It hasn't turned into a farce. It was a farce all along, since the day it was announced. Most sensible people on this board said so.
I don't agree with spreading money around in an equal manner either - I never said I did. I do, however, want to see money spread around in a more equal manner. Different thing altogether. If you have a situation where there's a huge gap between coming first, second and third, for example (about E300,000 next year), some clubs are going to spend based on finishing first, won't manage it and be stuck for money. Alternatively, they'll get a huge cash injection one year, add it to their budget the next, come third and suddenly have to cut back again. It's why Leeds are where they are (overstretched to get into CL), why Shels are where they are, why Bradford are where they are and many others who went into administration chasing big money.
In any case, what's wrong with the current situation? You show me a league in Europe where there were two league titles going right down to the wire, where teams can go from relegation play-off to league runners up in a matter of seasons, where teams can go from the First Division to top half of the Premier in one year, etc. The eL is a superbly competitive league, and pooling most of the cash in the hands of a few teams could well harm that.
Fundraising, as with a lot of other clubs. Main things - Superleague, jersey sponsorship (worth more than you might think), soccer camps, golf outings, alumni dinners, donations, selling players, etc. It all adds up.
None taken - you're right. Which is why the club is giving up on the college to a large extent and focussing on the local area with soccer camps, links to local clubs and the likes. You have to get new fans at a young age, not at 17/18. When you're six or seven, it doesn't matter what the ground is like - going to a live football game is a thrill, especially if you're watching the same players who were coaching you earlier in the week. And then once you're hooked, we own you.![]()
Bookmarks