Two reasons for me why Arsenal's current form is enjoyable.That's my adopted team, since around 2010 and Bale / Modric / Defoe. With Poch they've been punching above their weight, playing attractive, sound soccer at a budget well below the big four. Oh they'll break your heart in the end, but that's always part of the deal unless you're one of those dicks that adopt Chelsea or man united. Added bonus : it's so much fun to hate on arsenal
Before I had a team I was playing rec soccer and the guy who ran the team was an arsenal fan as he grew up next to highbury stadium and all his mates were on the team and they were all arsenal fans...... I rue the day I met them....... I am now an arsenal supporter.Anyone know what Premier League team I should support. I'm pretty sick of watching as a neutral. I've been thinking Tottenham because of Jewish origins but I'm not sure.
That Wimbledon team had a very young bruiser named Vinnie on it...
That Wimbledon team had a very young bruiser named Vinnie on it...
I predict Spurs are about to get bullied in the summer transfer market. Can't see them keeping Eriksen around another year.
Man only has so long to make money as an athlete, and Tottenham has a wage structure in place that they won't deviate from.
https://en.as.com/en/2018/01/17/football/1516210881_006124.html
You think they’ll all of a sudden double or triple half their lineup’s wages? Aledwereld is on well under $100k, as is pretty much the whole team.I thought the main point to the new stadium, both increased capacity and renting it out to the NFL a few times a year, was to generate the increased revenue for them to be competitive on things like this?
United makes so much more than anyone else, it’s disgusting. The whole club is available for sponsorship if you offer a little $.You might be right. They should nearly be doubling their gate receipts (compared to White Hart Lane not to this year at Wembley of course) and I don't know how much their getting for pimping the place to the NFL. I know it's a lot but probably not significant enough to compete with Liverpool/United never mind City and Chelski, They could stay ahead of Arsenal for the near future though which to Spurs fans I suppose would be something.
West Ham like me.Anyone know what Premier League team I should support. I'm pretty sick of watching as a neutral. I've been thinking Tottenham because of Jewish origins but I'm not sure.
They going to be able to offload Chicharito?West Ham like me.
This is one of those annoying issues where I know the answer (I think so at least), yet it doesn't add up to my satisfaction, so I ask anyway in case I'm missing something.United makes so much more than anyone else, it’s disgusting. The whole club is available for sponsorship if you offer a little $.
You ask a good question. In the (limited) reading on the topic I've done, I only ever see the "why" they have more revenues, not the "how" (or flip that, if it better suits your semantic paradigm). One example I'm aware of is they have an apparel deal that is ~35-40M pounds more than LFC.This is one of those annoying issues where I know the answer (I think so at least), yet it doesn't add up to my satisfaction, so I ask anyway in case I'm missing something.
Why does Man United make so much more revenue than anyone else in the PL?
I know they were the dominant winning team for a long time at the right time, when soccer became more global and allegiances and fandoms were formed and they are still taking advantage of that. And it's only been 4 (building to a near certain 5) years since they last won (and they won 5 of 6 before that).
But the sport and league have grown even more in the last decade as new teams have started to win some. Yet MU's revenue dominance is really overwhelming and seemingly disproportionate. Do they have such a locked in advantage that it's almost impossible for anyone to catch up? If they go another 5-6 years without a title would it even make a difference?
Dan Jones, partner in the Sports Business Group at Deloitte, said Manchester United's record revenues were achieved by "phenomenal commercial revenue growth".
He added: "In recent years, their ability to secure commercial partnerships with value in excess of that achievable by their peers has been the crucial factor in enabling the club to regain their place at the top of the money league.
I have no evidence to back this up but I think their dominance of the league happened just around the same time Fox Soccer Channel was formed to broadcast the Premier League in the US. Not saying that's the sole reason but it could be a factor.Why does Man United make so much more revenue than anyone else in the PL?
This is one of those annoying issues where I know the answer (I think so at least), yet it doesn't add up to my satisfaction, so I ask anyway in case I'm missing something.
Why does Man United make so much more revenue than anyone else in the PL?
I know they were the dominant winning team for a long time at the right time, when soccer became more global and allegiances and fandoms were formed and they are still taking advantage of that. And it's only been 4 (building to a near certain 5) years since they last won (and they won 5 of 6 before that).
But the sport and league have grown even more in the last decade as new teams have started to win some. Yet MU's revenue dominance is really overwhelming and seemingly disproportionate. Do they have such a locked in advantage that it's almost impossible for anyone to catch up? If they go another 5-6 years without a title would it even make a difference?