- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Official Manchester Derby Thread
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:20 am to crazy4lsu
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:20 am to crazy4lsu
quote:
The thing about United is that they really do well against the mid-table. Some years are better than others against the big clubs, but they are consistently good against competition they should be good against. In recent years, Arsenal, 'Pool, Spurs , Chelsea, and City have hit higher heights than United, but all seem prone to mid-table teams. United don't seem to have that problem as much, hence why they are so successful.
Exactly. They beat the teams they are supposed to. That is their recipe for success and they are fricking good at it.
1
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:26 am to crazy4lsu
The top two better than the rest was a reference to this season. Also, having a net gain in transfer fees really doesn't mean shite. Like 2 clubs in europe profit yearly. What difference does it make if you have nothing to show for it. You are missing the point, jumbeaux.
If you think it's fun rooting for a team knowing good and well that your only consolation is that you have a net fricking transfer profit...the your head is going to explode IF you ever win another trophy.
If you think it's fun rooting for a team knowing good and well that your only consolation is that you have a net fricking transfer profit...the your head is going to explode IF you ever win another trophy.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 10:30 am to PTBob
quote:
The top two better than the rest was a reference to this season. Also, having a net gain in transfer fees really doesn't mean shite. Like 2 clubs in europe profit yearly. What difference does it make if you have nothing to show for it. You are missing the point, jumbeaux.
If you think it's fun rooting for a team knowing good and well that your only consolation is that you have a net fricking transfer profit...the your head is going to explode IF you ever win another trophy.
wow, way to miss the entire point. It's clear you don't really understand what you're talking about, and just root for whomever is winning the most.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 11:09 am to Jumbeauxlaya
Wrong, Ive been a united fan going on 15 years probably. Admittedly, It started out that way bc that was the team that had the most exposure in the US at the time. But seriously, what am I going to do? Pick a different team b/c this one "wins too much"?
I've grown to love em and was telling a friend yesterday that it's crazy how emotionally invested someone can get for a team that is across the ocean that I've never actually seen live. I've seen some of the players when england played usa in chicago in 05 but never actually United
I do root for a team that wins more than Arsenal, but it's kinda hilarious when ALL fans of the prem call United fans bandwagoners. It's like there is some sort of decree that states when you are born you must support a team that is not good or the best.
Also frick posting from a phone.
ETA: I get off topic easily
I've grown to love em and was telling a friend yesterday that it's crazy how emotionally invested someone can get for a team that is across the ocean that I've never actually seen live. I've seen some of the players when england played usa in chicago in 05 but never actually United
I do root for a team that wins more than Arsenal, but it's kinda hilarious when ALL fans of the prem call United fans bandwagoners. It's like there is some sort of decree that states when you are born you must support a team that is not good or the best.
Also frick posting from a phone.
ETA: I get off topic easily
This post was edited on 5/1/12 at 11:19 am
Posted on 5/1/12 at 11:50 am to PTBob
I honestly didn't know you were a united fan, I'm going purely off he fact that you obviously don't care about the character of your club if you think the way they manage transfers and talent isn't part of your fandom
Posted on 5/1/12 at 12:19 pm to LSUSOBEAST1
Posted on 5/1/12 at 12:25 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
quote:
I honestly didn't know you were a united fan, I'm going purely off he fact that you obviously don't care about the character of your club if you think the way they manage transfers and talent isn't part of your fandom
That doesn't make any sense. If you get a chance, pick up and read Soccernomics. It is VIRTUALLY unheard of to run a European club at a profit. This is why MLS will never be close to what the EPL or any of the foreign leagues are with their current system. Potential owners view owning a sports team as a revenue building investment. In Europe, owners use teams as their "toys" more or less. Lyon and Arsenal are two of the few that run off of a profit and that is in big part due to their transfer policies.
BTW, Lyon is the only one that consistently wins their league. I'm sure you know.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 12:35 pm to PTBob
quote:
That doesn't make any sense. If you get a chance, pick up and read Soccernomics. It is VIRTUALLY unheard of to run a European club at a profit. This is why MLS will never be close to what the EPL or any of the foreign leagues are with their current system. Potential owners view owning a sports team as a revenue building investment. In Europe, owners use teams as their "toys" more or less. Lyon and Arsenal are two of the few that run off of a profit and that is in big part due to their transfer policies.
Did i say they had to run a profit for me to like them? no
But I do however find it very interesting and I like that the club I support manages to do so well without destroying itself in the budget.
quote:
BTW, Lyon is the only one that consistently wins their league. I'm sure you know.
Look back at the previous page, at the ridiculous # of important injuries we've had since 08. And if you're not aware Arsenal is one of 3 clubs to have won the EPL since 2000. you can't win em all, I'm fine with it.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 1:01 pm to PTBob
quote:
Potential owners view owning a sports team as a revenue building investment. In Europe, owners use teams as their "toys" more or less. Lyon and Arsenal are two of the few that run off of a profit and that is in big part due to their transfer policies.
I have no idea why Americans are so hard headed about this, its not true. American sports owners buy sports teams for the same reason. The overwhelming majority of sports franchises are money holes. The only value is resale, and its because some other rich person is willing to pay more than you did for the toy. On a fundamental business basis sports franchises are terrible.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 1:06 pm to kfizzle85
Because in America we have things called salary caps that allow the league to simultaneously make a profit and have parity.. It's the one area I have no problem saying our model is superior
The only issue is whether or not this model can be supported with relegation.. Which I like.
The only issue is whether or not this model can be supported with relegation.. Which I like.
This post was edited on 5/1/12 at 1:13 pm
Posted on 5/1/12 at 1:13 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
You clearly missed what I said then, because most teams do not make a profit. Through work I have seen probably 20 different pro sports franchises financials, and maybe 3 of them were consistently profitable, and barely at that.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 1:16 pm to kfizzle85
An investment is profitable if it increases in value, no?
Also google "do nfl teams turn a profit?"
3rd result is "Miami one of two teams to lose money in 09".. Kinda disproves your hypothesis
Also google "do nfl teams turn a profit?"
3rd result is "Miami one of two teams to lose money in 09".. Kinda disproves your hypothesis
Posted on 5/1/12 at 1:39 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
quote:
An investment is profitable if it increases in value, no?
Is not the same thing as "turning a profit." Not sure if serious with this comment? If so yikes.
quote:
Also google "do nfl teams turn a profit?"
3rd result is "Miami one of two teams to lose money in 09".. Kinda disproves your hypothesis
Didn't even read the link eh? Given the above comment not really surprised. From said link:
quote:
The figures by Forbes are estimates, since the Dolphins are a private corporation and not required to open their books. Only the Green Bay Packers, a publicly held company, are forced to share their financial information.
Kinda disproves your hypothesis. So go ahead and believe Forbes, who blatantly tells you they have no idea whether or not they make money because they can't see the financials. I've actually seen the financials they admit to never seeing. Forbes view is a hypothesis, my view is a law. eta: Not to mention they are referring to operating profit and/or ebitda, not net income or even cash flow, of the free, unlevered, or levered variety (take your pick). Forget them thinking operating profit/ebitda and net income are the same thing, that's an entirely different issue.
This post was edited on 5/1/12 at 1:42 pm
Posted on 5/1/12 at 1:43 pm to kfizzle85
quote:
Kinda disproves your hypothesis. So go ahead and believe Forbes, who blatantly tells you they have no idea whether or not they make money because they can't see the financials. I've actually seen the financials they admit to never seeing. Forbes view is a hypothesis, my view is a law. eta: Not to mention they are referring to operating profit and/or ebitda, not net income or even cash flow, of the free, unlevered, or levered variety (take your pick). Forget them thinking operating profit/ebitda and net income are the same thing, that's an entirely different issue.
So where I was assuming without reading that they are in fact profitable, you are simultaneously assuming that they are not profitable.
:csb:
Posted on 5/1/12 at 1:45 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
I'm not sure what part about "reading their financials" you don't understand, there is no assumption on my part.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 1:45 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
regardless, I find those aspects of Arsenal to be attractive, there's nothing you can really say to convince me that my opinion is wrong.
ETA: so you've seen the majority of the NFL's books?
ETA: so you've seen the majority of the NFL's books?
This post was edited on 5/1/12 at 1:46 pm
Posted on 5/1/12 at 1:49 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
I don't know wtf you're talking about man. Please tell me where anything I said had anything to do with Arsenal...
Posted on 5/1/12 at 1:50 pm to Jumbeauxlaya
quote:
ETA: so you've seen the majority of the NFL's books?
13 of them to be exact, so no, not quite the majority. eta: Its called sample size.
This post was edited on 5/1/12 at 1:52 pm
Posted on 5/1/12 at 1:53 pm to kfizzle85
You guys have totally lost me.
Posted on 5/1/12 at 1:56 pm to WarSlamEagle
seriously, take this shite to the money board.
Page 20 of 21
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News