The European football thread - Page 414

Sdpm100 · 11-25-2006, 06:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sdpm100

So I'll go with Chelsea.

So who's your pick then magnet?

Raderick · 11-25-2006, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sdpm100

So you want "foreign club USA" for all the teams then? IMO there's no point in having a loan league.

No, I haven't.

Well, Chivas formed a MLS club to tap into the US' hispanic market, and it's going very well. I don't see how a MU-USA wouldn't work, since the name itself is recognized casually in the US, regardless of if the owner is an American or not. But I only see it as a short term way to get fans interested, and a long term issue when it comes ot originality and the star players only coming to the US when their careers is nearing the end.

Raderick · 11-25-2006, 07:59 AM

Could someone explain to me the pact that Manchester United and the New York Yankees had?

LFC1892 · 11-25-2006, 08:59 AM

How 'bout them Ashes Paul?

ukhotstove · 11-25-2006, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GUTIERREZ

How 'bout them Ashes Paul?

Don't forget Australia HAVE to win England don't, Aussie's can keep on batting for all I care just means less time for them to bowl England out.

The first test was always going to be a tough one for England with the opening partnership out and Strauss and Cook leading the order, add the fact you have both the front line bowlers of Flintoff and Harmison just coming back from injury who should get better as the series goes on it's not all doom and gloom.

The only worry I have is how Langer is scoring so easily specially seeing that so far and I know it's early days but Hayden looks like the weak link of the top four, have to wait to see how Martyn does if he bats again although probably wont happen but if they can start getting Langer out cheap it could cause problems for the Aussie's.

ukhotstove · 11-25-2006, 09:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raderick

Could someone explain to me the pact that Manchester United and the New York Yankees had?

Someone will point you in a better direction but wasn't it that each could sell their merchandise in the other's stores, having never been to New York or Yankee Stadium I wouldn't know if they had their own merchandise store but United do and like I say sure they sell Yankee's merchandise their now.

ukhotstove · 11-25-2006, 09:23 AM

Rads this may help you.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...24/ai_75561824

EARLIER THIS YEAR, ENGLISH soccer power Manchester United and YankeeNets, the organization that owns major league baseball's New York Yankees, the NBA's New Jersey Nets, and the NHL's New Jersey Devils, formed an unusual alliance that depending on whom you ask may or may not prove to be groundbreaking. Under the agreement, YankeeNets will promote Manchester United in the States, and Man Utd will help to increase the Yankees' presence abroad, although Major League Baseball holds most of the team's international marketing rights.

Initially, the teams will market and sell each other's merchandise at games, promote broadcasts, and have advertising signage at each other's stadiums. In 2003, YankeeNets will market and organize a US tour and open soccer camps for Man Utd. The resources of YankeeNets, and particularly the popularity and recent success of the Yankees, should ensure that Manchester United will soon have a much stronger presence in America.

Also think that the YES network show United games.

Sdpm100 · 11-25-2006, 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raderick

Well, Chivas formed a MLS club to tap into the US' hispanic market, and it's going very well. I don't see how a MU-USA wouldn't work, since the name itself is recognized casually in the US, regardless of if the owner is an American or not. But I only see it as a short term way to get fans interested, and a long term issue when it comes ot originality and the star players only coming to the US when their careers is nearing the end.

But LA Galaxy is a name that is already established in MLS. Why change that just because someone wants to nab your money for a few years?
The difference between Chivas (who IMO should still build a new stadium to show their full commitment to the league) and this is that as you say MLS tapped into a new market with them. What would Manchester United tap into that's different to the current fanbase?

But it's really not my business to say how MLS should run their business, and if that's the only way it can be profitable then fair enough. I just won't be that interested in seeing just loan teams playing.

Sdpm100 · 11-25-2006, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GUTIERREZ

How 'bout them Ashes Paul?

It's clearly a tactic of just lulling the Aussies into a false sense of security.

After all, you don't become a bad team overnight, do you?

ukhotstove · 11-25-2006, 10:01 AM

Diouf should be brought up for bringing the game into disrepute, have to laugh at him when he says he isn't a bad boy hmmmm so spitting at fans isn't being a bad boy. Also have to laugh at Nolans quote when he says

"Diving is a problem that can be sorted out by players having a stern word with their team-mates"

Wonder how many stern words Nolans had with Diouf, I'm thinking it's between none and zero

Sdpm100 · 11-25-2006, 01:33 PM

For anyone interested in the "possible" Galaxy sale to Glazer, there is some discussion over at BigSoccer.

http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=441702

bababui · 11-25-2006, 02:38 PM

Its better for the MLS if every team had a seperate owner. Glazer would be good for Los Angeles. Just keep John Gruden in TB.

Sdpm100 · 11-25-2006, 02:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bababui

Its better for the MLS if every team had a seperate owner. Glazer would be good for Los Angeles. Just keep John Gruden in TB.

And call the team Manchester United USA? Personally I don't think that will be good at all for the league.
Also, remember he chose not to save a club that played in his own stadium.

bababui · 11-25-2006, 02:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sdpm100

And call the team Manchester United USA? Personally I don't think that will be good at all for the league.
Also, remember he chose not to save a club that played in his own stadium.

I seriously doubt he would call it Manchester United USA. Los Angeles isnt Manchester. LA United? Maybe. But it would be good for the league because it would bring in more money and more recognition. He didnt change Manchester United to Tampa Bay UK now, did he?

Sdpm100 · 11-25-2006, 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bababui

I seriously doubt he would call it Manchester United USA. Los Angeles isnt Manchester. LA United? Maybe. But it would be good for the league because it would bring in more money and more recognition. He didnt change Manchester United to Tampa Bay UK now, did he?

LA Galaxy is a well-known team name, why change it? For example, I bet most football fans in this country would have heard of San Jose Earthquakes because George Best played for them.

And there's already a Chivas USA, so why not Manchester United USA? (Or Barcelona USA, or Club America USA, or Real Madrid USA?)

As I said if you want to run the league like that then that's up to them. But I will no longer try to defend it in that case.

bababui · 11-25-2006, 02:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sdpm100

LA Galaxy is a well-known team name, why change it? For example, I bet most football fans in this country would have heard of San Jose Earthquakes because George Best played for them.

And there's already a Chivas USA, so why not Manchester United USA? (Or Barcelona USA, or Club America USA, or Real Madrid USA?)

As I said if you want to run the league like that then that's up to them. But I will no longer try to defend it in that case.

Derivative names do suck and lower the credibility of a league. Having Glazer and his money in Los Angeles is another matter. If he does buy the team I would bet the farm that he doesnt make that silly name change.

My suggestion would be SDPM Los Angeles ala PSV Eindhoven

Sdpm100 · 11-25-2006, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bababui

Derivative names do suck and lower the credibility of a league. Having Glazer and his money in Los Angeles is another matter. If he does buy the team I would bet the farm that he doesnt make that silly name change.

Well that's what the article says he will do.
Now it does come from a Manchester United fanzine, via the Mirror newspaper, so they are not exactly the most reliable of sources.
After all it was the Mirror that said that Old Trafford would host an NFL game now that Glazer had taken over - totally neglecting the fact that the field isn't 120 yards long to start with.

IMO it is a worrying trend though for the league, even if as I believe this turns out to be only hot air. They should be looking for local investors rather than having loan teams that could pull out at any time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bababui

My suggestion would be SDPM Los Angeles ala PSV Eindhoven

Nah, because PSV does actually stand for something. Only two parts of mine does.

ukhotstove · 11-25-2006, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bababui

I seriously doubt he would call it Manchester United USA. Los Angeles isnt Manchester. LA United? Maybe. But it would be good for the league because it would bring in more money and more recognition. He didnt change Manchester United to Tampa Bay UK now, did he?

The word "lynching" springs to mind if he had done that and no need for a rolly eyes smiley on that

bababui · 11-25-2006, 03:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sdpm100

Well that's what the article says he will do.
Now it does come from a Manchester United fanzine, via the Mirror newspaper, so they are not exactly the most reliable of sources.
After all it was the Mirror that said that Old Trafford would host an NFL game now that Glazer had taken over - totally neglecting the fact that the field isn't 120 yards long to start with.

IMO it is a worrying trend though for the league, even if as I believe this turns out to be only hot air. They should be looking for local investors rather than having loan teams that could pull out at any time.

Nah, because PSV does actually stand for something. Only two parts of mine does.

Id like to see Abramovich invest over here too. With the instability in Russia it would make since for him to have a financial foothold in the States.

What do you think of the Rangers signing Callanotto?

bababui · 11-25-2006, 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ukhotstove

The word "lynching" springs to mind if he had done that and no need for a rolly eyes smiley on that

Would have been funny had he done it.

11-25-2006, 07:59 AM	#8263
Raderick Hall Of Famer Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: San Diego, California Posts: 2,737	Could someone explain to me the pact that Manchester United and the New York Yankees had? __________________

11-25-2006, 09:23 AM	#8267
ukhotstove Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: North of England Gods Country Posts: 7,175	Rads this may help you. http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...24/ai_75561824 EARLIER THIS YEAR, ENGLISH soccer power Manchester United and YankeeNets, the organization that owns major league baseball's New York Yankees, the NBA's New Jersey Nets, and the NHL's New Jersey Devils, formed an unusual alliance that depending on whom you ask may or may not prove to be groundbreaking. Under the agreement, YankeeNets will promote Manchester United in the States, and Man Utd will help to increase the Yankees' presence abroad, although Major League Baseball holds most of the team's international marketing rights. Initially, the teams will market and sell each other's merchandise at games, promote broadcasts, and have advertising signage at each other's stadiums. In 2003, YankeeNets will market and organize a US tour and open soccer camps for Man Utd. The resources of YankeeNets, and particularly the popularity and recent success of the Yankees, should ensure that Manchester United will soon have a much stronger presence in America. Also think that the YES network show United games. __________________ Detroit Diesel Dynasty San Antonio Calzones of Laredo Dynasty

11-25-2006, 10:01 AM	#8270
ukhotstove Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: North of England Gods Country Posts: 7,175	Diouf should be brought up for bringing the game into disrepute, have to laugh at him when he says he isn't a bad boy hmmmm so spitting at fans isn't being a bad boy. Also have to laugh at Nolans quote when he says "Diving is a problem that can be sorted out by players having a stern word with their team-mates" Wonder how many stern words Nolans had with Diouf, I'm thinking it's between none and zero __________________ Detroit Diesel Dynasty San Antonio Calzones of Laredo Dynasty

11-25-2006, 08:59 AM	#8264
LFC1892 All Star Reserve Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Global Posts: 963	How 'bout them Ashes Paul?

11-25-2006, 01:33 PM	#8271
Sdpm100 Hall Of Famer Join Date: May 2005 Location: Cheltenham, England Posts: 7,644	For anyone interested in the "possible" Galaxy sale to Glazer, there is some discussion over at BigSoccer. http://www.bigsoccer.com/forum/showthread.php?t=441702