User Comments, Suggestions, or Complaints | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertising
|
Demarini, Easton and TPX Baseball Bats
|
AllianceTickets.com has cheap MLB Tickets. Get all your Colorado Rockies Tickets, Seattle Mariners Tickets, San Francisco Giants Tickets and all your favorite baseball tickets here. We also carry cheap Denver Broncos Tickets, Seattle Seahawks Tickets and Denver Nuggets Tickets. |
For wholesale prices on baseball gifts and equipment, check these stores out! |
Page rendered in 0.6105 seconds
50 querie(s) executed
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
If you're going to put Liverpool in the money-in/money-out bucket, I think Spurs and Everton clearly qualify as well by whatever measure you choose to make that distinction.
Stoke seem to have bought an awful lot of players and sold comparatively few in the last couple years to be fully self-sustaining unless their revenues have skyrocketed since becoming a regular in the top flight.
If you cut "make their money back on a sale" out of the equation, you could easily consider the Yankees to be a "patronage" when in fact they're a massively successful business because of the appreciation of team prices.
Is that a good comparison? I would have thought the Yankees' payroll:revenue / wages:turnover ratio would be way, way better than that of just about any English football club. Speaking as a Red Sox and Tottenham fan, I would much rather own the Yankees than Spurs. From a business perspective anyway.
Ba: 7mil fee, 5mil agents fees, 6-7mil a year for 4.5 years, can't be insured. He'd cost somewhere between 39 and 42mil in total.
Link.
Holy Toledo!
But I'll be more impressed if this happens during a game the players care about.
I was wrong to use the term "patronage" - my point was more that cutting re-sale / franchise value out of the equation leads to a significantly flawed picture of the financial state of a sports team.
Generally, it seems to me that super rich people really love owning sports teams, and if you own a sports team, you usually have the option of selling it to a super rich person for a lot of money. And with the growing richness of the super rich all over the world, that's only making it a better investment.
I still say there's shenanigans there. Pardew has denied it, but there were persistent rumors that he'd racked up some considerable debts to some regular gambling buddies: Mike Ashley and Derek Llambias.
Generally, it seems to me that super rich people really love owning sports teams, and if you own a sports team, you usually have the option of selling it to a super rich person for a lot of money. And with the growing richness of the super rich all over the world, that's only making it a better investment.
Yeah, I'm on board with all this. I think the earlier point about the lack of relegation risk for American sports franchises making them a lot more attractive as investment vehicles is a good one, though.
There's definitely a vanity aspect to all team ownership, but I think the scales in football are tilted more toward that end of the spectrum (as opposed to the business/moneymaking end) more often than they are in our domestic sports. There are precious few English clubs I'd buy with the expectation of making a lot of money, whereas I'd happily write a check for just about any American team you'd care to name (besides the NHL). Assuming someone would sell me one for like thirty grand, anyway.
EDIT: Ah, coke to Mattbert.
Yeah, I brought this up in last month's thread. It definitely seems underhanded, but, then again, I believe Man U has someone that actually sits on the tribunal that determines these fees so I can't blame Levy for getting sneaky. 6 million for Fryers was a pretty ridiculous fee and Man U shouldn't have been dicks about it. Putting that aside, long term, the FA needs to fix this as it will be smaller clubs that will get hurt by these kind of shenanigans.
Also, with Fryers coming aboard and Adam Smith impressing the hell out of everyone, I think that's about it for Danny Rose as a Spur. Only one goal but he'll always be a legend because of it.
In the NFL, NBA and MLB we wouldn't give pause to a 4/$40M contract to a player with a bum knee. The player would either produce and be worth it or they'd just cut him or pawn him off to another team. A player like Torres would have been cut by now, Andy Carroll and Wesley Sniejder would have been unloaded for late draft picks, etc. But the biggest teams in the biggest leagues in the biggest sport in the world can't afford to eat the money.
He's all ours!
Oh, he does actually drive this. Pics.
I think his hair is enough to oppose this move. It is genuinely disgusting.
As a big time Cleveland Browns fan <cough>Holmgren<cough>, I can second this assessment.
Good assessment of that loss yesterday. Starting both Marin and Moses was ridiculous. Hazard or Mata needed to be out there, especially with our recent history of putting on crap performences against QPR. Marin is a disaster at this point. I don't want to right him off, but he's like a bad, small version of Arjen Robben out there. All he wants to do is cut inside which works 1 out of every 10 times. And he definitely should have been shown the door after that horrific tackle in the 1st. We need to give him back to Werder Breman and take back De Bruyne who looks like the much better player.
Very rarely is the word "disgusting" used to describe a haircut, but it's very, very appropriate in this case. Does he not have friends? A girlfriend? A mirror?
Wow, those pictures don't look good. I've generally been a Mancini apologist, and as a fan of the team I hate to agree, but yeah, that's not okay. What if Balotelli had instinctively responded by pushing him to the ground, or punching him? That would have been the end to Mario's City career, I would think, and it would have been on Mancini.
As much as we can blame Rafa for rotating (which he could never get the hang of at Liverpool either), they were playing QPR. Chelsea even with four or five non-regulars, who still are very good players, should have taken all three point relatively easily.
I haven't seen much of Debuchy besides his highly impressive international performances in Euro 2012 and that qualifying draw against Spain, but he looked like one of the best players on the pitch in almost all the games I saw. That's a pretty huge get. Newcastle may be paying for some unproductive years down the line in order to bring him in now, but it makes some sense for the Magpies to take on a little future risk now with relegation a looming present risk.
This summer I rode up the C&O canal from DC and then cut over through southern Pennsylvania, some of the most back-country territory on this side of the Appalachians, and I saw like 3 Barca jerseys and a handful of other Euro teams. That felt to me like things have changed pretty drastically in the last 5 years.
You need to look deeper than one single transfer and signing. The EPL numbers stack up comfortably to those of major US sports. just a cursory 30 second google search turns up this for 2010/11:
That's a wage bill of about $310m for Chelsea. The average EPL team seems to be around £60m just short of $100m. That's not including transfer fees, where EPL teams tend to be huge net spenders, and i assume not including agent fees.
I think there's hope for Chamakh. He's had his moments for Arsenal and then never really got a run when RVP got healthy. Chamakh and Cole seem like very un-Big Sam kind of players, which is interesting. Humorously enough, David Sullivan's son took to twitter to apologize to Hammer fans for the Chamakh signing.
Joining up in July. I am 1. kind of surprised as this came out of leftfield 2. Shocked Spurs concluded negotiations in the first week of the window.
Not sure what this means re: the Moutinho or Sissokho rumors, though. With Vertonghen, Kane, Parker and Holtby, Spurs are putting together quite the RAF unit. Good, clean-cut lads, one and all.
edit: Coke to Mattbert. I lose spending time being snarky. As usual...
Your snark is always worth the wait, big guy.
Don't forget Carroll in that RAF unit. Parker appears to have converted Michael Dawson to the straight and narrow as well. He's been rocking the smart part recently. Next up: Sigurdsson or Lloris.
There are lots of issues with the data, including how you define a team in a sport without roster limits and how one treats bonuses, tax equalization and image rights deals and exchange rates, but those don't detract from the conclusion that clubs at the top of the European leagues spend a lot of money on payroll.
Hey now. Frogs don't have the bottle.
"I dare say, a gentleman with such a respectable hairstyle would never lower himself to simulation! You have my confidence, good sir; a penalty it is."
Well, Chamakh's tag was always "good in the air", which seems like a very Big Sam thing to be, so maybe he's been purchased to further the aim of scoring on every single set piece?
But if he gets and stays healthy, it should be a positive move for both player and club. I think that Rossi could learn some stuff from Montella.
D'oh!
Similarly, a lot of folks on the internet have been deluded into thinking Lewis Holtby is coming to Spurs for free. I'm sure Herr Holtby's agent would disagree with that. I ahve to say that my big fear now that Spurs have Holtby is that Arsenal will get aggressive and go for Isco. Because Isco is pure ####### class. I'm crossing my fingers he ends up at Barca or Real and not on another PL team.
Also, I forgot to respond to this: Not sure what this means re: the Moutinho or Sissokho rumors, though. Not much, I think. The way I read the tea leaves, I doubt Huddlestone, Parker, or Livermore have much of a future at Spurs beyond this season. Parker might not actually be sold, whereas I think the other two will be, but he'll be 33 at the start of next season. His contract runs for another two years, but I have to think his involvement will continue to decline.
That would leave Spurs quite light in the middle if Dembele gets banged up again and/or Sandro has any sort of significant injury layoff. Even with Holtby coming in, I'm sure Villas-Boas will want to continue to get younger and more energetic in central midfield - especially if he has designs on fielding a true 4-3-3 at least some of the time in the future.
According to transfermarkt, Sissoko's contract is up at the end of this season. I think I see a pattern emerging here...
Can't sign Sissokho until he's linked to Liverpool.
Giroud seems to have done ok so far. Chamakh always looked too mechanical. A tall guy playing soccer.
I read somewhere that Spurs were trying to loan Livermore out. It was probably a garbage rumor but every rumor is garbage out there until it happens.
I guess the clause in Rossi's contract regarding United's first option to buy has long gone.
Bwahahahaha!
I think he will get loaned out. With Parker back and Tom Carroll the apple of AVB's eye, Livermore isn't going to get to play much. He needs games. QPR, if Harry and Levy are still talking, makes a lot of sense.
I hope Levy sends him a package with one of those "You've Been Had!" cards from Ace Ventura inside.
We'll see. I think that stuff gets overblown a bit. We were still doing business with West Ham at the peak of the Olympic Stadium nastiness and, if we ever have a player Chelsea or United want again, I don't doubt they'll make their play.
Don't worry, Jermaine Jenas is back!
I smell what you're steppin' in here, although my concerns have been somewhat mitigated by the return of Parker, who was quite durable for Spurs and West Ham before overdoing it at the Euros last summer. Dembele is absolutely the one guy Spurs cannot do without right now, but that's not a problem that can be solved by hanging onto Livermore. Whether he stays or goes has little bearing on how badly screwed Tottenham will be if they lose Dembele again and haven't added another midfielder besides Carroll who can create and run around a bit.
Depth is good, but I guess I feel like it's better for the club if Livermore can go out and get a bunch of games in the Premiership under a guy he played very well for last season. If unfortunate circumstances align such that Livermore would have been desperately needed at Spurs, then they are really up a creek regardless.
Will it be difficult for the FA to amend the rules given the EU's regulations with respect to "restriction of trade"? I don't really know enough to say. I have provisional sympathy for the next club to be snookered in this way, but this whole thing was easily avoidable from United's perspective. Either quit lowballing your young talent and pay him what he's worth or sell him before the contract expires. Simples.
Still don't see why United isn't in on M'vila or Sissokho.
So from what I remember Debuchy was pretty good going forward. I don't remember much about him defensively - other then when Spain beat that weird double right back of Debuchy/Reveilliere in the knockout round. He's also pretty short - Newcastle is a long ways away from the Allardyce days.
raphael honigstein ?@honigstein
plenty of question on Holtby to Spurs. some quick thoughts
he's a no10 who can play deeper but isn't quite ready for that yet. ok in wide positions but not really at his best there
his main problem is inconsistency. not always at the level that we saw from him v Arsenal at the Emirates and for German U21 (excellent)
don't see a way for him to play for Germany at the moment. but that doesn't really matter, think of Mata / Spain
here's the important bit, imo. because he's free, it's really a no-brainer. at, say 70k per week, he basically plays for free for 2 years ...as Spurs will always be able to sell him on for 6-7m if he doesn't work out.
the potential is there. but not a world-beater yet
by the way, I factored sign-on fees into the 70k wages, for argument's sake
Indeed. I was amazed they didn't get a good, physical box-to-box type guy in the summer. Wenger seemingly just can't resist the siren song of Abou Diaby.
The series of Football Manager posts he did on Run of Play should have netted him a ####### Pulitzer. That stuff was genius.
I heart our Liverpool supporting posters here, but that is funny.
I don't know what it says about me that I probably read those about two years ago and I still remembered the name of the team.
It makes you realize how big our economy is. Lots and lots of people, pretty high average income. When you look at the Deloitte money league, the big clubs would remain on the top even with American clubs around. But US teams will supplant a lot of the top 20, and fill in a very large proportion of the top 100.
Where do they get the salary data? That info seems a lot less available for pretty much all teams besides the US ones (mainly due to players unions).
It's odd to have such long gaps in time between the finals and the other knockout rounds.
It's more of a function of major US sports having a de facto monopoly on the sport, so the revenue gets split among about 30 teams. Whereas there are hundreds of top flight teams, and many significant second and third flight teams making money in football.
Using Deloitte's money league figures from 2010/11, they estimate the top 20 teams make about a quarter of all European football revnue, with €4.4bn. So football in Europe makes about about €18bn, almost $24bn, or more than MLB, NFL, NBA and NHL combined.
And that's just club level. Throw in the money generated from international competitions, and it's simply no contest.
Spurs playing a strong team with Bale included but I'll have to settle for radio coverage.
And that revenue is nowhere near enough to cover their spending. Profit, they've heard of it.
That was a special goal from Orlandi in the Brighton-Newcastle game. Special celebration from Gus as well.
No radio. Reading a play by play.
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main