http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A62307-2003Apr30.html Article on Man U in today's Washington Post. Follow the link above for the complete article. I posted the first couple paragraphs as I don't want to get busted for a TOS violation.--Bill Man U's Perfect Pitch On Field and in Boardroom, English Soccer Club Is a Winner By Thomas Heath Washington Post Staff Writer Thursday, May 1, 2003; Page D01 Picture a professional sports team that has the tradition of hockey's Montreal Canadiens, wins as often as baseball's New York Yankees and evokes as much love and disdain as football's Dallas Cowboys. Picture a team that exudes the glamour of basketball's Los Angeles Lakers yet adheres to a financial discipline that makes Wall Street proud. Manchester United, the English soccer team, is probably the wealthiest, winningest, most popular professional sports team in the world. "Man U," as the team is known to 53 million fans worldwide and its legions of detractors (known as ABUs for "Anyone But United"), is launching a four-city U.S. tour this summer aimed at penetrating America's $15 billion-a-year professional sports market -- something no other soccer business has been able to achieve. It hopes to create enough buzz in North America to spur fans to its Web site, to buy its magazine, to watch it on television and to someday buying everything from Man U curtains to Man U credit cards.
Not only that- I believe Liverpool is the most succesful english club ever. Maybe some liverpool fans can chip in
True. They have won the European Cup more than Man. U. as have AC Milan. I don't know how many league titles those two have though as I'm a Spanish Liga fan but Liverpool's last league title was 1990 I believe and AC Milan last won Europe in 1994. Someone correct me if I am wrong on the dates.
European Cups: Liverpool: 4 (1977, 1978, 1981, 1984, UEFA Cup in 1973, 1976, 2001) Man Utd: 2 (1968, 1999) League Titles: Liverpool: 18 (none since 1990) Man Utd: 14 (something like six in the last 10 years) Man Utd have the edge in FA Cups (10 to Liverpool's 5). Liverpool are more successful in terms of sheer volume of trophies won, mostly in the 70s and 80s, while Man Utd's success is largely in the 90s.
Man oh man. I'm so torn about this tour and the coverage it is generating. I think that if ManU had played just one exhibition, perhaps against an all-star MLS squad or something, I wouldn't have this negative vibe. Reading that article, there's barely a mention of MLS. And that mention is essentially that soccer is a struggling sport here, with NASL having folded in '84 and MLS losing millions of dollars. We had an amazing run of good news in pre-season: new stadium in LA, TV deals, players signings, etc. Now we I wake up to a HUGE article in the Post which basically ignores a league that's in its 8th year of steady and constant growth in favor of what some would call a poaching and strictly opportunistic mega-giant marketing and sales machine. ManU = WalMart MLS = Local Hardware Store
Thanks Dave! I downloaded a free English Premier League team tracker that has all this info on my Palm this morning so this should keep me straight. subbuteo-I wish the article mentioned other teams in Europe enjoying success on and off the field as well. Real Madrid is in the hunt for a Liga and European double and are doing a lot better financially then they were a few years ago. Unfortunately they aren't touring the US this Summer like Man U are.
No prob. When they see how much money Man Utd will make this summer, they'll undoubtedly be planning a trip of their own for the future.
I see your point, but my point was kind of counterpoint to the whole Liverpool > or = Man. Utd etc... Also, with the Bend it Like Beckham craze, 20/20 interview, the summer tour etc... it's no surprise that Man. Utd. would get a huge article/more American media coverage. Now, maybe someone will churn out a Spin It Like Zidane movie and Real Madrid will be on their way over etc... I wonder what the global Man Utd supporters' numbers are compared to Real Madrid's and other huge clubs'.
"Picture a professional sports team that has the tradition of hockey's Montreal Canadiens, wins as often as baseball's New York Yankees and evokes as much love and disdain as football's Dallas Cowboys. Picture a team that exudes the glamour of basketball's Los Angeles Lakers yet adheres to a financial discipline that makes Wall Street proud." yawn
Should read most commercialized, whingingest sports team who have attracted legions of infatuated followers all over the world. For those few "serious" Man U fans, this is an insult. They hate it when people call them ManU or ManYoo or anything else that sounds like part of "ManUre". And as far as "ABUs"? Whatever.
It really depends on what you call a supporter. To Man U - Im sure they're flattered by a kid in Thailand wearing a bootlegged Beckham shirt, but is that tangibly supporting the club? There is a blurry line between fad and fan. In terms of week in week out registered and viewing support, honestly I'd be surprised if any club was bigger than Celtic. And as of a couple years ago Barcelona had the largest membership of any club in the world. No coincidence that those are the two matches that are sold out on Man U's tour right now.
i have read the article and i must say: 1 -Manchester is a great team, but it isn't the club with best history. These are the teams with best history: Real Madrid - 9 Champion's leagues (team with more titles) - 3 Intercontinental cups (team with more titles) Named by the FIFA and many other soccer associations best soccer club of the history. Milan - 5 Champion's leagues (2nd team) - 3 Intercontinental cups (team with more titles) Ajax - 4 Champion's leagues (3rd team) - 2 Intercontinental cups (2nd team) Bayern Munich - 4 Champion's leagues (3rd team) - 2 Intercontinental cups (2nd team) Liverpool - 4 Champion's leagues (3rd team) - 2 Intercontinental cups (2nd team) .......... The Manchester has "only" won 2 champion leagues and 2 Intercontinental cups. 2- About players, Beckham is a very good player but he isn't one of the biggest. These are the last winners of the Golden ball (voted by the journalyst) and Fifa Wold Player (Voted by all the National team managers around the world) 2002 - Fifa world player - Ronaldo - Golden Ball - Ronaldo 2001 - FWP - Figo - GB - Michael Owen 2000 - FWP - Zidane - GB - Figo 1999 - FWP -Rivaldo - GB - Rivaldo 1998 - FWP -Zidane - GB - Zidane 1997 - FWP - Ronaldo - GB - Ronaldo 1996 - FWP - Ronaldo - GB - Ronaldo 3 - Financially, The Manchester is the most powerfull team, follow by the Real Madrid, Bayern Munich and Milan. But beeing the team with more money they have "only" won 1 champion league and 1 Intercontinental cups in the last five years. And for example, the Real Madrid has won 3 champions leagues and 2 intercontinental cups in the last five years.
Indeed. From my experience, it seems most Celtic fans over here are Glaswegian or Irish ex-pats who have maintained their allegiances, or their families supported Celtic. And the core of Barcelona's support comes from the Socios. Man U doesn't have the cultural or political attachment to its fans that Celtic and Barça have.
Two guys in my office today have already asked me if I read the article. Had to explain a few things to them.
"Hey, did you see that soccer article on the soccer team?" "Yeah, lets ask office soccer guy about it"
If Barca has to bail on their summer tour of the US due to Intertoto Cup commitments, perhaps Real could fill in. (Which would go over great with all the Barca fans who have already bought tickets)
Well, it all depends what you count as a good history and what you mean by rich. Man United have more money on paper than any other club, but Real Madrid can get into as much debt as they like knowing the government will help them out. So in reality they're much richer than everyone else, which is why they have Ronaldo, Zidane, Figo, etc. It's also why they've won so many trophies and one reason why United haven't won more. Another reason United haven't won more is the Munich air disaster which wiped out a brilliant young team and necessitated complete re-building. Another is the ban on English clubs from European competition because of the Heysel stadium disaster. This applies to all English clubs, obviously, not just Manchester. If you want recent success by teams other than Real Madrid then United are about as good as it gets. I believe they have won more Champions League games (not trophies) than any other team, including Real, but I could be wrong about this. It all depends how far you want to go back in time and what your criteria of success are. It's all pretty subjective. Liverpool, Barcelona, Madrid, etc. all have good claims to being the best team ever. Also subjective is the number of fans, because it's so hard to define who counts as a real fan. I'd say United have more fake fans than any other team in the world, but they also have the best record of any English team for home support (I'm talking about people actually paying to go to the games), and that includes the times when United were far from successful. The only good reasons for hating United are traditional rivalry (e.g. you come from Liverpool or support City) or opposition to any club becoming a plc. But it's a bit odd for Americans to oppose this kind of capitalism. I'd say someone saying "I hate ManUre" is more pathetic than someone in Thailand claiming to love them, but it's all subjective isn't it?
Liverpool is the most successful English club in history. It's a fact. Manchester United supporters have no problem acknowledging this. Any club would be ecstatic to have such a history that rich. However; United are closing in on their League Championships number though. And United is definately hoping to add to the European Cups tally in the next few years as well. It's going to be difficult as hell though...