Still not worthy of a thread

[Kaizero]

Just now, toon25 said:

Yet to make a compelling argument against 100-odd years of American sporting ownership culture, but crack on

 

The onus is on the prosecution, not the defendant. I've stated that 9 out of 10 US owners in English football aren't bad. So far only Boehly and his all-star wish has been brought up as something bad a US owner has done. I've shown examples of bad things non-US owners has done, and could show more.

 

Meanwhile, your argument is that "they have a different culture than us, therefore they are bad!"

 

Without showing any examples of that having an effect on actual real ownership of an English football club. You are basing your argument on a stereotype and saying all US owners are bad because they are American. Not because they are bad owners, or using any example other than them being Americans as an example for why they would be bad owners.

[toon25]

3 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

 

racism

/ˈreɪsɪz(ə)m/

noun

prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism by an individual, community, or institution against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular racial, national or ethnic group

 

 

 

You're making absolutely no sense. There's no discrimination here, just a debate over the potential fate of English football based on the number of American owners.

[Kaizero]

1 minute ago, toon25 said:

You're making absolutely no sense. There's no discrimination here, just a debate over the potential fate of English football based on the number of American owners.

 

And I am saying it's not a debate fueled by facts, but racist thinking. None of the "anti-US" people have yet to bring one convincing argument as to why the fate of English football is more at stake due to many US based ownership groups than it already is due to owners of non-US nationalities.

 

A Norwegian ownership group did what I believe is the most damage any owners have done to a club in the PL era when they ran Wimbledon into the ground and moved the club to Milton Keynes. They weren't American.

 

 

Edited 16 hours ago by Kaizero

[Rod]

Just now, Kaizero said:

 

And I am saying it's not a debate fueled by facts, but racist thinking. 

You are talking crap.  In fact you are talking like a racist.

[joeyt]

3 American owners of Premier League clubs signed to join the European Super League 

[toon25]

If you're calling me a racist, you're barking up the wrong tree Kaiz. It's nonsense. There's no discrimination, only, seemingly, circular debate pertaining to the culture of American sports ownership and fucking innumerable statements by innumerable fucking American owners that would have PL football become some fucking American franchise.

 

 

[Ronson333]

8 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

 

The onus is on the prosecution, not the defendant. I've stated that 9 out of 10 US owners in English football aren't bad. So far only Boehly and his all-star wish has been brought up as something bad a US owner has done. I've shown examples of bad things non-US owners has done, and could show more.

 

Meanwhile, your argument is that "they have a different culture than us, therefore they are bad!"

 

Without showing any examples of that having an effect on actual real ownership of an English football club. You are basing your argument on a stereotype and saying all US owners are bad because they are American. Not because they are bad owners, or using any example other than them being Americans as an example for why they would be bad owners.

So they try a super league but are not bad?  You pissed?

[Rod]

3 minutes ago, Ronson333 said:

So they try a super league but are not bad?  You pissed?

"You pissed" means "are you angry" in America. 

[Shays Given Tim Flowers]

American sporting culture revolves around a far different system, college, draft etc. A bad owner will fuck up your club but I think people should be way about the Americanisation of English football.

[toon25]

Kaiz, calling folk racist is a bit wide of the mark man.

[Kaizero]

18 minutes ago, toon25 said:

Kaiz, calling folk racist is a bit wide of the mark man.

 

It's the textbook definition, man. Get a hold of yourselves and look in the mirror. There's no "Americanization" of football, it's people being fearful of owners coming from a different background when those people have done nothing to deserve being talked about in the way they are being talked about.

 

27 minutes ago, Ronson333 said:

So they try a super league but are not bad?  You pissed?

 

Perez and Agnelli are Spanish and Italian respectively. Also, our current owners would absolutely jump at the chance of being part if a super league – without a doubt, and they are not American. Our owners are using us to engage in sportswashing a despotic dictatorship, I'd say that's a bit worse than a jolly weird American owner of Chelsea saying he likes All-Star games.

 

 

Edited 15 hours ago by Kaizero

[toon25]

Kaiz, get away man.

 

If you're ok with it mate, just sit back and let it all happen. But to suggest we're all naive, it racist, for our views is bang wrong 

 

 

Edited 15 hours ago by toon25

[ElDiablo]

CIA Kaiz. Never thought I'd see the day.

[Disco]

Would be the same if it was a massive majority of owners from any outside background. The corporatisation and global aspiration at the expense of the local nature of English club football, European club football, and the international game all has huge red flags to your average fan over here, in Italy, or wherever who grew up on a different “product” (). 

 

Be the same if loads of English wankers bought clubs in wherever.  It’d be shit for those who matter (the fans of said clubs). 

We’ve done this to death on here but views are predominantly entrenched and aren’t going to changed. Sadly those in boardrooms are a lot more maleable to change that isn’t popular on the terraces.

[Kaizero]

32 minutes ago, toon25 said:

Kaiz, get away man.

 

If you're ok with it mate, just sit back and let it all happen. But to suggest we're all naive, it racist, for our views is bang wrong 

 

Again, not when you're literally doing the textbook definition of it without any other counter-argument than "i is not, dey terk er jerbs!"

 

11 PL clubs have either majority or minority US based ownership at the moment, in past season that number's been 14 at most. The majority of PL clubs have had a majority of US majority/minority owners for over a decade. No Americanisation of the sport has taken place, nor will it, as that's bad business for the businessmen owners to do as it'd alienate a global fanbase. It's illogical and conspiracy-theory adjacent to think otherwise when you can fact-check reality and find that it's nowhere like what people keep saying over and over again about US ownership.

 

However, crazy bajillionaire owners that don't have to think about profits? They are dangerous, no matter where they're from. And yes, some US owners are absolutely insane and dogshit.

 

Shit owners are horrible for any fan base and they deserve sympathy. But horrible owners don't have just one nationality, and continuing my above point, US owners are less likely to fuck with traditions as they for the most part own and run the club as a business intended to make profits for their ownership group – be that through the club itself or through using the club for marketing purposes. 

 

What people are arguing is essentially "Americans owning all PL clubs", speaking of the owners as "one group". Now, if one company had owned all 20 PL clubs then yes - that'd be bad and could mean they'd change tradinional aspects because they own all the clubs. The US owners don't have a group chat on WhatsApp where they discuss how to Americanise football in the UK, though. They are separate individual business entities looking to generate the most profit possible through the intellectual property, actual property and sporting team(s) they own.

 

 

Edited 14 hours ago by Kaizero

[Pata]

Americans have built massive leagues around parity and level field of competition. 

 

Fuck the Yanks though while constantly crying in the PSR/FFP/APT threads.  

[Kaizero]

But, as Disco said, I doubt any of us will change anyone's stance or thoughts on the matter - so I'll tap out here.

[toon25]

3 minutes ago, Kaizero said:

But, as Disco said, I doubt any of us will change anyone's stance or thoughts on the matter - so I'll tap out here.

Probs best mate when you're calling folk racist

 

 

Edited 14 hours ago by toon25

[Kaizero]

Just now, toon25 said:

Probs best mate

 

I'd have lost my temper eventually given that I actually give examples, sources and reasoning for my standpoint and everyone else just reply "nah mate, fuck americans"

[madras]

21 minutes ago, Pata said:

Americans have built massive leagues around parity and level field of competition. 

 

Fuck the Yanks though while constantly crying in the PSR/FFP/APT threads.  

It could also be argued they've done it through cutting out competition and franchising. Ultimately they feel like they were purely businesses before they had any pretence to be sporting clubs.

[Pata]

Yank owners would obviously love to have the closed shop model of most US leagues in European football too. Their teams are money-making machines and the split between owners and players is 50/50 while the valuation of their franchises just keeps going up and up. Financially healthy leagues mean players are still making a lot of money too.

It’s never going to happen here and the optimal model in theory would probably be somewhere between those two. US owners make too much money from their teams but it’s also so much better for the average fan. If your bad team makes good decisions and has some luck for a season or two you’re not far away from actually contending for the league. 
 

It’s just naive to instantly declare Yank owners as bad. They’ve built a nice system in their own leagues despite all the All-Star, national anthem and cheerleader cliches which can be infuriating but simply harmless in the big picture. They love money but their product is better than the uncompetitive Premier League right now.

[OverThere]

Just now, madras said:

It could also be argued they've done it through cutting out competition and franchising. Ultimately they feel like they were purely businesses before they had any pretence to be sporting clubs.

There is no relegation and that protects profits and allows for a more of a profit sharing arrangement. We could do it in the UK by going to about 30 teams and the rest would disappear or become 'minor league '. The ticket prices are also insane over here, almost to the point where you often just watch the game on the telly.

[Nine]

On Christmas night..

[Jaqen]

Are people forgetting that idea proposed by Liverpool and Man U owners that would give the 'big 6' special voting powers as well as trim the league down to 18 sides whilst getting rid of the League Cup amongst some other nonsense 

 

The Birmingham owners tried to get their game against Wrexham moved to the US FFS 

 

Villa are already charging £97 for champions league games. 

 

People are concerned because there is a genuine possible threat to the whole English game with an ever increasing number of American owners. 

 

Saying Mike Ashley ran Newcastle poorly as an arguement against that is just completely missing the point. 

[thomas]

can't buy what's not for sale, losers. get richer domestic shitheads if you don't like it