Would we ever want an 'Abramovich'?

[Lineker's Left Foot]

Now that the face of football has changed two years ago with Roman Abramovich acquiring Chelsea and turning them into a 'super force' in football, I've always wondered why we don't go down the route of trying to acquire the wealth from a Billionaire of sorts.

Part of me would like it to happen at City, because it's likely that with a limitless transfer budget we could achieve Premiership Champion status and aspire to become European Champions also and maybe it's also the only way we could realistically move forward. My girlfriend and her dad are Chelsea fans and tend to go 'on and on' about the successful period that has inevitably begun at Stamford Bridge. However, I'm also unsure whether I would want somebody who could just 'wash their hands' of a club if it began to fail to win silverware. Can Abramovich be trusted as he isn't a Chelsea fan born and bred.

I'm hoping to hear your views about this and let's hope that one day it does all go wrong for Chelsea as it cannot be good for English football.

[Katy]

Now that the face of football has changed two years ago with Roman Abramovich acquiring Chelsea and turning them into a 'super force' in football, I've always wondered why we don't go down the route of trying to acquire the wealth from a Billionaire of sorts.

Part of me would like it to happen at City, because it's likely that with a limitless transfer budget we could achieve Premiership Champion status and aspire to become European Champions also and maybe it's also the only way we could realistically move forward. My girlfriend and her dad are Chelsea fans and tend to go 'on and on' about the successful period that has inevitably begun at Stamford Bridge. However, I'm also unsure whether I would want somebody who could just 'wash their hands' of a club if it began to fail to win silverware. Can Abramovich be trusted as he isn't a Chelsea fan born and bred.

I'm hoping to hear your views about this and let's hope that one day it does all go wrong for Chelsea as it cannot be good for English football.

I would never want this kind of thing to happen to us, its not what football is about.

[Solihullfox]

I wouldn't want a full Abramovich but a part time/filthy rich investor would be nice just to spice things up a bit.

[lush]

Abramovich (a-broom-with-a-witch ) will get citizenship in 2 years time. He has no real interest in CFC, as he first inquired to take over spurs first.

I think money in the professional game is absolutely OK. Its a business, its designed purely to earn money. The days of football morality within the PROFESSIONAL game have long gone.

Football is still the greatest game ever.

Professional football is a business, there is a huge difference.

[Sly]

We'd still be competing with Chelsea, Man U, Liverpool and Arsenal for silverware. For the good of the game it would be great, it'd just add more competition.

The standard of football would also improve, and at the end of the day that’s what we as supporters want most.

To be a successful manager you need to A) win games and B) play good football. Sven Goran Eriksson can do point A with England but people call for his head because point B isn't brilliant.

With money you could do both.

I don't think many people would complain if we were taken over. Last season Chelsea played some of the best football in the premier league.

[Head Honcho]

I would like to see a bit more investment in the Club,but not on the scale of Abramovich and Chelsea.

The way things are now we are all part owners of the club to some extent.

If someone like Abramovich came in supporting the club just wouldn't feel the same.

Part of it would have been taken away from all of us.

You have to experience the bad times to appreciate the good times.

[lush]

We'd still be competing with Chelsea, Man U, Liverpool and Arsenal for silverware. For the good of the game it would be great, it'd just add more competition.

The standard of football would also improve, and at the end of the day that’s what we as supporters want most.

To be a successful manager you need to A) win games and B) play good football. Sven Goran Eriksson can do point A with England but people call for his head because point B isn't brilliant.

With money you could do both.

I don't think many people would complain if we were taken over. Last season Chelsea played some of the best football in the premier league.

The better players, whoever they are, will always play for a certain number of teams in the prem, whether they be city derby florest and cov, or the current bunch. Making lcfc more financially viable, then better, will just mean one of those "bunch" will drop out of the reconing. it wont necessarily make football better. Better coaching, and better talent, will.

I think erickson has done "A". Weve qualified for the last 2 tournaments, then finished q/f twice. We can definately do better, but sven needs to take his celebrity crown off to do so, or we get a diff manager.

I agree totally with your last point. lets double our efforts to win the lottery

[The People's Hero]

Don't want it, it's not what Leicester City are all about.

Leave the West London fancy dans to it.

[Head Honcho]

Don't want it, it's not what Leicester City are all about.

Leave the West London fancy dans to it.

Totally Agree

[Guest]

The romantic in me would hate it; the cynic is saying yes. It's not like we, as a club, could be hated any more, and I would love to stick two or possibly one finger up at the so called big boys.

[lush]

Don't want it, it's not what Leicester City are all about.

Leave the West London fancy dans to it.

Then we will NEVER win the prem we might struggle to settle in the prem, the way things are going.

In 2 years time, tv contracts will potentially destroy the professional game, depending on how clubs are dealing with this now. Of course, NO ONE at sky, or lcfc or liverpool or newcastle will go public on this.

The only good thing i see happening, is that admission prices could well drop.

[lush]

The romantic in me would hate it; the cynic is saying yes. It's not like we, as a club, could be hated any more, and I would love to stick two or possibly one finger up at the so called big boys.

Use both hands Lisa

Does anyone else here dream of the eighties? You know when you woke up early on a saturday morning, played for your school team and played with the dream you could make it into Gordon Milnes Youth team, ahh. There was romance in the heart. You could enter the ground without purchasing a ticket days or weeks before. Life seemed free and easy then. There was no rush, just a romantic energy flowing through your blood.

Were guna win the league

Were guna win the league

i know you dont believe us

i know you dont believe us

i know you dont believe ussss

Were guna win the league

Do we ever feel the romance to sing that, or another song of similar stance.

[Sir JJ Wilcox]

Champions league your havin a laugh!!

[lush]

Champions league your havin a laugh!!

[Thracian]

I would never want this kind of thing to happen to us, its not what football is about.

Me neither. I am perfectly happy with the way things are evolving under Craig Levein to be honest. He's doing what should always have been done at City, he's building from the academy upwards and he's building solid foundations for this club.

It must be like a youth camp at Belvoir Drive there's so much young blood and the atmosphere is starting to feel electric.

If Mr Money came along the superstars would collect their pound of flesh until the next irresistable offer and all the emerging players at City would be forgotten, the careers of some being quite possibly damaged beyond repair.

And where would the satisfaction come from? What would the achievement be?.

I thing Morinho is a super manager but I don't give a damn what he does at Chelsea. In athletics terms he's bound to do well cos he's got half a lap start on everyone else.

Sport is about challenge and achievement. I collected stacks of trophies in my day for winning things but threw em all away cos the things I really wanted to remember involved pitting myself against opponents who actually beat me but made me play out of my skin.

If City are going to win things I want em to earn them. I want em to develop some of their own players, show them off to the world and buiild a spirit which will enable them to achieve the unlikely. Matt Gillies did it, Martin O'Neill did it and I believe Craig Levein can do it.

Sod the idea of buying success. It's shallow. People like Dario Grady, Sam Allardyce, Alan Curbishley etc are the men I admire in today's football, people who have built something out of nothing without the aid of silver spoons.

[Head Honcho]

Then we will NEVER win the prem we might struggle to settle in the prem, the way things are going.

In 2 years time, tv contracts will potentially destroy the professional game, depending on how clubs are dealing with this now. Of course, NO ONE at sky, or lcfc or liverpool or newcastle will go public on this.

The only good thing i see happening, is that admission prices could well drop.

If SKY pull out of the Premiership,i think we will be one of the few teams prepared for it.

Bring it on that's what i say.

We might start to see a level playing field for the first time in a decade.

[Guest]

If SKY pull out of the Premiership,i think we will be one of the few teams prepared for it.

Bring it on that's what i say.

We might start to see a level playing field for the first time in a decade.

If Sky pulled out of the PL, what concerns me is those teams with the money and the backing would be franchising their own TV coverage and bringing in the sponsorships for themselves. Instead of 20 teams sharing the wealth, it would be handed out to 5 maximum.

[Head Honcho]

If Sky pulled out of the PL, what concerns me is those teams with the money and the backing would be franchising their own TV coverage and bringing in the sponsorships for themselves. Instead of 20 teams sharing the wealth, it would be handed out to 5 maximum.

That's why all the rest of the clubs have to be strong and say no.

They did it in Scotland when the old firm tried it.

[Steven]

If I become rich enough I will do exactly what Abramovich has done to Chelski, to City.

[lush]

If SKY pull out of the Premiership,i think we will be one of the few teams prepared for it.

Bring it on that's what i say.

We might start to see a level playing field for the first time in a decade.

Thats a probable possibility. But we`ll NEVER ever ever ever win the prem, because man utd will get a whopping great big tv deal, because of their global attraction.

City will get jack sh!t. Our income will be attendance and advertising. We MIGHT, get Lineker doing the games on tv (him being a 20% share holder n all), but it wont be terrestial, it probably wont be digital, most likely the net, and who the hell`s going to watch our home games? we`ll be lucky to keep it financially stable.

If the tv deal goes belly-up, having a good manager is all we can rely on.

[Bluefoxtim]

it would be nice to have a bit of money, but i think it should be about playing well and getting the players you can. It would be much more satisfiying going up with a ok team than going up with an amazing team who we have bought just cos we have loads of money

[lush]

That's why all the rest of the clubs have to be strong and say no.

They did it in Scotland when the old firm tried it.

It wont be down to club power, more like the european employment courts, who will allow individual companies (football clubs) free access to find their own tv deal, and rule out exclusive rights to tv companies. Im led to believe its already the case in Italy and Spain?

80% of the whole company of sky`s income, comes from football subscription. Out of that 80%, man utd fans make up half that income, worldwide. Take man utd out of the equasion, and its downhill for sky, thats why sky wanted to buy mufc.

So, for example, sky will do man utd tv games, bbc will get maybe liverpool, itv will get chelsea, c4 will get arsenal and c5 will get spurs. And the last 4 wont get anything near what they get now.

UK Gold will get city

[Foxes_Wizard_Striker]

it would be nice to have a bit of money, but i think it should be about playing well and getting the players you can. It would be much more satisfiying going up with a ok team than going up with an amazing team who we have bought just cos we have loads of money

seconded and thanks for saving me work typing my opinion

[Head Honcho]

It wont be down to club power, more like the european employment courts, who will allow individual companies (football clubs) free access to find their own tv deal, and rule out exclusive rights to tv companies. Im led to believe its already the case in Italy and Spain?

80% of the whole company of sky`s income, comes from football subscription. Out of that 80%, man utd fans make up half that income, worldwide. Take man utd out of the equasion, and its downhill for sky, thats why sky wanted to buy mufc.

So, for example, sky will do man utd tv games, bbc will get maybe liverpool, itv will get chelsea, c4 will get arsenal and c5 will get spurs. And the last 4 wont get anything near what they get now.

UK Gold will get city

But don't forget they all have to play away.

This is when the smaller clubs can broker deals of their own.

[lush]

But don't forget they all have to play away.

This is when the smaller clubs can broker deals of their own.

Thats a bloody good point. I think its something like £405,000 per club, per game on sky now in the prem.

Its then a case of negaotiating a deal between man u`s opposition and sky. How much do you think sky would offer us? £50,000, £60,000. Dont forget, we cant be too choosey, but they will need us none the less.

So maybe we get £100,000 v man utd, because sky NEED to show football. How much will channel four pay us for the arsenal game? £30,000 £40,000. Is it even worth channel 4 showing the game live?