December 01, 2020, 04:55:28 AM

Author Topic: Usmanov  (Read 109605 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

January 21, 2018, 06:57:23 PM
Read 109605 times


NSNO Subscriber
Donít really know where to post this but suppose itís a target of some description.

Apparently people high up at United have got wind that Usmanov is coming on board in the summer and are shitting it.

Heís already here in capacity but wants in with the ground etc.

Hopefully this comes to fruition, youíd like to think heíd run a better ship than his mate.

Weíre certainly missing leadership. Would be the biggest thing we could do this summer.

January 21, 2018, 07:00:15 PM
Reply #1


NSNO Subscriber
Sorry if im being dozy here but why would United be shitting it,?

I didnít really get the link either, and makes me question the whole thing more. I suppose as itíd be another team with cash to challenge them (theoretically, ala Chelseaand Man City) so thatís detrimental to their chances of constantly finishing top 4.

February 13, 2019, 10:29:58 PM
Reply #2


NSNO Subscriber
It's not. See Spurs.

What have Spurs won? Money is behind the success of pretty much every club seriously competing for the biggest competitions.

It's clearly not everything, nor is it a magic wand without the proper people in place to use it, but long term success relies on being able to financially compete with the very top teams.

Although I was being flippant, there are going to be exceptions (Spurs have done well, Atletico) but it's a narrow road that relies on not losing the manager capable of success under such conditions.
« Last Edit: February 13, 2019, 10:32:39 PM by blueToffee »

February 13, 2019, 11:16:14 PM
Reply #3


NSNO Subscriber
Spurs are winning unbelievably to be in the position they are, on their net spend. It's absurd (in my opinion) to judge them solely on trophies.

Of course money matters, but praying for some windfall from a 3rd world dictator isn't the way forward. Much better to just make much better decisions throughout the club and maximise performance and potential that way.

Yeah, I'm not suggesting we cross our fingers and hope that someone with bigger pockets comes along. All we can do is as you say make good decisions, appoint good people and try and incrementally move forward.

However, I do stand by the fact that continued success relies on a budget that competes on the top end. Otherwise, eventually a bigger fish will come along and poach your better players and manager. I mean, I don't think anyone would be surprised if Pochettino decided to go to Real Madrid or Man United should Spurs fall short again this season.  Or you get stories emerging like this:

There will always be a ceiling otherwise. Plus, usually it also provides a floor more often that not too. When Man United have a disastrous season, they're still only going so far down the league as the players they have are of a certain calibre.

February 14, 2019, 01:35:03 AM
Reply #4


NSNO Subscriber
Spurs show you can become competitive without money.

What they havenít yet shown either by winning, or how they cope without the manager and loss of 2/3/4 stars (itís easier to replace a RB than Kane/ Eriksen etc.) is that they can better the money teams when it really counts.

At the moment itís still clubs with massive money who win.

Atlťtico are a better example but the comparison isnít so straight forward as although they are way behind Madrid and BarÁa theyíre still 3rd in a big league which gives them better access to players than maybe even Arsenal, say.

The winners are increasingly those with most money.

As a sustainable strategy over 15-20 years we need to find a niche which is self sustaining, even if itís ceiling is limited.

Given the barriers to entry of the top 5 (excluding spurs moneywise) here even with a richer billionaire thereís no guarantee of breaking through to the top of that group.

Weíre yet to see the exit of a mega benefactor and itís impact but it might not be pretty.

So we need a model that enables consistent performance at a reasonably high level that isnít reliant on individuals.

Youíd assume that would be with development of younger players attracted through the possibility of first team minutes at a good level.

I'd imagine most would take a niche that means we may not be winning all that much, if anything, but are at least relevant/competitive/in the conversation. Much like Spurs. At least for a while.

In terms of Spurs and Atletico the litmus test will be when/if lose their managers. When clubs are built up to revolve around their managers to such a degree, as we were with Moyes or Man Utd did with Ferguson when the lynchpin is still in place then the plate spinning act can work and look good but after they go it's not hard to see why it can quickly become a mess.

Not to say that'll happen to Spurs, but it will be a test of their current model.
« Last Edit: February 14, 2019, 03:05:29 AM by blueToffee »

January 23, 2020, 06:28:22 PM
Reply #5


NSNO Subscriber
They seemingly want to kneecap Man City and PSG by any means necessary. So Iíd not be surprised if at some point they come after any club with the temerity to attempt to improve themselves by similar methods.

I would be inclined to agree with their argument if the governing body were not using their power in a clear attempt to give an advantage to the clubs who were currently at the top table. That is all this is. Big clubs wanting to create a ring fenced money source and monopoly and call it fair because they happened to make their money first. That to me is a more obnoxious degradation of football than such sponsorship deals.

I mean why shouldnít Man United, etc always qualify for the CL no matter the team they put out? Why shouldnít they always have first choice on the best players?
« Last Edit: January 23, 2020, 06:29:46 PM by blueToffee »