So this is about the workers in Liverpool, London,
by tex29 (2018-05-23 09:41:19)
Edited on 2018-05-23 09:58:23

In reply to: That's such a myopic view.  posted by NDMike2001


Madrid, Barcelona, Munich, etc.? I can’t believe you are making that argument with a straight face. Yes, the poor workers in Liverpool will be displaced if the unfortunate Reds can’t maintain their Champions League place year in and year out because of the evil oil oligarchs. Give me a break. What about the workers in Paris and Manchester, as well as the cities themselves, who benefit from the influx of capital?

And the BCS argument is not even close to comparable. It would be more like the NCAA passing a rule saying that the number of scholarships a team can hand out is tied to its revenue. So Notre Dame, Ohio State, and Texas, can build a roster with 110 scholarships, while the MAC schools (along with the lesser power 5 schools) can field a team of 25 or so. If the NCAA even thought about making such a rule, about 100 member teams would (rightly) scream bloody fucking murder.

EDIT: And City have been successful largely because of the moves they were able to make before EUFA tried to step in and wipe them out. This isn’t just about City. This is about the fans of the lesser clubs who will never have a chance to compete (apart from a fluke), because the rules prevent them from making the investment required to convert a smaller club into a club that can compete with the big clubs.

This would be similar to the MLB adopting a rule that tied salary to television revenues. It not only would allow the major market teams to spend freely (as they do now), but it would prohibit a wealthy owner from say, buying the pirates and spending his own money to build a winning team. This is far more than giving a subtle advantage to clubs that are currently big. It is virtually guaranteeing that those clubs, and only those clubs, will be the most successful clubs in perpetuity. It’s total horseshit.


Replies: