Champions League Discussion

[Bigpapa42]

Doing well in the Champions League isn't just about the prestige and the expectation of a big club doing so. They are certainly there, but there is a very real financial element to it. The biggest clubs in the world count on deep runs into the Champions League every season and the money that brings. Simply making the Group Stage is a pretty big windfall for a club but there is prize money for each round beyond that. More importantly, there is huge TV money. When big clubs have crashed out of the CL at the Group Stage in the past - such as Manchester United way back in 2006 or 2007 - there is always talk about the financial effect on the club.

Its might be easy to say that Manchester City don't need the money. But with the Financial Fair Play rules coming into effect soon, they do. As of last season, the incomes that the club made were not even enough to cover the squad's wages. Winning the league certainly brought in some money but the club against spent this summer. City is entirely reliant on the Sheik's money. Under FFP, that doens't work. Not to mention the danger that he will pull that financial support. The moment that he pulls the support, City hits administration. As a support, that would honestly make me nervous.

I do find it amusing to try to downplay expectations. How is it okay for the most expensive squad in the world to get outplayed and lost to Europe's premier feeder club? As a supporter, I would pissed. As an Arsenal supporter, I came into this season with no expectation they would legitimately compete for the league title nor that they would win the Champions League. I have hope, but not expectation. I appreciate that the club is financially viable but frustrated at the results. Even recognizing that the amount of money that Wenger has invested into the squad won't put Arsenal on level, I still expect them to advance through to the Champions League knockout rounds, so I don't see a result like the 2-0 loss to Schalke as particularly acceptable. I'm not going to call for them to fire Wenger but it tells me that they need to sort shit out. If Wenger had dropped $200m into the squad in the past two seasons, I would absolutely expect better than the Group Stages.

 

[1ke]

Doing well in the Champions League isn't just about the prestige and the expectation of a big club doing so. They are certainly there, but there is a very real financial element to it. The biggest clubs in the world count on deep runs into the Champions League every season and the money that brings. Simply making the Group Stage is a pretty big windfall for a club but there is prize money for each round beyond that. More importantly, there is huge TV money. When big clubs have crashed out of the CL at the Group Stage in the past - such as Manchester United way back in 2006 or 2007 - there is always talk about the financial effect on the club.

Its might be easy to say that Manchester City don't need the money. But with the Financial Fair Play rules coming into effect soon, they do. As of last season, the incomes that the club made were not even enough to cover the squad's wages. Winning the league certainly brought in some money but the club against spent this summer. City is entirely reliant on the Sheik's money. Under FFP, that doens't work. Not to mention the danger that he will pull that financial support. The moment that he pulls the support, City hits administration. As a support, that would honestly make me nervous.

I do find it amusing to try to downplay expectations. How is it okay for the most expensive squad in the world to get outplayed and lost to Europe's premier feeder club? As a supporter, I would pissed. As an Arsenal supporter, I came into this season with no expectation they would legitimately compete for the league title nor that they would win the Champions League. I have hope, but not expectation. I appreciate that the club is financially viable but frustrated at the results. Even recognizing that the amount of money that Wenger has invested into the squad won't put Arsenal on level, I still expect them to advance through to the Champions League knockout rounds, so I don't see a result like the 2-0 loss to Schalke as particularly acceptable. I'm not going to call for them to fire Wenger but it tells me that they need to sort shit out. If Wenger had dropped $200m into the squad in the past two seasons, I would absolutely expect better than the Group Stages.

Got this from Swiss posted on the 8th of October. Just a small snippet......Let know know BP if you want the full link. Its about LeArse. Also, last years finances for United were super fucked due to them not getting any extra CL money.

Nevertheless, the bottom line is that Arsenal once again made another sizeable profit, even if it was largely on the back of player sales. There is no doubt that the club’s record off the pitch has been superb, especially in the unforgiving world of football, where large losses are frequently the order of the day. In fact, the last time that Arsenal reported a loss was a decade ago in 2002, amply demonstrating its self-financing ethos. The last five years have been particularly impressive, at least financially, with Arsenal accumulating staggering profits of £190 million, an average of £38 million a year.

Arsenal have consistently been one of the most profitable clubs in the world, though they are not quite the only leading club to make money. Both the Spanish giants have recently reported large profits for 2011/12: Barcelona £41 million (€49 million) and Real Madrid £27 million (€32 million). In addition, Bayern Munich have been profitable for 19 consecutive years. Manchester United slipped to a £5 million loss (before tax) last season, dragged down by £50 million of interest charges, though they made a £30 million profit the previous year.

At the other end of the spectrum, clubs operating with a benefactor model reported enormous losses. Manchester City’s £197 million loss in 2010/11 was the largest ever recorded in England, while Juventus, Inter, Chelsea and Milan all registered losses of around £70 million. As Gazidis put it, “we see clubs struggling to keep pace with the financial demands of the modern game.”

That said, the arrival of UEFA’s Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations, not to mention the economic difficulties of many of the clubs’ owners, has produced a clear change in behaviour. Milan and Inter have been selling their experienced, more expensive players, while City were relatively restrained in the transfer market (by their own exalted standards) this summer. Even Chelsea’s spending has been on younger players with a future resale value.

 

[calgaryballer]

I think a big part of Juve's loss was building their new stadium. They are supposed to be in extremely good health now that the new arena is open.

Believe someone mentioned that City will crush Ajax next time round. Probably true. But that's not going to right the ship. Like last year, Ajax was the team you NEEDED 6 points off because it was always going to be a mini league between Dortmund/City/Madrid. Like last year, 10 points is still possible. However, even if City win all three, Dortmund just needs to beat Ajax and it's like a Madrid win and Dortmund draw puts them through ahead of City again.

 

[1ke]

I think a big part of Juve's loss was building their new stadium. They are supposed to be in extremely good health now that the new arena is open.

Believe someone mentioned that City will crush Ajax next time round. Probably true. But that's not going to right the ship. Like last year, Ajax was the team you NEEDED 6 points off because it was always going to be a mini league between Dortmund/City/Madrid. Like last year, 10 points is still possible. However, even if City win all three, Dortmund just needs to beat Ajax and it's like a Madrid win and Dortmund draw puts them through ahead of City again.

Really? I thought Juventus' Stadium was already 3 years old? Ill look for some numbers....

 

[calgaryballer]

Really? I thought Juventus' Stadium was already 3 years old? Ill look for some numbers....

Last season was its first

 

[seaplus]

with the investment into youth players and infrastructure i'd say City is built/building for the long-term.

and i am in no way dispassionate about Manchester City. i believe as a lifelong Wolfpack and Panthers fan, i just have more patience and am more skeptical of hype than most fans. i also see ADUG as a patient owner so i trust Mancini to be around for some time despite the amount of money that has been thrown at these players and the club's recent CL performances ... others may feel differently and understandably so. i expect City to move pass the group stages but i also know crazy things happen in sports and some of the best teams don't always move on. i am/was upset at the loss but oh well.

also, Sergio's dream club is Real Madrid. just being empathetic to the man's aspirations. i'll be sad if he decides to leave but it won't shock me. now if Silva, Toure, or Kompany leave ... that's a different story.

 

[calgaryballer]

with the investment into youth players and infrastructure i'd say City is built/building for the long-term.

and i am in no way dispassionate about Manchester City. i believe as a lifelong Wolfpack and Panthers fan, i just have more patience and am more skeptical of hype than most fans. i also see ADUG as a patient owner so i trust Mancini to be around for some time despite the amount of money that has been thrown at these players and the club's recent CL performances ... others may feel differently and understandably so. i expect City to move pass the group stages but i also know crazy things happen in sports and some of the best teams don't always move on. i am/was upset at the loss but oh well.

also, Sergio's dream club is Real Madrid. just being empathetic to the man's aspirations. i'll be sad if he decides to leave but it won't shock me. now if Silva, Toure, or Kompany leave ... that's a different story.

Which youth is City investing in? When was the last time an academy grad made it in to the first time? Micah Richards? There will be no time for a kid to break in to the squad because they can just go buy an established name. This isn't La Masia, it will be like Madrid where all the best kids (i.e Alvaro Negredo) can't break the squad because they can't beat out the name player and then are farmed out incessantly on loan. I can only assume this will happen to John Guidetti

 

[1ke]

We can move all this City talk to their thread instead of cluttering the CL thread. But Im also interested in what is goin on with this magical youth setup i keep hearing about.

For me this guy was their best youth player but just kept on getting loaned out. Michael Johnson....not so much, Ireland, not good enough, Boyata aint gettin any looks, Sturridge left.....Dont really know.

 

[seaplus]

Which youth is City investing in? When was the last time an academy grad made it in to the first time? Micah Richards? There will be no time for a kid to break in to the squad because they can just go buy an established name. This isn't La Masia, it will be like Madrid where all the best kids (i.e Alvaro Negredo) can't break the squad because they can't beat out the name player and then are farmed out incessantly on loan. I can only assume this will happen to John Guidetti

it isn't an overnight thing, this youth development. it is a new focus that has ten of millions of dollars recently invested into it. no one expects Denis Suarez to break into the starting XI next year. i expect kids at the new state-of-the-art, world-class academy facilities to rise through the ranks but not for some years. i'm hopeful for Suarez, Scapuzzi, and Guidetti but i am thinking of an even more distant future with homegrown U18s. long-term means long-term

:melo:

 

[kyhadley]

And yes, money is kinda important here. I mean....just a little no? Youve spent whatever amount. Ok, the problem here is not getting to the knockouts means less money recieved all around. Less prize money due to your finish. Less gameday money. Less TV money. And with FFP kicking in damn soon(next year?) you can only spend what you make. A

This is why Chelsea winning the CL last year was soooooo huge. It gave us so much income that it allowed us to go out and spend £89m without Abramovich footing the bill (likely not all of it, but the majority), protecting us from FPP. I doubt we spend as much (or attract the players for that matter) if we didn't win it.

Which youth is City investing in? When was the last time an academy grad made it in to the first time? Micah Richards? There will be no time for a kid to break in to the squad because they can just go buy an established name. This isn't La Masia, it will be like Madrid where all the best kids (i.e Alvaro Negredo) can't break the squad because they can't beat out the name player and then are farmed out incessantly on loan. I can only assume this will happen to John Guidetti

Chelsea has already shown how this works. Just look at Josh McEachran, and all the kids on loan (we could fill an entire squad with our loanees). When you're expected to win now, you can't really experiment with youth.

 

[Bigpapa42]

Would definitely like to read the rest of that article, Ike. And sorry, but wanted to reply...

with the investment into youth players and infrastructure i'd say City is built/building for the long-term.

and i am in no way dispassionate about Manchester City. i believe as a lifelong Wolfpack and Panthers fan, i just have more patience and am more skeptical of hype than most fans. i also see ADUG as a patient owner so i trust Mancini to be around for some time despite the amount of money that has been thrown at these players and the club's recent CL performances ... others may feel differently and understandably so. i expect City to move pass the group stages but i also know crazy things happen in sports and some of the best teams don't always move on. i am/was upset at the loss but oh well.

also, Sergio's dream club is Real Madrid. just being empathetic to the man's aspirations. i'll be sad if he decides to leave but it won't shock me. now if Silva, Toure, or Kompany leave ... that's a different story.

it isn't an overnight thing, this youth development. it is a new focus that has ten of millions of dollars recently invested into it. no one expects Denis Suarez to break into the starting XI next year. i expect kids at the new state-of-the-art, world-class academy facilities to rise through the ranks but not for some years. i'm hopeful for Suarez, Scapuzzi, and Guidetti but i am thinking of an even more distant future with homegrown U18s. long-term means long-term

:melo:

Like CB said... what youth policy? Having a great training facility and infrastructure is a good thing. A great thing. But facilities don't develop young players into great players. This isn't Football Manager. What does it is a combination of raw talent, coaching, and experience. Successfully developing youth into quality players isn't just about buying young players then sitting them on the bench, in the reserves, or out on loan. It can work but it doesn't tend to be the most effective. Young players need to play and nothing beats the experience of playing with the club and having the faith of the manager. Playing out on loan just doesn't seem to develop players as well. Chelsea are an example of this (sorry kyadley) as they've invested quite a bit of money in the last few years into promising prospects and, for the most part, loaned them out. They have a ton out on loan right now. And are any of them about to step in and star for the club? Does anyone expect Jeffery Bruma to come back and replace John Terry? Can Josh McEacheren be Frank Lampard next year? Is Romeu going to become a constant in the side? Does Sturridge have the quality to displace Torres? Would Chelsea have splashed out on Marin, Oscar, and Hazard if De Bryune and Katuka were the answer?

Its takes a real commitment from the manager to developing some of the younger players. A degree of trust that they will deliver. Manchester United and Arsenal do it well, thanks to SAF and Wenger. Yet Arsenal is also a key example of how such a policy can backfire and fail to deliver... I hate to admit that but its truth.

kyhadley makes another point - that the pressure to win keeps many managers from committing to developing younger players like Ferguson and Wenger. Mancini is worried about his job not the club over the next ten years. That's true of most managers who aren't essentially tenured. If you look throughout Europe, you will notice that many of the biggest clubs don't make any sort of overt commitment to youth. Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, AC Milan, Inter, Juventus... They do bring through some youth players but its not an overt focus. Barcelona does that moreso but they are kind of a unique deal in a lot of ways. One of the reasons those clubs are willing to spend extra to buy a fairly developed 22-25 year old player rather than a 17-19 year old who has a lot of growing and developing to do is the pressure to win. Managers there don't get time to look 4-8 years into the future...

Patience? I'm not sure that word has any business being near Manchester City. The club went from being a solid mid-Prem side to a world class squad in a very short period of time and patience had nothing to do with. Neither did smart and careful buys, great coaching, or anything else. They evolved in 3-4 seasons because the Sheik made it rain. Its not just the hundreds of millions they club paid out to buy the new players, but the massive wages they are on. They had a helluva time selling Adebayor and can't sell Wayne Bridge. Why? Wages. They didn't attract players based on club prestige or anything else. It was purely on money. And the problem is that you can't just cut off the fount, because every new recruit to the club is going to expect a bumper wage. And what you end up with is depth players on the squad who are making what top players are for other clubs and then they can't be sold...

I have to admit I'm really curious as to what makes you think the Sheik is a patient owner? What has he done thus far which gives you that impression?

 

[mgoblue2290]

Chelsea has already shown how this works. Just look at Josh McEachran, and all the kids on loan (we could fill an entire squad with our loanees). When you're expected to win now, you can't really experiment with youth.

Good point. Youth players aren't going to develop from the rare appearance once every month or two. They have to be given time and patience which I don't think would happen at City. The one positive of Liverpool's tight budget and poor form over the past couple seasons, has been allowing guys like Wisdom, Shelvey, Sterling, and Suso to get time. I don't think starting four players under 20 in big matches would ever happen at City.

Think of it this way, you guys have a bunch of rent boys on the team. I'd bet quite a few of them will leave before their primes are up. Are your owners really going to risk a season playing youth prospects or getting guys on the cheap? No. I'd bet they go out and splash the cash right away.

City is built for the short term and they should be focusing on getting every trophy in site because not only will it bring glory to the club, but also quite a bit of money which can allow them to continue to spend. This isn't a knock on you, but City is built for fast results, not long lasting success like United and until recently, Liverpool had seen. The oil money would come in forever without supplementation through CL and premier league titles.

 

[CaribbeanJoseph]

Winning the CL better than winning the league?


:nope:

 

[kyhadley]

Winning the CL better than winning the league?


:nope:

Keep up the delusion.

 

[CaribbeanJoseph]

Keep up the delusion.

The CL is more prestigious yes but winning the league means more.

 

[calgaryballer]

The CL is more prestigious yes but winning the league means more.

This may sound snarky, but I am especially surprised to hear this from a Liverpool fan. CL has been the only real taste of success for Liverpool in the last 30 years (save for a few domestic cups, but I think we can all agree those are below the CL and Prem). I figured if anyone was going to take up the CL banner, it'd be 'Pool fans

 

[calgaryballer]

BigPapa brings up an especially interesting case in Bayern. They have always had a large number of home grown players, while supplementing that with (mostly) smart purchases. I have to think that their history of success + a large catchement area + extremely good German coaching have all played a part. Being the most popular club in Germany mean parents want their kids in that youth system and kids want to be there. Once you're in the system, the coaches are able to nurture the players to the best of their abilities. Just doing a quick look at their Wiki and I see Lahm, Muller, Contento, Alaba, Badstuber, Schweiny, Can, and Kroos. Alaba may be a stretch, but if you play U-17, that`s basically the Bayern youth system. Frankly, that`s pretty close to a damn good starting 11.

Biggest problem facing England is highlighted in this article (dated, but I believe the ratios still hold true) - http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2010/jun/01/football-coach-shortage-england

Three years ago an official report concluded that coaching is the "golden thread" leading to international success, but new Uefa data shows that there are only 2,769 English coaches holding Uefa's B, A and Pro badges, its top qualifications. Spain has produced 23,995, Italy 29,420, Germany 34,970 and France 17,588.

England isn`t that much different than Spain, Italy or Germany, but they are dwarfed in terms of coach output. Perhaps the new academy at St George will help change the mentality in English youth soccer, but that is going to take time

 

[seaplus]

Barcelona does that moreso but they are kind of a unique deal in a lot of ways. One of the reasons those clubs are willing to spend extra to buy a fairly developed 22-25 year old player rather than a 17-19 year old who has a lot of growing and developing to do is the pressure to win.

.......

I have to admit I'm really curious as to what makes you think the Sheik is a patient owner? What has he done thus far which gives you that impression?

my views are coming from the club's videos and press releases so it's not like i'm just pulling shit out my arse and trying to convince you it's roses ... just not my style

i think there is a year-old article or video on the mcfc.co.uk website where Patrick Vieira talks about emulating Barcelona with the youth academy. and an example of City willing to pay for the 17-19 year olds is where they paid more than Barcelona was willing to shell out for Suarez. the club is obviously looking to be a leader in youth development and i expect it to succeed, in time

and my opinion of patience comes from some interview Al Mubarak did after winning the premiership. he said something about how it is still early and how the club still has a long way to go. since Sheikh Mansour doesn't do many interviews for the club i just go with Al Mubarak to get a feel for how ownership is thinking



... but i'm obviously seeing things through sky blue colored glasses since everyone else and their mother disagrees with my views. so be it

 

[kyhadley]

Young players need to play and nothing beats the experience of playing with the club and having the faith of the manager. Playing out on loan just doesn't seem to develop players as well. Chelsea are an example of this (sorry kyadley) as they've invested quite a bit of money in the last few years into promising prospects and, for the most part, loaned them out. They have a ton out on loan right now. And are any of them about to step in and star for the club? Does anyone expect Jeffery Bruma to come back and replace John Terry? Can Josh McEacheren be Frank Lampard next year? Is Romeu going to become a constant in the side? Does Sturridge have the quality to displace Torres? Would Chelsea have splashed out on Marin, Oscar, and Hazard if De Bryune and Katuka were the answer?

Just to respond to the Chelsea bits:

Bruma is still just 20, and Terry is still just 31. I think he's still going to be on loan for the next 1-2 years. What he becomes after that? Who knows. (Supporting your point, of course).

McEacheren really got set back when Sigurdsson broke out with Swansea last year, he just didn't get the time that Chelsea expected him to get. He's been fantastic by all accounts at Middlesborough this year, and I think next year he would be a player that you we could afford to give more minutes in the first team next year. But I doubt that happens.

Romeu I think will become a constant in the first team. He is the backup for Mikel in that role of our midfield 2 right now. And I think he will get his minutes this year. He's looked good whenever he's been on the field.

Sturridge I think does have the quality, and with Torres really starting to look like he could use a break, I could see him getting more minutes in the near future. He's our only other true #9 on the team (Piazon or Moses is probably our 3rd striker currently). And he had a fantastic goal-scoring record last year playing as a striker on the wing.

I think De Bruyne should be mentioned in the same group as Oscar and Hazard. I think he is Lampard's replacement, personally. But he also provides more depth at any of the 3 AM spots. No way he isn't in our first team next year.

Marin I think was a depth buy. Seemed great at the time for only 7m, but he continues to be plagued by injuries justifying his price a bit.

Don't forget Lukaku who I think will be in the first team next year or the year after.

As far as all of our other loanees, they're all under 20 and I think benefit more by getting minutes than playing with our youth or reserve team. I honestly think we're starting to get it more right with our youngsters, in a way that could lead to them making it with our first team.

 

[seaplus]

and i don't know what Mark Hughes was thinking letting Sturridge get away