Football 2013-2014

[kaosmark2]

they might have the same rule there, but rules like that are implemented by a country's FA.

[eFestivals]

I remember getting mocked at the start of this thread for saying Man U's wingers had lost all their threat and their centre-backs were aging and in decline

I've been reading the comments on the Guardian's footie pages now and then, and even the Man Utd fans posting there are conceding (over many weeks) that the squad is threadbare. Most seem to have already accepted that they probably won't make top 4 unless Utd buy in some real talent in January.

Probably the most common theme there (from Utd fans, remember) is "oh well, we've blown this season and won't make CL next season. Rebuild in the summer so Moyes has his own players, and push on from there". There's a fair amount of criticism for fergie too, for the state he let the squad get into over the last few seasons.

What I think those fans are missing tho is what sort of impact no CL next season will have on them - more difficult to get the players to get back up, and a big loss of required income along with a big need to spend on players.

The question that should be concerning those fans is: do the Glazers have any money?

[eFestivals]

Cheers. So our FA hiding behind that is absolute bollocks given its not coming from FIFA.

I don't think they've claimed that, have they? The only thing I've noticed them 'hiding behind' is the rules as they exist at that moment; that they won't act against something that should perhaps be acted against because action is not allowed within the rules.

The rules have been tweaked a bit now and then (I think there was a slight change at the start of this season, tho it might have been the previous one), to better address the inadequacies that get exposed now and then.

[kaosmark2]

I've been reading the comments on the Guardian's footie pages now and then, and even the Man Utd fans posting there are conceding (over many weeks) that the squad is threadbare. Most seem to have already accepted that they probably won't make top 4 unless Utd buy in some real talent in January.

Probably the most common theme there (from Utd fans, remember) is "oh well, we've blown this season and won't make CL next season. Rebuild in the summer so Moyes has his own players, and push on from there". There's a fair amount of criticism for fergie too, for the state he let the squad get into over the last few seasons.

What I think those fans are missing tho is what sort of impact no CL next season will have on them - more difficult to get the players to get back up, and a big loss of required income along with a big need to spend on players.

The question that should be concerning those fans is: do the Glazers have any money?

[eFestivals]

No not directly, it's just the way they say they can't act because of the rules imply they have no influence over the rules, when in fact they set them.

they set them, but they can't change them mid-season. Which I think is fair enough.

Rules of any sort tend to get better-defined over time, as any new situation that the rules didn't previously cover gets written into them.

While doing things that way has it's faults it's a better way of doing things than having them too strict from the start.

[The Nal]

The question that should be concerning those fans is: do the Glazers have any money?

[eFestivals]

More money than sense if they're willing to spend 28m on Fellaini.

The manager chooses where the money gets spent. The owners decides if there's money to be spent.

That subtle difference is everything.

My take on the Fellani buy is that Moyes had no more than £30M to spend in total, because that's all that was available to him to spend, and that he felt he had to spend it rather than not spend it.

Which implies to me they're strapped for cash. Even so I think it's likely that they could probably find the funds for a big splurge in the summer, but it only takes a glance to what happened to Liverpool to see what a massive risk that could be.

They don't seem like risk takers to me. They seem like people who want an outcome they're in control of - which suggests to me lots of possible outcomes, but not so many of the prevalent ones from Utd fans.

[zahidf]

The manager chooses where the money gets spent. The owners decides if there's money to be spent.

That subtle difference is everything.

My take on the Fellani buy is that Moyes had no more than £30M to spend in total, because that's all that was available to him to spend, and that he felt he had to spend it rather than not spend it.

Which implies to me they're strapped for cash. Even so I think it's likely that they could probably find the funds for a big splurge in the summer, but it only takes a glance to what happened to Liverpool to see what a massive risk that could be.

They don't seem like risk takers to me. They seem like people who want an outcome they're in control of - which suggests to me lots of possible outcomes, but not so many of the prevalent ones from Utd fans.

[kaosmark2]

The Prem form table makes happy reading atm

http://www.premierleague.com/en-gb/matchday/form-guide.html

Highlights are 1st, 13th and 19th place

[lost]

My take on the Fellani buy is that Moyes had no more than £30M to spend in total, because that's all that was available to him to spend, and that he felt he had to spend it rather than not spend it.

Which implies to me they're strapped for cash. Even so I think it's likely that they could probably find the funds for a big splurge in the summer, but it only takes a glance to what happened to Liverpool to see what a massive risk that could be.

They don't seem like risk takers to me. They seem like people who want an outcome they're in control of - which suggests to me lots of possible outcomes, but not so many of the prevalent ones from Utd fans.

[strummer77]

Neville got it right. United are just drifting through games, doesn't seem to be that anger there any more about the plight.

Anyway Gerrard and Sturridge out now. If we can win one of those three tough away games I think we've done quite well.

[Bobs]

I genuinely think it's deeply enthralling, the season will probably end in a damp squib now.

As i've said, I think Liverpool's season will be summed up in their next three away games, if they take 6 points, which i think is a great possibility, then they have every chance of reaching the top 4. That said, it wouldn't be the end if Liverpool ended up with 0 or 1, if they invest in January, but do they have any money? With Suarez on the form he's in, will he go out of form? That really would knacker Liverpool.

Spurs. What crisis? 2 hard fought wins on the road, albeit it against weaker teams, has put them in the mix again, and the Liverpool game will be a wondeful indication of were the teams are at. Liverpool, for the great home form, need a test away from home.

Arguably Chelsea could easily drop out if they aren't careful, they should be arguably right up there, and even though they are 5 points off, they really do seem to be struggling at the moment. No gelling at all.

Everton, great results great football. But too many draws.

[pink_triangle]

Anyway Gerrard and Sturridge out now. If we can win one of those three tough away games I think we've done quite well.

[eFestivals]

If they are strapped for cash then I think that's even more reason to stick with Moyes.

Not really.

If things are going to go badly then (with limited funds) that's Utd in a downward spiral that circumstances dictate will be extremely hard to manage (and perhaps might end up like Leeds or Pompey). While Moyes might manage to pull them out of that with decent signings, he might not manage to do that either.

Whereas if they were to get themselves a 'top top' manager (if one exists, if they can identify him and get him, etc) and somehow find him a big wedge to spend then they can, fingers crossed immediately get themselves back into a financially manageable position (tho a far worse one if it doesn't work).

The first of those is a big big gamble, and the second of those is a big big gamble. They both have their up sides and their downsides.

Ultimately, which one is best depends on how much risk you're prepared to take, and what you'd want to end up with to walk away in the worst possible circumstances. It's a judgement that only the owners are in the position to make.

It's all made harder to call because there's just so many variables - such as signings that don't work out which can happen for both the expensive and the cheapies. A 'normal' business would be much easier to work with, because the risk of any human failings (as there might be with a signing) tend to get better averaged out.

[eFestivals]

I think it may work in your favour, with them available Liverpool would have probably gone into those tough away games selecting their best 11 players, they will no end up selecting their best team. I personally think playing away against top 6 premiership sides with gerrard, coutinhio, suarez and sturridge all in the team would have been footballing suicide, offering little defensive support and an open invitation to be dominated in midfield. I think therefore the enforced changes will make you a lot more solid.

Unfortunately for Liverpool, Henderson is now out for a bit as well, leaving them very short in midfield.

Perhaps they should give Wenger a call and ask if they can borrow some of their massive midfield overstaffing... perhaps for just a pound.

[strummer77]

Unfortunately for Liverpool, Henderson is now out for a bit as well, leaving them very short in midfield.

Perhaps they should give Wenger a call and ask if they can borrow some of their massive midfield overstaffing... perhaps for just a pound.

[thetime]

What's all this complete rubbish about man utd not attracting the 'top players'? Apart from RVP have man utd attracted the 'top top' players since the influx of billionaires?

Right or wrong fergie usually got players with potential which hasn't always worked. Players like jones, smalling, nani, Anderson, de gea, be be, ronaldo, vidic, evra, so it's not like they have history of signing 'top top' players in recent times.

Edited December 10, 2013 by thetime

[pink_triangle]

Not really.

If things are going to go badly then (with limited funds) that's Utd in a downward spiral that circumstances dictate will be extremely hard to manage (and perhaps might end up like Leeds or Pompey). While Moyes might manage to pull them out of that with decent signings, he might not manage to do that either.

[jump]

What's all this complete rubbish about man utd not attracting the 'top players'? Apart from RVP have man utd attracted the 'top top' players since the influx of billionaires?

Right or wrong fergie usually got players with potential which hasn't always worked. Players like jones, smalling, nani, Anderson, de gea, be be, ronaldo, vidic, evra, so it's not like they have history of signing 'top top' players in recent times.

[eFestivals]

What's all this complete rubbish about man utd not attracting the 'top players'?

if they want to ensure they get themselves out of the shit, it's ONLY 'top top' players that they need to be signing, either now or (if the shit properly hits the fan) in the summer.

If they're in that much of shit come the summer, they won't manage to sign 'top top' players, cos those top players will want chumps footie.

[eFestivals]

I just dont see this downward spiral happening that your talking about. They may turn into a team who is borderline 4th -6th like liverpool or spurs but I dont see them going any lower.

simple fact is that the finances are unlikely to work for them to do that, unless there's someone putting their hands in their pockets - something that the Glazers have done their very best to avoid doing to date.

Can the Glazers find £100M to bail Utd out of the shit if they need bailing out of the shit? No one knows.

[eFestivals]

I don't see how there will be a downward spiral beyond being a team just outside Champions League (unless of course they are seirously mismanaged) While not getting Champions League money would hurt any side, the Man United finances are in much better shape than most other teams around them.

yeah, they can lose 15% of their every-penny-spent income without it having an impact.

Turnover means fuck all. It's spare cash that counts.

[thetime]

if they want to ensure they get themselves out of the shit, it's ONLY 'top top' players that they need to be signing, either now or (if the shit properly hits the fan) in the summer.If they're in that much of shit come the summer, they won't manage to sign 'top top' players, cos those top players will want chumps footie.

Edited December 10, 2013 by thetime

[eFestivals]

Suarez, Sturridge not 'top top' players?

so far they've not been 'top top' enough to get Liverpool back into the chumps.

Who might a non-chumps Utd buy with ease that would be better?

The simple fact is that outside the chumps the options are limited, and you have to get lucky with who you buy.

Your going a bit slightly over board don't you think? In the shit? We have had a bad few games, not like you exaggerating with united.

bad enough games over nearly half a season to have it looking like you're going to struggle to make the chumps.

Or haven't you noticed that?

Oh yeah I forgot not qualifying for the champions league and united will be doing a Leeds. Rather than fanciful claims, back it up why you think this will happen?

Without the chumps the expenditure will be greater than the income.

Without a magic money tree Utd will have no choice but to do a Leeds - or a Liverpool* at the very least.

(* and don't forget that Liverpool's turnaround has come about via the luck of circumstances around who their debt was to and that forcing a change of owner, it's not been an organic turnaround).

So the question is then about whether the Glazers have that magic money tree, and if they do whether they want to up their risks of massive losses (which pumping money into the club would be).

Without that magic money tree then the natural thing to happen for them will be a downward spiral, for at least as long as it takes to re-jig the expenditure so that it doesn't out-strip income... and in the worse case, you DO end up like Leeds.

Edited December 10, 2013 by eFestivals

[kaosmark2]

Bloody hell Neil. The Champions League is a large portion of income and the Glazers are using a lot of money for debt management but Man U are one of the richest clubs in the world. They have an income over in Asia that other premier league clubs can only dream of. The Champions League is MUCH less a % of their income than it would be for Spurs. Leeds spent less time in the Champions League than Newcastle, and took out ridiculous loans in an attempt to maintain that position and income. Man U have been established at the top for decades, they're not in comparable situations at all.