Football pre-season and too much money

[Magic-Johnson]

This one is going to be one of the most interesting seasons in our lifes.
but, one question about transfers...
From where big clubs found so much money for signing players?!

[TheGooner]

TV rights are worth BILLIONS each year - and are paid out to the clubs.

[universal4]

Yep, as an example, in 2014 each NFL Team got a share of over 6 billion dollars $6,000,000,000.00
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/11...ers-financials

The NFL is likely the best at sharing revenue
http://thefieldsofgreen.com/2014/07/...he-best-at-it/

Some team owners are less than happy about the sharing agreement.
http://www.bigcatcountry.com/2009/10...en-blow-up-the

Rick
Universal4

[Magic-Johnson]

yes i understand it all, but think this is wrong. Sports became just business.

[universal4]

We can also ask ourselves how much Las Vegas and betting had to do with sports being all about the money.

Would the kind of money that is being paid by the networks be as high if it weren't for the Sports Betting Business?

Would the viewer numbers be where they are at if it weren't for the fact that so many have placed wagers on the games and have so much interest in watching the outcomes?

Looking at what the networks pay for the NFL games annually, and realizing that the amount of money that football betting is worth is such a factor above that helps gives credence to your statement, Yes, much of sports has become all about the money.

Rick
Universal4

[Magic-Johnson]

Paul Pogba to Manchester United for 120M euros, even more that Juventus stadium price, lol!

[Magic-Johnson]

Latest news: Mario Gotze's back to Borussia Dortmund
Andre Gomes from Valencia to Barcelona for 55 M euros.
Pjaza transfer to Juventus!

[universal4]

120 Million is nothing for a stadium in the US.

Cowboy stadium was over 1 Billion and the Dallas Cowboy team is estimated to be worth 2.3 billion dollars or more depending on who is figuring their net worth. (2.3 billion is Forbes estimate) Patriots are estimated at 1.8 billion.

But the television contracts are many factors higher in the US. And when you consider how much the networks are shelling out, and then think about the fact that doesn't cover the other sports like baseball, basketball, etc, it just crazy amounts of money.

Rick
Universal4

[Magic-Johnson]

I just want to say that i'm amazed so much with Juve transfer politics.. got Pogba for free and now can sell for 120 M.
and this is not the first good deal for Juventus!

[DanHorvat]

Dallas Cowboy team is estimated to be worth 2.3 billion dollars or more depending on who is figuring their net worth. (2.3 billion is Forbes estimate)

Then the average Texan would estimate it at 2300 gazillion.

They're independent, you know?

[DanHorvat]

Most teams don't do such big transfers. It's a known fact only the top third of Premier League plus Barcelona, Real and Bayern can pay the top price.

Most teams still stay around 2-10 million, in installments, with a transfer such as Marko Pjaca to Juventus for €23m being among the higher transfer fees.

No insult intended but English clubs are just dumb. They're like those people who prefer to pay more for a flight so they can brag about it, as you can't brag about a cheap flight to Japan. It has to cost.

They're overpaying for players. And the entire Europe knows it. Mino Raiola knows it.

Barcelona, Bayern and Real have far superior transfer policies than any of the English drunken millionaire managers and that's why they're winning the CL. Just look at Manchester City and their hoarding of €50m wingers. Or Arsenal, one of the top clubs in the world still relying on a single half-baked forward.

[Deano99]

Most teams don't do such big transfers. It's a known fact only the top third of Premier League plus Barcelona, Real and Bayern can pay the top price.

Most teams still stay around 2-10 million, in installments, with a transfer such as Marko Pjaca to Juventus for €23m being among the higher transfer fees.

No insult intended but English clubs are just dumb. They're like those people who prefer to pay more for a flight so they can brag about it, as you can't brag about a cheap flight to Japan. It has to cost.

They're overpaying for players. And the entire Europe knows it. Mino Raiola knows it.

Barcelona, Bayern and Real have far superior transfer policies than any of the English drunken millionaire managers and that's why they're winning the CL. Just look at Manchester City and their hoarding of €50m wingers. Or Arsenal, one of the top clubs in the world still relying on a single half-baked forward.

Jeez, don't know where to start with this...

"dumb"

17 out of the top 30 richest clubs in Europe are English, that's nearly the whole of the premier league. I'd use a lot of words to describe these clubs and how they are run, but "dumb" wouldn’t be one of them.

"brag"

So these multi million pound successful businesses (ie. clubs) "prefer" to pay over the odds for players, so they can "brag" about it? Yep, sounds about right..!

I agree that English clubs are overpaying for players, but it has nothing to do with being dumb, or bragging. I can think of 4 factors right now, each of which on their own is more plausible that your reason;

1. They can afford it, and the clubs in Europe know this. The record TV deal of €5.1billion, spread equally among the 20 premier league clubs, is starting to come through now so it's just going to get worse.

2. It's the most competitive big league in Europe so you quite often have many English clubs going for the same player, which can start a bidding war and drive up player prices.

3. Weather in England and quality of life (especially outside London) cannot compete with sunnier climes elsewhere in Europe, so they have to offer better terms for players to be persuaded to come and live there.

4. Pound has fallen by about 10% against the euro, which means in theory that players brought in from Europe are now 10% more expensive.

"English drunken millionaire managers"

Ah, nothing like a bit of casual racism as we head into the weekend. I think there are only 2 or 3 English managers in the premier league at the minute, but yeah, they're all pissheads, and millionaires (see point 1 above)

"Arsenal relying on a half baked forward"

It is this half baked remark that has irked me the most. Firstly I'm an arsenal fan. Secondly, and more importantly, you can't berate the English clubs for overspending and then in the same post slag off an English club for sticking to a wage structure and sensible business model / transfer policy. You've completely undermined your whole argument, as poor as it was.

[DanHorvat]

So your main argument is "they can afford to overpay so overpay they should". Excuse me, but that's the very definition of a drunken billionaire.

And you very well know the owners of top English clubs are IN FACT drunken billionaires from US, Russia and the Emirates. They can often be spoiled brats. They like things such as Robinho for 32m or a 500-foot yacht for 400m. Little do they know about football.

I don't care if you're an Arsenal fan - Olivier Giroud is one half-baked forward.

We all see Arsenal aren't really challenging the title but are in business of finishing fourth and making money in the process. That's why Wenger is the manager for so long despite not winning anything. And that's why Giroud is still there.

From a business perspective the clubs are doing fine and can definitely afford to pay even more, it all offsets through shirt sales alone, especially in case of Man United. They sold 1.7m replica kits in 2015-16 and Martial was #3 by shirt sales in the world.

From that perspective, 42.5m paid for him is a bargain and the ROI is amazing. From a football perspective, he's useless.

Well what I'm talking about is that football perspective we all care about. The real world. The goals and wins. That's where English clubs are usually cannon fodder in the later stages of the Champions League, and can only win it by accident. (I was happy when Drogba did)

I just don't think the way to increase your club's chances to win a competition is paying 50m for a random in-form player just because you can. Or buying Otamendi for 32m. You need to be a bit more cunning than that.


Plus, in football, players usually have one great season which is fruit of a lot of wisdom and labor – and top English clubs are prone to buying them AFTER that season. You don't have to be a genius to see Pogba reached the CL final with Juventus and the Euro final with France. But you should be a genius to take him off United's hands two years ago, train him into a player he is today, reach the CL final and then make 105m on him.

Or look at Mahrez. So easy to make 40m bids now. But he's not worth 40m anymore, he is in retrospect (as in going back in time and having Mahrez play a flawless season, winning the title for you). Well whoever buys him is too late.

I'd even go as far as saying the top English clubs are often the graveyard for the 40m player's career. What Juventus / Monaco / Wolfsburg / Lille or a smaller domestic team create, the top teams buy for 40m and then ruin.

So glad Leicester won it.

For what it's worth, I like what Liverpool / Klopp are doing in this transfer window.

[Deano99]

No my main argument is more a supply and demand one, pretty simple really. There's a massive demand in England for good players, and there's a general lack of supply across Europe. That tends to drive up prices, which can only be paid because the english clubs can afford to.

And do you know who can afford the very best players? And have overpaid just as much if not more that the English clubs? The beloved triumvirate of Real Madrid, Barca and Bayern Munich. Are they all owned by rich drunkards as well? These 3 clubs are guilty more than most of the practises that you mention, and you know what? It's worked for them. It's nothing to do with being "cunning", they are the clubs with the biggest money and prestige so they can attract the best players, so they have most success. It's a simple formula, but it's a formula that doesn't work without money.

I'm a big fan of the goals and wins as well, that's what football is all about, but it's naive to think that money does not help get those goals and wins.

Your point on martial is not necessary true, clubs make very little from shirt sales nowadays, it's a bit of a myth that they do. In United's instance it is even less true, they signed a massive record breaking shirt deal last year with adidas, which means that the club gets a tiny share of any shirt sales. United do well out of the deal, but they'll never recoup martial's transfer fee directly from shirt sales.

I agree that the English clubs have underperformed in Europe, but to say they're cannon fodder is not right either. Since 2005 there have been 3 (different) winners from England, and 8 finalists. The rest of the European titles have gone to the same big European powerhouses. You should be thanking the English clubs for even coming close to breaking that dominance. Unless of course you enjoy watching the big superstar galacticos demolish every team in Europe as well as their domestic leagues? Not what I would expect from a purist such as yourself.

We do agree on a lot of things tho, one of them being that Giroud is indeed a half baked forward. I never said anything to the contrary! But the unfortunate thing is that there is a lack of real options in the transfer market to improve the squad, and arsenal are hamstrung by their wage structure, which has seen them lose out on a few players to other premier league clubs. Not that they or wenger are blameless, of course they're not, I was merely pointing out their sensible strategy as a contradiction to your main point of "dumb English clubs will pay anything for players".

We also have a mutual appreciation for Leicester and Liverpool. What Leicester done last season was incredible, and something that could only happen in the premier league right now. And Klopp is just the man!! I would have loved him at arsenal, but he's a good fit for Liverpool if I'm honest.

The main thing is that the premier league is attracting the best talent outside of the big European three, managers and players. It's only a matter of time before that starts showing more on the pitch. As difficult a pill that would be for some to swallow.

Ps. I not even English!





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DanHorvat]

What I'm trying to say is that good transfer policy isn't about the transfer fees. Bayern bought Hummels for 32m and ensured stable defence for years to come, Barca bought Umtiti for 21m and will make him be a good defender whether he likes it or not. Meanwhile, Man City shelled out 58m on Otamendi and Mangala last year and they will now take insanity to the next level, paying 50m for a single defender.

Maybe they should pay 55. One million for every goal Everton conceded last season.

I'm just under the impression that the top English clubs are getting rid of their big signings so easily within a year, and the other big teams in Europe seem to be more patient with theirs.

Or maybe it's just me and I fail to understand that 50m is really peanuts for these guys and they'll just get rid of a 65m player as soon as they see he's no good. Other teams are doing that as well, but with 1-10m transfers, so it doesn't make the news.

By the way, Rick, feel free to open a new topic about throwcarryball.

[universal4]

By the way, Rick, feel free to open a new topic about throwcarryball.

Thanks Dan, this made me laugh......(guess I deserved that one).....and oddly enough, the beginning of the thread was more about football until you soccer guys slanted it....

...just kidding........

Yes sports, and sports betting (and each country's version of football), as well as the huge TV contracts, have certainly been some of the major driving forces that has elevated sports to mean much more the "business of sports" on both sides of the pond.

I find some of the numbers posted for UK Teams as well as player salaries etc to be fairly large compared to what NFL Player salaries are as an example, especially when the teams themselves are not quite on the same net worth ranges (although climbing).

I ask this because I really do not know the answer:
Do the teams in the UK Leagues have to follow the same kinds of TV Revenue sharing agreements as the NFL? (As an example, Jerry Jones is not exactly happy about having to give away some of the revenues, he feels his team should get a larger portion since the Cowboys do command larger $$ from the networks)

As far as I know, each team gets equal share in the revenue (after the league takes their cut) no matter how popular or unpopular (spelled tv ratings) any team is any year.

Also, are there any rules concerning salary caps? (whether single player or aggregate totals per team)

Rick
Universal4

[DanHorvat]

No salary caps. Just some fair play rules but no one knows what they are.

TV rights in the UK are shared 50% equally among all clubs and the rest is based on the number of televized matches and final league position.
http://www.totalsportek.com/money/pr...-distribution/
Orderly people, Brits. They're not cowboys.

[universal4]

Thanks Dan,

The tv rights deal on the surface looks to be fairly distributed, but it also favors the teams that have better seasons (as opposed to the NFL method which is more evenly distributed among teams even when they have bad seasons).

The lack of salary caps does seam to favor the larger and deeper pocketed teams more.

I couldn't recall what it was so I looked it up and this years cap is $155,270,000.00 maximum in 2016.
https://www.nflpa.com/news/all-news/...am-salary-caps

Looking at the chart, most teams do a pretty extensive job of spending almost every dollar they are allowed to each year...lol

Rick
Universal4

[slotplayer]

Cristiano Ronaldo is the worlds highest paid athlete in 2016, 88 million USD.

I heard that on the news a while back.

[DanHorvat]

The lack of salary caps does seam to favor the larger and deeper pocketed teams more.

Yes, only the wealthiest teams sign top players, there's no chance for a smaller team to do it. They can have a top player only if they create one through their youth system or scout network.