Kaizero

Last time Bodø/Glimt met a team managed by Ange Postecoglou (Celtic), they won 2-0 at home and 3-1 away, going on a 5-1 aggregate.

Small sidenote to the B/G discussion and the myth that they "only do well" because they play on astroturf above the artic circle, here's their full home/away record in European competition since their "return" to them for the 20/21 season: Home: 29 – 3 – 5┊107 – 30┊+77 GD Away: 8 – 11 – 17┊45 – 57┊-12 GD Total: 37 – 14 – 22┊152 – 87┊+65 GD 7 of 17 away defeats were by 2 goals or more, meaning 10 out of 17 were lost by 1 goal. Only 2 matches were lost by more than 2 goals, 0-3 against Arsenal in the 22/23 EL group stage and 0-4 against Roma in the 21/22 ECL QF. Yes, of course B/G gets some advantage from being used to their astroturf and their local climate – but how"large" of an advantage they're getting, when compared to the general "advantage" all home sides have due to simply being more familiar with their home ground than the opponents, could be discussed to death in and of itself – also, shouldn't truly "big" European teams be professional enough to do their job on any turf in any weather if their team truly was much more talented than their opponent?

Djurgården in the ECL and Bodø/Glimt in the EL, haven't beat better teams along the way, then? Does that make the ECL and EL "rubbish"? All competitions will inevitably start with some teams being "clear favorites", which most of the times sees those favorites win the competition in the end. That's been the case for the English League Cup just as it's been the case for most European competitions, but that doesn't mean the competitions are "rubbish". People would talk down our LC victory this season saying shit like "it's only/just the League Cup!" – but is it "only/just" the League Cup, really? Because for the last 12 seasons befre our victory this season, all winning teams had also finished in the top 4 the same season (which we will end up doing as well, for that matter...) – does that mean it's not a big deal winning that cup? Why isn't it a big deal for teams to win the EL or/and the ECL? Is it because the CL exists which is a "bigger" trophy/competition ran by the same hosts? If so, that would mean the FA Cup would be a bigger achievement than the League Cup for an English side to win, which on paper doesn't even make sense as the FA Cup is filled up by tons of "lesser" teams making the way to the final per definition "easier" for the teams getting there than a League Cup run would've been for them, as that competition only contains teams from the top four divisions in England. For Bodø/Glimt to get to the semis, they've defeated: Porto, Braga, Besiktas, Maccabi Tel Aviv, Twente, Olympiakos and Lazio. For Djurgården to get to the semis, they've defeated: Panathinaikos, TNS, Vikingur, Legia, Pafos and Rapid Wien. (teams in bold are teams they've defeated during their off-season period – meaning they've been doing pre-season friendlies and training at the same time, which is usually an absolute killer for teams from Norway/Sweden whenever they've advanced from a European group stage) For Arsenal to get to the semis, they've defeated: PSG, Shaktar, Sporting Lisbon, Monaco, Dinamo Zagreb, Gironoa, PSV and Real Madrid. Yes, there are more "obviously" good sides among those defeated by Arsenal than the ones defeated by the two Scandinavian sides. That said, based on pre-match odds set by bookies, Bodø/Glimt were only pre-match favorites for 1 (MtA) out of their 7 matchups. Djurgården for 2 out of their 6 (TNS+Vikingur). Why are people using teams like these two outperforming their expectations as a negative when discussing the competitions? If anything, cinderella stories like those two should be used as a positive when discussing them, as it shows the pre-tournament favorites to win aren't always likely to be the ones to get to the final four – or even the final – when all is said and done. Whereas, for the CL, the opposite has been true for as long as I can remember and the pre-tournament favorites have pretty much always been the ones left in it from the QF's onward? Yes, both the EL and ECL might still end up having finals made up of two teams that were favourites to win it before this season's competition began. But that's the case for pretty much any cup-competition, as well as league competition, throughout the history of football as a sport in all nations and in all continental-cups? But in the "shit" EL and ECL, you at least get to experience some late-stage upsets and get interesting, unique, stories of clubs and their backgrounds. I just don't get why people are so negative towards these two competitions attitude-wise when they're from one of the "big five" countries in Europe, whilst everyone else in Europe view them as legitimate, quality, competitions for teams that aren't "CL quality" at present. ––––––– All that said, I wish the CL consisted only of teams that had won the league in their respective nation the season prior and the ECL consisting only of the cup-winners (or the 2nd placed team in the cup if the same team won the league and cup that season). The EL, IMO, should've been where all the non-league winners and non-cup winners should've been fucking about. But we'll never get that again, because there's just not enough money in it for UEFA and the big FA's in Europe to back such options. At the same time, the reason we no longer see teams from "lesser" nations in Europe do well in European competitions like they used to do until the mid-to-late 90s is down to that very same reason; greed. When the "Big 5" european leagues started getting additional spots in the CL, the "lesser" leagues/teams suddenly started receiving less money than they once did and it cemented the "big leagues" as the "big leagues" in public opinion, probably for the rest of time. So far in the 24/25 season; Bodø/Glimt has earned £22.75 million in prize money – their total 2024 season budget was ca £12.5 million. Djurgården has earned £12.86 million in prize money – their total 2024 budget was ca £8 million. Arsenal has earned £100 million in prize money – you all know the size of a PL club's budgets... How are teams from "lesser" leagues ever to put up a challenge against the "big teams" when all the money's been diverted to the "big five" leagues and their clubs for almost three straight decades now? It's not like a club like Djurgården isn't well-supported in its home nation, either, as they had a higher average attendance for home games in Allsvenskan than Ipswich, Fulham, Crystal Palace, Brentford and Bournemouth has had this season in the Premier League. It's just another example of how money ruined the modern game

Bodø/Glimt keeper double-enjoying them knocking Lazio out:

Paid

Yes, I just got to watch the Lazio-B/G spectacle. Perhaps one of the most exciting games I’ve watched as a neutral. On a personal level, I’d rather B/G didn’t get to the final - I especially hope they don’t win it. Them advancing to the Semis now mean the Norwegian UEFA coefficient will be gigh enough got one of our teams going straight into the CL group stage without having to play a qualifying round first. If B/G win it, my hometown will forever be doomed to live in Bodø’s shade - so, fuck that! Go Spurs/Frogmen/Bilbao! The fact I enjoy the EL/EC more has nothing to do with Bodø/Glimt. The implication itself would be comparable to someone asking a NUFC fan “surely, you must hope Boro win the final - making the whole of North Eastern England proud??”

There’s no reason for you to even try, your «competition value» double-standard is so god damned high you might seriously injure yourself in the fall down.

You say what you say implying I don’t watch any football I’ve watched Peruvian 3rd tier matches just to watch football when nothing else has been on at 3am, among other random matches, since I was a child. I’d rather watch a Legia Warzaw vs. Red Star Belgrade EL qualifying fixture than than being forced to watch a Barcelona/Real Madrid vs. Inter/PSG/Bayern (or any other of the repetitive turgid clubs usually getting there) final - 10 out of 10 times. It’s the final result of FIFA & UEFA’s dream; turning football into a soulless money printing machine in competition format. At the moment, for now at least, the EL and the EC feel like the anthesis of that.

No, two PL teams have lucked their way to the semis against better opposition. I’ve always maintained that any match the EL and EC is streeta ahead of any CL fixture between the same old teams that play in the year in, year our. If you don’t support a team playing in it, watching a CL fixture feels like absolute torture. Boring, shit, predictive fixtures between team more aftraid of losing than they’d enjoy winning. The CL is absolute shit, the saddest thing abour our own rise is that I won’t get to see us play another season in the EL before we join the cycle of repetitiveness ourselves.

God bless «second rate» cup competitions, IMO.

Unserious? Because it’s the most entertaining of the European competitions last time I checked.

Fucking English fans thinking the PL is some kind of quality label

You weirdos talking like Spurs isn’t the shittest team B/L will have faced in their current EL season

I feel like you didn't read my post when you quote that part and say what you said, when what you said is exactly the same as what I said in the section directly above what you quoted You're repeating one of the two scenarios I described for how the sports club end up bearing the cost of a player's agent even if they don't directly pay the agent themselves.

In. Will sort out the fiver tomorrow (feel free to nudge me by PM if I forget)

General custom is that the club pays the agent the fee they'd take from their client's wages/bonuses and similar. Alternative would be that the club pays the player in wages/bonuses what the player would have to pay their agent for the agreed terms. Here's examples for both using generic and easily digestible numbers rather than numbers from an actual deal: Background Info for Examples: Player X has signed a 3 year deal with Club Y, giving him a weekly salary of £1000 £52k per annum £156k in total In addition, Club Y has agreed to pay Player X a £5000 "signing-on" bonus Player X will earn £161k in total at the end of his 3 year deal with Club Y Player X is represented by Agent Z, in their representation agreement Player X has agreed to pay Agent Z; 10% of his salary 10% of his bonuses Agent Z is therefore entitled to; £15.6k from Player X's salary for the 3 year deal agreed with Club Y £500 from Player X's "signing-on" bonus from Club Y £16.1k in total Club Pays Agent: Player X signs the deal with the terms specified above, with Club Y signing a separate payment agreement with Agent Z for £16.1k This would in most cases be structured as one of the below; 1 lump sum payment – this is the easiest option for Club Y, though it may not be the wisest economic choices as if Player X leaves the club before the contract is up, the "extra" money paid to Agent X will be lost 3 annual payments – this lowers the chance of throwing money out of the window should Player X leave after 1 or 2 years, not seeing out his contract 6 semi-annual payments – this lowers the chance of throwing money out of the window even further, but as with the "3 annual payments" option, this option means more beurecracy and tax-related work efforts to be put in by Club Y Player Pays Agent: Player X assumes responsibility for paying Agent Z, leaving Club Y out of their payment arrangement This, however, does not mean that Club Y won't be the ones paying Agent Z... Player X and Agent Z agreed that Player X would sign for Club Y if offered a weekly salary of £1000 However, the weekly salary demand for Playr X to sign under the "Player pays Agent" scenario is not the same as the one in the "Club pays Agent" scenario Player X will now only sign for a weekly salary of £1100 The same applies to Player X's "signing-on" bonus, where the absolute minimum demanded for Player X to sign is now £5500 In the end, it's always the club that bears the financial burden of paying a player's agent/agency for services provided

Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile lack of everyone's favorite radge male model in the pics for the new gear in the club shop

A full season of Amorim's PL form would see Man Utd finish with 42 points. He's genuinely a horrid manager, it seems, as other managers at least managed to paper the massive cracks caused by the turgid atmosphere and players haunting the club over the last couple of years. They went from 1.36 PPG this season before Amorim took charge to 1.09 PPG after he took charge, it's beyond belief to be honest

If looking past the absolute disgraceful attempt at pronunciation of even straightforward names (how the guy manage to turn "Knutsen" into "KrrrRnUttsSnn!!" is beyond me ), this video summary is fairly okay.

Agent fees are insane, it's why I started an agency in the first place