Leicester is a former league champion ... they ain't the same as Liverpool. Trying to equate Everton and NottF to Liverpool based on singular data points really illustrates perfectly just how much you are incapable of connecting the dots to show an entire picture. As I've illustrated many times over, I'm well aware that football goes past the last decade, 20yrs, 30yrs, or as you've now moved it too 40yrs ... YOU aren't aware that the game today is NOTHING like what it was 10, 20, 30, and especially 40yrs ago and it is continually making you look foolish. Liverpool is THE winningest football club in English history ... Their trophies dwarf NottF and Everton. Even 40+ years later they win trophies. JFC dude. Funny how Wrexham hadn't sniffed getting out of the NL until those sugar daddies came into play ...
Everytime anybody mentioned any team on here there used to be a fella that used to claim they were only successful because of money - he said it about so many clubs that he mentioned about 90% of the top two divisions! :-D. If Wrexham make it to the Premier League will it be because they have more money than all the clubs currently above them!? I don't think so somehow.
Why aren't Leicester 'the same as Liverpool'? They have the exact same opportunities? They've always had the same opportunities? I wonder if at the turn of the year in 1974 people thought that Manchester United - the biggest club in the world would never get relegated?
Reynolds wants Wrexham in the Premier League in 10 years........it took Brighton to rise from a similar position to theirs 17 years. Watford once went from the fourth tier to the first in 5 years. On the other side of the coin it took Luton only 18 years to go from Premier League to non-league football, another 8 years to get back from non-league to the Championship - quite a 'ride' for Hatters fans. Oldham had Premier League riches just 18 years ago and now they are non-league non entities - what on earth did they do to shaft away all their wealth!! (bad management). Goes to show what can happen.
Non one is debating this. What is being pointed out is that the sheer scale of the monies involved involved in Football today are not proportionate to the monies in Football 10,20, 30, 30, 50..... years ago. In fact it's grossly disproportionate. The gulph in wealth in the EPL today, is exponentially larger than it was when the EPL was formed. Sure, winning gets your club up the ladder and in turn the pyramid. In order to win, your club needs better players....better players cost $$$. The higher up the pyramid a team goes, the exponentially greater the costs of better players become. At the core, it's sporting merit. That sporting merit comes at an ever increasing price tag though. A price tag that many clubs are being priced out of. Sure, all clubs have the OPPORTUNITY to climb the pyramid via sporting merit.....that opportunity comes with a great cost. We hear a lot of supporters saying that their football club has lost its soul..........it turns out that that sporting merit ride costs more than money.
Did they get a cartel membership fee accepted? Or do they actually have to win games on the field of play? They are in a tight battle with Notts County for the one automatic promotion spot. Although Wrexham must be favorites to win the league, it's hardly a forgone conclusion. Lots more performances on the field of play needed.
Mega wealth helps the sporting cause, whether it's paying an expansion fee or a transfer fee some smaller scale team could never dream of affording. If sporting merit is supposed to be above all I'm not sure I could watch any sports at their highest level of on-field quality.
It certainly does. There was a time when sporting merit couldn't be bought, but that was in the days before the abolition of the maximum wage. A long time ago.
The money in football has always been in proportion - in the 1930's Arsenal were known as 'the bank of England club' because of the huge amount of money spent outspending their peers. Clubs complained at the iniquity at the time. The money argument is a moot point, EVERY club in the Premier League has access to untold wealth yet 3 clubs WILL go down and 3 new clubs will gain access to that wealth. I'm sorry but to get to the Premier League involves winning football matches, how you win those matches is down to management - Brighton are a good example of a club getting to the top without outspending its peers, how much did Brighton spend in comparison to clubs below them? I think you'll find the answer is peanuts. If Boehly wants to sp*nk a billion pounds in his efforts to get back to the top then its up to him (its his club) but if he thinks that's a guarantee to success then he's mistaken, Brighton brushed aside Chelsea (my club) with absolute ease a couple of months ago with a team that is pound for pound less valuable for every player in every position. Its perfectly simple........if you can't afford 100 million pound players then you find a fantastic player and turn them into 100 million pound players, and in the meantime these players take you to the top - that's what Brighton have been doing so successfully, players aren't 'born' worth 100 million, they're made.
The thing that will help them win games is money. Money buys better players, coaches, staff and infrastructure. The only way up the pyramid for Wrexham is its owners spending money to make the team better. Until their new rich owners showed up, they weren't really going anywhere. But, the thing is that even though they're quite wealthy by normal people standards, Ryan Reynolds and Rob McElhenney don't have deep enough pockets to afford taking the team up to the Premier League. Especially given that the team's revenues are always going to be limited, and they'll need to subsidize it out of their pocket. It's a great feel-good story, but if Wrexham were to somehow make it into the Premier League, it'll only be because its owners poured hundreds of millions of pounds into the team to get them the "sporting merit" they need to win.
You don't have to spend money to be successful!? You just need to find a good team and have a good manager!! Players aren't born 100million pound players! They're made! Gianfranco Zola (our best ever player) played for Nuorese when he started playing, not Manchester United.
This is a ridiculously naive view. It costs money to find players at clubs like Nuorese, because you're looking for needles in haystacks -- not to mention that talented players at those levels are mostly raw potential and still need to be developed. And if you get them indirectly through other clubs' scouting efforts, they're more expensive. When Zola went up to Torres in Serie C/1, his price tag went up. And then when he moved from there to Napoli, his price tag went up even more. And then, let's say you find those players and start moving up the divisions... good luck keeping those players and that manager if you're not willing to pay them what they're worth.
But, again, finding a good team and a good manager is a lot easier when you can spend a hundred million pounds on your payroll, versus a couple of millions. I don't think I'm making some sort of profound insight here.
No it isn't? If anything your view is naive? You don't seem to understand how the football pyramid works. Lets look at it closely - you're talking as if Wrexham need to spend 100 million pounds tomorrow to get into the Premier League.......of course they don't! Wrexham need to compete with Gateshead, Dorking Wanderes, Maidstone and a whole host of other clubs nobody in the US has ever heard of. If they outperform those clubs they get promotion, promotion means league 2. League 2 means higher attendances, more money through the door and more prize money. Now do Wrexham have to spend 100 million to compete with Manchester United? No of course not! Now they have to outperform Newport County, Barrow, Sutton Utd and a host of other teams nobody in the US has heard of..........they do get more money though, instead of their games being watched by an average of 2000 paying fans they get watched by an average of 6000 paying fans AND their prize money is tens of thousands of pounds more. If they do outcompete these teams they 'may' gain promotion to League 1, do they have to spend 100 million to compete with Manchester United now? Of course not. Now they have to compete with Cheltenham Town, Morecombe and Barnsley and a host of other teams nobody in the US has heard of. They DO however now play in front of an average of 11'000 fans AND they get a lot more prize money, this helps them to compete and by now they are getting a LOT more money than their old 'peers'' in the non-league. If they succeed and get promotion do they need to spend 100 million to compete with Manchester United? No of course not! Now though they have to compete with Millwall, Birmingham City and West Brom, luckily they have a lot more money now than they used to so they can buy much better players than they used to, now they play in front of an average of 20'000 paying fans, now their prize money is an awful lot more than it used to be! Lets say they succeed and get into the Premier League, do they now have to buy 100 million pound players to compete with Manchester United? Of course not! They will however have MUCH better players than they had 5 years ago! If they have spent wisely they can compete with Manchester United and now they play in front of 40'000 fans and now they have huge amounts of TV money, now they are amongst the richest clubs on the planet, and now that they are filthy rich they can buy 100 million pound players if they want to go down that route. THAT is exactly how Brighton (and everybody else since before aeroplanes) has done it, that is how you become a Premier League club, thats where you get your money. Unfortunately its not easy because EVERY club is vying to do the exact same thing, its bloody competitive.
This would be one of the reasons it costs so much. Because everyone else is willing to spend money for the same players.
I wonder how much money Nuorese spent on Chelsea's greatest ever player? Wasn't hundreds of millions but one thing is for sure he certainly made Nuorese a much better team than they would have been without him!? They probably made a tidy profit when they sold him too, money no doubt that enabled the club to buy better players and lift the club to even greater heights (if they are managed right of course). Alternatively they could have s*nked that money on god awful 'buys' and ruined the opportunity (that of course would be the difference between good and bad management).
And yet in League 2 some clubs have better players and a better management than others, despite none of them spending 100 million. Some of those clubs are doing something right. Brighton were (not very long ago) a struggling League 2 side, they didn't spend hundreds of millions in getting to League 1. In fact I don't think Brighton (despite now being one of the worlds richest clubs, and the 6th best team in the country right now) have spent a hundred million yet?
Maybe not on transfers, but they have spent close to a hundred million pounds in player wages in the last two years.
I think the highlighted part says it all really. NOW Brighton are one of the richest clubs on the planet, that's what you get when you make it to the Premier League. See post 35340 and it explains how they got to this point.
Could be a number of reasons, his contract ran out, he wanted to leave, the club wanted to cash in on him because other clubs were asking silly money for him...............many reasons. Ultimately though Nuorese didn't have to spend tens of millions of pounds on him like other clubs did.
I think it stands to reason that he left because he could make more money at clubs such as Napoli or Chelsea.
And? I don't know what division Nuorese where in but one thing for sure is that they weren't competing against Juventus. Thing is he was a bloody good player and he played for Nuorese, therefore he made them much better, not only that he brought in a few quid to the club, money that if spent wisely would have given Nuorese the edge over there competitors (not AC Milan). Perhaps enough to get them promoted? Thing is once promoted Nuorese become the club that pinches players from teams below them in lower divisions! If you wan't to see how that works look at post 35340. There was a time you know (and not very long ago) that Brighton would lose a player to Bolton Wanderers for the very same reasons Zola left Nuorese - but here's the thing - Bolton are now the team that loses players to Brighton, for obvious reasons.
And that's just one example of how teams win by spending money on good players. This isn't very complicated. He made them better, but they didn't get any use from his talents past age 19, because other clubs could pay him more money.