actually a City fan b/c I've already been insulted by two, which leaves just the one... Anyway- well chuffed that my thread has hit the 75 posts mark. Cheers everyone for what has been a lively, sensible and engaging debate. Some really good ideas flying around.
Hi Helder, as you say, you've provoked a good debate Some of the comments have helped me get a better understanding of why the Mansours went for City, as to where it will all end for football, it's impossible for anyone to say in detail what football will be like in 30 years time. Anyone who tried it 1981 would have been so far out, it would have terrible for any potential Mystic Megs or Maurices. What I can say is to repeat already what I have said, globalisation and media-driven revenues will continue to grow apace, and City are in a very good place to benefit from that trend.
